1316 replies to this topic

[Kopra]

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

When I look at the progress in Hawken, all I see is this:

Spoiler

Offtopic: Isn't that what you see when the movie is playing forward_

Edited by Kopra, October 28 2014 - 02:56 PM.

[SS396]

Kopra, on October 28 2014 - 02:56 PM, said:

Offtopic: Isn't that what you see when the movie is playing forward_

Lol, Touché.

[IareDave]

SS396, on October 27 2014 - 09:58 PM, said:

So if you don't give a fuzzy bunny about what someone said to you, then why did what I say that night matter to you and why do you remember it so fondly_  (besides the amusement I provided).  BTW I don't play TDM's for your info it was a siege match, where you were using your smurf account (Iarntdave or some fuzzy bunny) farming kills for your inflated KDR, instead of helping your team.  You ended up with 30+ kills and in the next match you ended up with 49, I guess you don't remember all the things so well in this case.  You were also in a much lower average MMR ranked room (1900) and basically pubstomping just for funzies and preying on weaker players for your own enjoyment and satisfaction.  Were you not_  But none of that matters.

I already stated in my post that I brought it up to reflect that both your in-game and forum behavior is WHY you are receiving backlash, and yes, it was funny as hell. I do recall the match more vividly now that you filled in some details, and I do now recall you flaming me for also my kill count, which I found more amusing as you thought of any 'justifiable' reason to fuzzy bunny talk. To go further into your post, 1900 mmr is actually considered high in Hawken's current average, most servers are in the 1500-1800 range. Also yes, I was using a smurf account, because when you can't find a SINGLE server to join, in a game I find quite enjoyable, then I will find a way around that. My intentions is not to smurf to stomp the noobies, but until my mmr reached respectable levels, I was stuck in the lowbie servers (which didn't take long I might add). Now my smurf is in a reasonable mmr range where I can queue into matches that the matchmaking should otherwise be placing my main account into.

But you've somehow managed to disregard everything I said that was meant to be constructive criticism towards you and hopefully make you understand why people are mad with you, and instead accused me of 'wrong' doings.

Awesome.

Edited by IareDave, October 28 2014 - 03:45 PM.

[PepeKenobi]

speaking of MMRs ...... you can not check what your MMR is right now due that the mates list is down at all.... __isn't it. Amongst maany other unpleasant thingies and the abandon factor increased in such a way because of that serious issue these last days.............

Best

[Dr_Freeze001]

OFFTOPIC:

Spoiler

PepeKenobi, on October 28 2014 - 03:55 PM, said:

speaking of MMRs ...... you can not check what your MMR is right now due that the mates list is down at all.... __isn't it. Amongst maany other unpleasant thingies and the abandon factor increased in such a way because of that serious issue these last days.............

Best

Actually... as of 30 min ago there is a workaround.

https://community.pl...pp/#entry576684

[Gunmoku]

In this thread: One big ego is still thinking he's all that.

Edited by Gunmoku, October 28 2014 - 05:46 PM.

[SS396]

IareDave, on October 28 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

I already stated in my post that I brought it up to reflect that both your in-game and forum behavior is WHY you are receiving backlash, and yes, it was funny as hell. I do recall the match more vividly now that you filled in some details, and I do now recall you flaming me for also my kill count, which I found more amusing as you thought of any 'justifiable' reason to fuzzy bunny talk. To go further into your post, 1900 mmr is actually considered high in Hawken's current average, most servers are in the 1500-1800 range. Also yes, I was using a smurf account, because when you can't find a SINGLE server to join, in a game I find quite enjoyable, then I will find a way around that. My intentions is not to smurf to stomp the noobies, but until my mmr reached respectable levels, I was stuck in the lowbie servers (which didn't take long I might add). Now my smurf is in a reasonable mmr range where I can queue into matches that the matchmaking should otherwise be placing my main account into.

So yeah, someone with the in game skills to get 2797.2271728515625 MMR has to play smurf accounts and blame the matchmaker for not letting them into matches where his skill out weights everyone in the rest of the match.  You think your piloting skills get lower if you start a new account_  Can't you see how completely fuzzy bunny unfair that is_  How about you take some of your own advice and look at things from the viewpoint of the weaker players you pummeled with those 49 kills that match.  So while you can pick apart my actions, I can do the very same thing to yours, as I don't find them very acceptable either.  Just saying.

IareDave, on October 28 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

But you've somehow managed to disregard everything I said that was meant to be constructive criticism towards you and hopefully make you understand why people are mad with you, and instead accused me of 'wrong' doings.

Awesome.

Sorry dude, but you miss the point.  I simply don't fuzzy bunny care anymore, and most of all I don't want to hear anything constructive from the likes of you or anyone else.  Also, how dare you think I'm some kinda fuzzy bunny moron that can't figure out something so fuzzy bunny trivial as to why everyone hates me.  I know why, and I just choose to ignore it, if people want to be buthurt cause I'm vocal and speak my mind, again thats their problem.  They are free to ignore it, if they can, if not its their problem.

Gunmoku, on October 28 2014 - 05:40 PM, said:

How much more full of yourself can you possibly get_  Seriously.  Get off the high horse.

I guess you need to find a bigger pole to reach me way up here.

Remember paybacks a fuzzy bunny.  Soon™.   toodles.

[Nept]

Just leave him be, Dave.

As for you, SS, while the majority of your reply is emotional drivel, it's worth addressing this point:

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 06:05 PM, said:

So yeah, someone with the in game skills to get 2797.2271728515625 MMR has to play smurf accounts and blame the matchmaker for not letting them into matches where his skill out weights everyone in the rest of the match.  You think your piloting skills get lower if you start a new account_  Can't you see how completely fuzzy bunny unfair that is_

There are two issues you fail to recognize:

1) His MMR prevents him from accessing any matches.  He's forced to smurf if he wants to find games within a reasonable time frame.  For months now, every Omni member has had to either smurf or intentionally drive down their MMR.

2) There's nothing unfair about having superior skills in a video game (and using them).  Mollycoddling community members by preventing them from playing against stronger opponents has nothing to do with "fairness"; it's simply a means of maximizing community retention.

Video games provide one of the most "fair" competition venues.  Players are largely protected from the disparity-promoting factors permeating most sports (e.g., socio-cultural support and financial backing, training facilities, physical build, etc.), and until recently, there wasn't much money driving player training and availability.  (Realistically speaking, there's still relatively little money - especially within the FPS scene).  Although one might make the argument that top-tier players possess genetic (or training) advantages which express themselves through superior reaction times, information-processing abilities, or tactical imagination, that same argument veers into Harrison Bergeron territory by preempting any form of competition.

Now if you were attempting to argue that it wasn't "fun" for the weaker players, then you might find yourself with some footing.  Even then, though, you're casting an overly-wide net by painting all players with the same negative nancy, woe is me attitude that you've assumed as of late.

Edited by Nept, October 28 2014 - 07:32 PM.

[SS396]

Nept, on October 28 2014 - 06:52 PM, said:

Just leave him be, Dave.

As for you, SS, while the majority of your reply is emotional drivel, it's worth addressing this point:

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 06:05 PM, said:

So yeah, someone with the in game skills to get 2797.2271728515625 MMR has to play smurf accounts and blame the matchmaker for not letting them into matches where his skill out weights everyone in the rest of the match.  You think your piloting skills get lower if you start a new account_  Can't you see how completely fuzzy bunny unfair that is_

There are two issues you fail to recognize:

1) His MMR prevents him from accessing any matches.  He's forced to smurf if he wants to find games within a reasonable time frame.  For months now, every Omni member has had to either smurf or intentionally drive down their MMR.

2) There's nothing unfair about having superior skills in a video game (and using them).  Mollycoddling community members by preventing them from playing against stronger opponents has nothing to do with "fairness"; it's simply a means of maximizing community retention.

Video games provide one of the most "fair" competition venues.  Players are largely protected from the disparity-promoting factors permeating most sports (e.g., socio-cultural support and financial backing, training facilities, physical build, etc.), and until recently, there wasn't much money driving player training and availability.  (Realistically speaking, there's still relatively little money - especially within the FPS scene).  Although one might make the argument that top-tier players possess genetic (or training) advantages which express themselves through superior reaction times, information-processing abilities, or tactical imagination, that same argument veers into Harrison Bergeron territory by preempting any form of competition.

Now if you were attempting to argue that it wasn't "fun" for the weaker players, then you might find yourself with some footing.  Even then, though, you're casting an overly-wide net by painting all players with the same negative nancy, woe is me attitude that you've assumed as of late.

Should of just left your post as it was, I liked it better before you felt compelled to edit it (almost even gave it a like), but it makes you look like a hypocrite when you tell Dave to ignore me, and then can't resist the temptation yourself.

I didn't fail to recognize your points, I just didn't address them in that specific post, I've mentioned them many times before in other posts most of which you've never seen.  Either way, I am against skilled players engaging in both smurfing and lowering their MMR intentionally to force them to play against lesser skilled players, obviously.  Same goes for high mmr players and parties.

And again blaming the system for forcing you to perform shady tactics is bull fuzzy bunny and is hardly an excuse for doing it.  It still doesn't make it acceptable.  Evolwar is ~2600+ and you don't see him farming up 49 kills in a siege match to boost his KDR, he politely waits for the match maker to dump him into a game and then instead of running around stomping everyone in the most OP mech and internal setup he can find, he'll lower his skills to the rooms level and enjoy the game for what it is, many times just playing random mechs with no loadouts.  Many of the people that inhabit the top ranks, do not do the same, they play to stomp the every living fuzzy bunny out of everyone no matter what, and yes, it is not fun to be on the receiving end of that.  And since you can't seem to understand that, it must mean that you've never experienced that before, but just think about how you would feel.

As far as community retention, maybe thats one of the reasons why this game can't keep players, cause of all the skilled veterans smurfing and pummeling them before they even get familiar with the game.  Nobody likes to lose.

Anyways, this is way off topic, if you'd like to start a new thread by all means, please do I look forward to discussing matters such as these with you or anyone, but this thread is about Dev silence and who knows what and who doesn't remember_

[Nept]

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 08:22 PM, said:

Should of just left your post as it was, I liked it better before you felt compelled to edit it (almost even gave it a like), but it makes you look like a hypocrite when you tell Dave to ignore me, and then can't resist the temptation yourself.

I asked Dave to avoid responding because he was focusing on your emotional meltdown.  I'm responding to that portion of your post which was patently wrong.

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 08:22 PM, said:

I didn't fail to recognize your points, I just didn't address them in that specific post.

You either conveniently ignored or failed to recognize the first point, and completely failed to recognize the second, as evidenced by your use of the term "unfair", as well as by the rest of your reply.

What I said: There's nothing unfair about having superior skills in a video game (and using them).  Mollycoddling community members by preventing them from playing against stronger opponents has nothing to do with "fairness"; it's simply a means of maximizing community retention . . . Now if you were attempting to argue that it wasn't "fun" for the weaker players, then you might find yourself with some footing.  Even then, though, you're casting an overly-wide net by painting all players with the same negative nancy, woe is me attitude that you've assumed as of late.

What you had said: So yeah, someone with the in game skills to get 2797.2271728515625 MMR has to play smurf accounts and blame the matchmaker for not letting them into matches where his skill out weights everyone in the rest of the match.  You think your piloting skills get lower if you start a new account_  Can't you see how completely fuzzy bunny unfair that is_

What you changed your position to:  "it is not fun to be on the receiving end of that.  And since you can't seem to understand that, it must mean that you've never experienced that before, but just think about how you would feel"


So no, you clearly didn't recognize the point until your response.  You then took up the very position that I had suggested, and pretended it had been yours all along.

As for that position, you're still casting too wide a net.  You're assuming a) that Dave, alongside other top-tier players, are playing "to stomp the every living fuzzy bunny out of everyone no matter what"; that they're interested only in stat padding; c) that making alternate accounts is some sort of "shady tactic" which breaks "the rules"; and d) that everyone shares your poor outlook on losing, and on challenges.

[Amidatelion]

Here solely to applaud the Harrison Bergeron reference.

Carry on.

[SS396]

Nept, on October 28 2014 - 09:00 PM, said:

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 08:22 PM, said:

Should of just left your post as it was, I liked it better before you felt compelled to edit it (almost even gave it a like), but it makes you look like a hypocrite when you tell Dave to ignore me, and then can't resist the temptation yourself.

I asked Dave to avoid responding because he was focusing on your emotional meltdown.  I'm responding to that portion of your post which was patently wrong.

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 08:22 PM, said:

I didn't fail to recognize your points, I just didn't address them in that specific post.

You either conveniently ignored or failed to recognize the first point, and completely failed to recognize the second, as evidenced by your use of the term "unfair", as well as by the rest of your reply.

What I said: There's nothing unfair about having superior skills in a video game (and using them).  Mollycoddling community members by preventing them from playing against stronger opponents has nothing to do with "fairness"; it's simply a means of maximizing community retention . . . Now if you were attempting to argue that it wasn't "fun" for the weaker players, then you might find yourself with some footing.  Even then, though, you're casting an overly-wide net by painting all players with the same negative nancy, woe is me attitude that you've assumed as of late.

What you had said: So yeah, someone with the in game skills to get 2797.2271728515625 MMR has to play smurf accounts and blame the matchmaker for not letting them into matches where his skill out weights everyone in the rest of the match.  You think your piloting skills get lower if you start a new account_  Can't you see how completely fuzzy bunny unfair that is_

What you changed your position to:  "it is not fun to be on the receiving end of that.  And since you can't seem to understand that, it must mean that you've never experienced that before, but just think about how you would feel"


So no, you clearly didn't recognize the point until your response.  You then took up the very position that I had suggested, and pretended it had been yours all along.

As for that position, you're still casting too wide a net.  You're assuming a) that Dave, alongside other top-tier players, are playing "to stomp the every living fuzzy bunny out of everyone no matter what"; that they're interested only in stat padding; c) that making alternate accounts is some sort of "shady tactic" which breaks "the rules"; and d) that everyone shares your poor outlook on losing, and on challenges.

Uh, no, I didn't change my position, I'm still against it.

Like I said, create a new thread if you want to discuss things such as these, I'll gladly go there and contribute.

TIL smurfing isn't considered a "shady tactic" if its not specifically stated it is against the rules for the game.  

[Nept]

You didn't change the thrust of your argument (i.e., that Dave shouldn't be smurfing), but you did change your position (i.e., that what he did was "unfair" to what he did kept others from "having fun").

To avoid further confusion, it's worth noting that I'm using "position" to refer to an argument's premises.  You're using "position" to refer to an opinion or stance.  To delineate the events and terminology more specifically, you have an opinion (that Dave - or any high-tier players - shouldn't be smurfing), and attempted to support that opinion through argument.  Your starting position within that argument comprised a number of premises that I noted were incorrect.  You then reworked that position by altering the "skilled pilots competing against weaker opponents is unfair" to "skilled pilots competing against weaker opponents isn't fun for those weaker opponents.  In other words, you changed your position while keeping the thrust (i.e., main point) of your argument the same: that Dave shouldn't be smurfing.

Edited by Nept, October 28 2014 - 09:30 PM.

[SS396]

BTW, you completely left out this:

and yes, it is not fun to be on the receiving end of that.

So, you completely removed the context of how I was agreeing with your post (was that intentional_), but don't take it that I all the sudden changed my view.  Either way I'm still against smurfing, and I'm against the high tier players getting into games where their MMR is 500+ higher than the rest of the lobby and them making the game unfun.  Ask Merl, I've even laid into him for having a MMR 300+ above the room.  That position hasn't swayed one single bit

Like I said, NEW fuzzy bunny THREAD DUDE, please.

[Nept]

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

BTW, you completely left out this:

and yes, it is not fun to be on the receiving end of that.

So, you completely removed the context of how I was agreeing with your post (was that intentional_), but don't take it that I all the sudden changed my view.

Your agreeing with that point doesn't invalidate my argument (which was that you had missed two important points in your reply to Dave), and so doesn't provide any additional context.  That particular statement was meant to indicate that that activity wasn't fun, yes, but it did double-duty by upholding your mistaken assertion that you hadn't missed the point in the previous post.  You should also note that I was not, in fact, stating that such situations were inherently unfun.  I merely suggested an alternate premise which would've provided you stronger ground for your argument.  However, I also weakened the strength of such an argument by indicating the assumptions one would have to make in its defense.  As such, you were not agreeing with my post.

[Xacius]

https://www.youtube....l-Pl-NP65I#t=96

Edited by Xacius, October 28 2014 - 10:01 PM.

[SS396]

Nept, on October 28 2014 - 09:45 PM, said:

Your agreeing with that point doesn't invalidate my argument (which was that you had missed two important points in your reply to Dave), and so doesn't provide any additional context.  That particular statement was meant to indicate that that activity wasn't fun, yes, but it did double-duty by upholding your mistaken assertion that you hadn't missed the point in the previous post.  You should also note that I was not, in fact, stating that such situations were inherently unfun.  I merely suggested an alternate premise which would've provided you stronger ground for your argument.  However, I also weakened the strength of such an argument by indicating the assumptions one would have to make in its defense.  As such, you were not agreeing with my post.

Please dont' try to think you can get in my head and tell me what I was saying.  You have no clue.

Again, new thread, if you care to discuss this further.  I can show you at a few THREADS where I've discussed my dislike of the higher ranked players getting into matches where they shouldn't belong.

[Nept]

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 09:56 PM, said:

Nept, on October 28 2014 - 09:45 PM, said:

Your agreeing with that point doesn't invalidate my argument (which was that you had missed two important points in your reply to Dave), and so doesn't provide any additional context.  That particular statement was meant to indicate that that activity wasn't fun, yes, but it did double-duty by upholding your mistaken assertion that you hadn't missed the point in the previous post.  You should also note that I was not, in fact, stating that such situations were inherently unfun.  I merely suggested an alternate premise which would've provided you stronger ground for your argument.  However, I also weakened the strength of such an argument by indicating the assumptions one would have to make in its defense.  As such, you were not agreeing with my post.

Please dont' try to think you can get in my head and tell me what I was saying.  You have no clue.

I have every clue as to your wording intentions.  Although writing isn't your strong suite (or perhaps because writing isn't your strong suite), your posts are easily dissected.

Anyway, you've missed the main point again: Your agreeing with that point doesn't invalidate my argument (which was that you had missed two important points in your reply to Dave), and so doesn't provide any additional context.  That particular statement was meant to indicate that that activity wasn't fun, yes, but it did double-duty by upholding your mistaken assertion that you hadn't missed the point in the previous post.  You should also note that I was not, in fact, stating that such situations were inherently unfun.  I merely suggested an alternate premise which would've provided you stronger ground for your argument.  However, I also weakened the strength of such an argument by indicating the assumptions one would have to make in its defense.  As such, you were not agreeing with my post.

[SS396]

Nept, on October 28 2014 - 10:06 PM, said:

I have every clue as to your wording intentions.  Although writing isn't your strong suite (or perhaps because writing isn't your strong suite), your posts are easily dissected.

Anyway, you've missed the main point again: Your agreeing with that point doesn't invalidate my argument (which was that you had missed two important points in your reply to Dave), and so doesn't provide any additional context.  That particular statement was meant to indicate that that activity wasn't fun, yes, but it did double-duty by upholding your mistaken assertion that you hadn't missed the point in the previous post.  You should also note that I was not, in fact, stating that such situations were inherently unfun.  I merely suggested an alternate premise which would've provided you stronger ground for your argument.  However, I also weakened the strength of such an argument by indicating the assumptions one would have to make in its defense.  As such, you were not agreeing with my post.

Oh, Ok, for some reason you think all you have to do is repeat yourself over and over.  Ok.  Here goes.

SS396, on October 28 2014 - 09:56 PM, said:

Please dont' try to think you can get in my head and tell me what I was saying.  You have no clue.

Again, new thread, if you care to discuss this further.  

I can show you at a few THREADS where I've discussed my dislike of the higher ranked players getting into matches where they shouldn't belong.

I wonder can you fuzzy bunny dissect that sentence in red_

Edited by SS396, October 28 2014 - 10:10 PM.

[Akrium]

Note: Anyone can start a new thread