111 replies to this topic

[Silverfire]

You didn't say I was wrong or lying though, did you :D I don't complain if people do as they are supposed to ( hint: get on and defend the AA area )- I do complain if they refuse to even try, and/or would rather hide or play their own little game of TDM on the other side of the map instead of playing the objectives. I sound like a stuck record, the number of times I've had to highlight this particular problem with Siege matches.

 

Anyone would get frustrated by other players behaving that way too- how vocal they are about it is neither here nor there- there is a mute button, use it if you want to.

 

You're right, I didn't say you were wrong, just insufferably annoying and abrasive in VOIP, even when we were doing what you were saying, or just in general, in any regular game I encountered you in, Siege, TDM, MA.  Abrasive, insulting, and rude.  I distinctly remember this from pre-Ascension when VOIP worked.  Just my experience, man, I'm not trying to judge you or anything, just stating the facts of how I felt how you acted back then.

 

Aside from gathering EU, one of the best ways, if not the best way, to win at Siege is to kill the enemy team, aka playing TDM.  The only time you are required to be on AA is when you're trying to shoot down the other ship, whereas it may be a smart strategy to split the team to kill the enemy team before they reach AA to avoid AA feeling pressure. Likewise, even during gathering EU stages, playing TDM is also smart because you're killing the enemy team in order to deny them EU. One or two people gather EU and everyone else goes and plays TDM.  When your ship is in the air, a good way to deny the enemy team the AA is by killing them, aka playing TDM.  You don't need to be on AA when only your ship is attacking.   The only time you need to be on AA is when you're shooting down the enemy ship, and you can help your team do that by playing TDM.  Quite honestly, only one person ever needs to be focusing on the objectives (running EU, capping AA) because if the other 5 people can play TDM good, you're going to win.  

 

Playing TDM in Siege is actually a really good way at winning.  Actually, without DM skills, you can't win at Siege at all, or Missile Assault either.  Actually, if you don't play TDM/DM well, regardless of game mode, you're not going to do well.   

 

Playing TDM in Siege is smart.

Edited by Silverfire, 18 August 2016 - 10:52 AM.

[TheButtSatisfier]

The only time you are required to be on AA is when you're trying to shoot down the other ship, whereas it may be a smart strategy to split the team to kill the enemy team before they reach AA to avoid AA feeling pressure. Likewise, even during gathering EU stages, playing TDM is also smart because you're killing the enemy team in order to deny them EU. One or two people gather EU and everyone else goes and plays TDM.  When your ship is in the air, a good way to deny the enemy team the AA is by killing them, aka playing TDM.  You don't need to be on AA when only your ship is attacking.   The only time you need to be on AA is when you're shooting down the enemy ship, and you can help your team do that by playing TDM. 

 

When there was a Siege Cup, this was the general competitive strategy that emerged. If you had a definitive TDM edge over the other team, then it would be foolish for you to cluster in one convenient location (the AA) when your ship is in the air. Move past the AA, grab cover, and prevent them from getting there in the first place.

 

Yelling at people to get on the AA and to retrieve EU is like telling kids playing soccer to only focus on passing the ball and to score goals. While they're core components of the game, there's still a lot more depth to the game that should be considered if you want the edge.

 

I'd strongly prefer that Reloaded work on more callouts like "Enemy Spotted" rather than trying to implement VoiP. If I want to hear anyone's voice, I'll get in TS with them, and that's only because I know they have comms discipline. Otherwise, stfu so I can hear people walking close by.

Edited by TheButtSatisfier, 18 August 2016 - 12:00 PM.

[BlackWarGreymon]

You two have got to be kidding me, right?

 

What part of 'playing tdm half way across the map' translates into ' pushing forward to stop the other team even getting to the aa'?

 

You'll note that I specifically stated that people need to defend the AA and the area around it- ergo, stopping the other team before they get there-I do enjoy watching you twist my words and imply I'm saying something completely different to what I stated, in black and white.

 

Playing TDM in front of the AA, or between it and enemy base is fine- I do that all the time to cut-off guys trying any kind of flanking approach ( down the sides of the AA, around behind it and such )- that is nothing like playing TDM at the opposite corners of the map however, especially when there is only one ( or no one ) person left on the AA and the enemy manages to break through or sneaks in using a Pred or Infil, for example. 

 

Stop.

 

Twisting.

 

Facts.

[TheButtSatisfier]

What part of 'playing tdm half way across the map' translates into ' pushing forward to stop the other team even getting to the aa'?

 

You'll note that I specifically stated that people need to defend the AA and the area around it- ergo, stopping the other team before they get there-I do enjoy watching you twist my words and imply I'm saying something completely different to what I stated, in black and white.

 

Playing TDM in front of the AA, or between it and enemy base is fine- I do that all the time to cut-off guys trying any kind of flanking approach ( down the sides of the AA, around behind it and such )- that is nothing like playing TDM at the opposite corners of the map however, especially when there is only one ( or no one ) person left on the AA and the enemy manages to break through or sneaks in using a Pred or Infil, for example. 

 

Stop.

 

Twisting.

 

Facts.

 

I said nothing about pushing halfway across the map. If you care to double-check, I shared my thoughts regarding Silverfire's post, and that's it. I feel no need to address anything you've previously said.

 

The only thing here that's being twisted is your panties.

Edited by TheButtSatisfier, 18 August 2016 - 01:14 PM.

[BlackWarGreymon]

 

 

Yelling at people to get on the AA and to retrieve EU is like telling kids playing soccer to only focus on passing the ball and to score goals. While they're core components of the game, there's still a lot more depth to the game that should be considered if you want the edge.

 

 

 

That's another issue- trying to convince people to:

 

1) go AA first before the other team gets there / launches, regardless if how much EU we need or are carrying

 

2) start collecting EU just before your ship gets shot down, that way you will be full & headed back to base before the other team even gets to the EU stations ( assuming other team isn't about to launch )

 

3) stay at the AA if the other team is about to launch

 

4) not to launch until we hold the AA, or to launch a block if possible if we can't take the AA

 

5) etc etc etc, all common sense stuff essentially, once you understand the very basics of how siege works- 1 match usually 

 

is entirely pointless because, as I have found time and time again, no one wants to listen. Being the voice of experience is worthless as newbies and idiots just want to do their own thing and aren't actually interested in learning or picking up pointers, regardless of how polite you start out. 

 

You can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. 

 

You can shoot it though... :D

[BlackWarGreymon]

I said nothing about pushing halfway across the map. If you care to double-check, I shared my thoughts regarding Silverfire's post, and that's it. I feel no need to address anything you've previously said.

 

The only thing here that's being twisted is your panties.

 

I know you didn't, I did. I was referencing what SF said- he ignored what I said about playing no where near the AA and turned it into an argument for playing TDM between the AA and the enemy base to stop them getting near the AA, which is why I said they are not the same thing. You also said the same thing- about pushing past the AA to head off the other team. Again, that's nothing to do with playing no where near the AA- heading off an advance is not the same as playing hide and seek by the EU or something of that sort. 

Edited by BlackWarGreymon, 18 August 2016 - 01:18 PM.

[TheButtSatisfier]

That's another issue- trying to convince people to:

 

1) go AA first before the other team gets there / launches, regardless if how much EU we need or are carrying

 

2) start collecting EU just before your ship gets shot down, that way you will be full & headed back to base before the other team even gets to the EU stations ( assuming other team isn't about to launch )

 

3) stay at the AA if the other team is about to launch

 

4) not to launch until we hold the AA, or to launch a block if possible if we can't take the AA

 

5) etc etc etc, all common sense stuff essentially, once you understand the very basics of how siege works- 1 match usually 

 

 

I feel like these are all valid points that should be addressed with a much more comprehensive tutorial rather than trying to convince anyone over VoiP. It won't fix all the Siege issues, but it'll do more than VoiP.

[BlackWarGreymon]

I feel like these are all valid points that should be addressed with a much more comprehensive tutorial rather than trying to convince anyone over VoiP. It won't fix all the Siege issues, but it'll do more than VoiP.

 

I do constantly suggest people look up the Siege tutorials on the forum- I'm usually met with either a wall of silence, or 'forum? I just want to have fun'. I think there might be some irony in there, hard to say :P

 

They won't listen on voip or chat though, you're right about that, which is kinda the crux of the issue that turns a fun game into a frustrating one. 

 

We need more game modes- ones which are genuinely fun, like head to heads- I had an idea about a 'climbing' mode, inspired by the Hawken Space Program thread a little while back...

[TheButtSatisfier]

I do constantly suggest people look up the Siege tutorials on the forum- I'm usually met with either a wall of silence, or 'forum? I just want to have fun'. I think there might be some irony in there, hard to say :P

 

I don't really blame them; if a competitive gamemode needs a tutorial to play correctly, it should be in the game itself, not on the interwebs. The reach of an in-game tutorial is going to be significantly higher.

 

That said, I do applaud you for directing others to community-made tutorials.

[Silverfire]

Playing TDM off the point is beneficial because if you're doing it right, you're killing the enemy team, therefore denying them either of EU to launch a ship, or denying the enemy team a player to attack AA, or do whatever.  Even if an enemy is half way across the map, they are still a threat to your team as long as they are alive.  If they're gathering EU, they're a threat to launch the enemy ship.  If they're not on AA and a ship is out, it is highly likely that this player not on AA will come to AA.  Attacking the enemy pre-emptively, before they reach AA, regardless of location, will prevent them from getting to AA, which is the point.

 

 

 

I did address your point - playing TDM instead of playing the objective.  I explained that playing TDM can be highly beneficial to a team in a Siege match.  You complain that people do not play the objectives in Siege, which are, namely, holding the AA and gathering EU.  I pointed out how "playing TDM" can benefit a team, and I explained in what ways.  It was more of a general statement regarding "playing TDM in Siege" because you never clarified what "playing the objective" meant until we pointed out how TDM can be beneficial, which you, in turn, agreed with us.

 

 

 

Playing TDM in front of the AA, or between it and enemy base is fine- I do that all the time to cut-off guys trying any kind of flanking approach ( down the sides of the AA, around behind it and such )- that is nothing like playing TDM at the opposite corners of the map however, especially when there is only one ( or no one ) person left on the AA and the enemy manages to break through or sneaks in using a Pred or Infil, for example. 

 

 

If I missed something previously in the thread, I apologize.

 

 

We've been in need of a comprehensive Siege tutorial for a long time, something that seems to have fallen on deaf ears (the devs).

[Flifang]

Siege is far too difficult of a game mode to learn with no in-depth tutorial. Agreed.

 

Siege is in my opinion, too complex to be learned by the majority of players over public voice com, or in-game chat.

Far too many players are unconcerned about a new gamemode when they have been stuck playing the generic bread and butter of team based games, TDM.

 

Although back in the old days where a pretty evenly matched siege game could go on for as long as four hours, some people could pick up the concepts eventually.

 

The game definitely needs more in-depth tool-tips and probably a tutorial. If anything bring back those super distracting heads up display tooltips for siege that were nearly impossible to ignore.

[WmMoneyFrmMissouri]

4 hour siege game sounds insane! Not saying it's not true but that it really does live up to the meaning of epic match.

[Silverfire]

4 hour siege was a drag, actually, it was fun for most of it but I just wanted it to end.

[BlackWarGreymon]

4 hour siege game sounds insane! Not saying it's not true but that it really does live up to the meaning of epic match.

 

 Hour and half was the longest I had a match last- those length of matches were only possible pre-Ascension due to Siege being different:

 

The ships would not attack or damage the enemy base until they actually reached it ( and the ship turrets would target enemy players on the ground ); I'm sure you can imagine what the results of that kind of game-dynamic would be- arrive at the AA with half health, somehow manage to take it over and shoot down the enemy ship before it damages your base, rinse and repeat a dozen times.

 

I remember one match when two of us just camped at our base and shot down maybe 8-10 enemy ships with our Rocketeers, thanks to having line-of-sight the whole time it was in the air ( back when Bazaar was in the Siege map rotation ). Totally noob way to play, but funnily enough we couldn't take the AA so we had no other option- shooting the ship back then was a a viable option, and shooting off the turrets was vital to make it possible to take the AA at all without being killed before you got there.

 

Oh man, the good old days- those matches were actually fun- imagine the XP and HC you could get from a one hour match...

[StubbornPuppet]

Yeah, I don't buy the 4 hour thing... maybe 75 minutes at the most, but those matches were indeed EPIC.  I understood the reasons that ADH wanted to keep Siege from lasting so long.  It was more than most players could afford to commit to and the population in Siege was waning due to it.  But I don't agree with all the things they did.

 

I liked having the turrets on the ship actually DO something - shooting at enemy players.  They were realistically inaccurate, so it wasn't like they were ruining play on the ground, they were preventing folks from camping to shoot down the ship.

[MechFighter5e3bf9]

 Hour and half was the longest I had a match last- those length of matches were only possible pre-Ascension due to Siege being different:

 

The ships would not attack or damage the enemy base until they actually reached it ( and the ship turrets would target enemy players on the ground ); I'm sure you can imagine what the results of that kind of game-dynamic would be- arrive at the AA with half health, somehow manage to take it over and shoot down the enemy ship before it damages your base, rinse and repeat a dozen times.

 

I remember one match when two of us just camped at our base and shot down maybe 8-10 enemy ships with our Rocketeers, thanks to having line-of-sight the whole time it was in the air ( back when Bazaar was in the Siege map rotation ). Totally noob way to play, but funnily enough we couldn't take the AA so we had no other option- shooting the ship back then was a a viable option, and shooting off the turrets was vital to make it possible to take the AA at all without being killed before you got there.

 

Oh man, the good old days- those matches were actually fun- imagine the XP and HC you could get from a one hour match...

 this exact scenario once landed me 40k+ points in one round

[Flifang]

Yeah, I don't buy the 4 hour thing... maybe 75 minutes at the most, but those matches were indeed EPIC.  I understood the reasons that ADH wanted to keep Siege from lasting so long.  It was more than most players could afford to commit to and the population in Siege was waning due to it.  But I don't agree with all the things they did.

 

I liked having the turrets on the ship actually DO something - shooting at enemy players.  They were realistically inaccurate, so it wasn't like they were ruining play on the ground, they were preventing folks from camping to shoot down the ship.

4 hour siege was a thing. Didn't happen often, but the ship's health increased with every launch as did the cost of the ship to launch. In a very balanced match, where the AA was constantly contested or people were playing off of the AA, it was pretty much up to a battleship to attack the other battleship. Battleship did no damage to the base until it reached the base itself, and its dps was reduced to 5 if you took out the two turrets on it, which by the way attacked enemy players and did damage comparable to that of another mech.

 

Past the third launch it wasn't really feasible to take down the ship itself with even your entire team attacking it. When you took out those turrets almost all urgency in getting to the AA was gone because that dps is nothing. Mechs back then were A HELL of a lot slower too. On bazaar I could drain my entire fuel tank on every mech before I actually reached the AA when traveling from either base.

 

Keep in mind that back then there were so many more players than we've had in years. There were much fewer people who knew what they were doing in siege back in the day, so it was often up to maybe one or two people on either side to actually gather EU. The rest just congregated wherever there were things to shoot. It took longer to get places, EU tanks were smaller, and in an even match the cost to launch a battleship easily increased to 10k EU at times. With one or two people gathering EU on either side that took fuzzy bunnyng ages.

 

You may not believe it but it was indeed a thing that could and did happen. I'll admit: four hour siege was a rarity. The mean time was around an hour most of the time, with a 2 hour match every now and then. Potentially, it could have gone on till servers had to be restarted. People complained, and then adhesive made changes to address how slow going siege could be.

[MechFighter5e3bf9]

i enjoy the new siege much more now because of those gruesome long bouts taking a toll except for the ships shooting while on approach instead of on arrival taking out those moments your all sweating to launch a ship to block the enemy ship and cling to life with only a few points remaining

[MechFighter5e3bf9]

a good player, is a player who has fun

[StubbornPuppet]

a good player, is a player who has fun

 

I've often hoped that games with an MMR system will also employ a FFR (Fun Factor Rating).  After each match, I'd like to be able to rate my own personal FFR on a scale of 1-5 and then hope to be placed into more matches with players who are also having a similar FFR on similar matches. :D

[ARCH3TYP3]

I've often hoped that games with an MMR system will also employ a FFR (Fun Factor Rating). After each match, I'd like to be able to rate my own personal FFR on a scale of 1-5 and then hope to be placed into more matches with players who are also having a similar FFR on similar matches. :D

This is interesting.
I have sometimes been in matches where I felt like I forever was running backwards against a well coordinated enemy team as we proceeded to be stomped decisively ~40-20 and at the end, many of my teammates were refreshed and invigorated by how fun the match was, while I felt a bit drained and frustrated.
There certainly was a difference in perspective.
Last night, in contrast, was another ~40-24 match where my team lost to a better, more coordinated team, but because I was not getting flustered, and remained pretty focused, I had a lot of fun.
(I wonder how this would bork my FFR.)

[StubbornPuppet]

I've often hoped that games with an MMR system will also employ a FFR (Fun Factor Rating).  After each match, I'd like to be able to rate my own personal FFR on a scale of 1-5 and then hope to be placed into more matches with players who are also having a similar FFR on similar matches. :D

 

 

This is interesting.
I have sometimes been in matches where I felt like I forever was running backwards against a well coordinated enemy team as we proceeded to be stomped decisively ~40-20 and at the end, many of my teammates were refreshed and invigorated by how fun the match was, while I felt a bit drained and frustrated.
There certainly was a difference in perspective.
Last night, in contrast, was another ~40-24 match where my team lost to a better, more coordinated team, but because I was not getting flustered, and remained pretty focused, I had a lot of fun.
(I wonder how this would bork my FFR.)

 

Well, your FFR is something that YOU vote on at the end of each match (in my hypothetical scenario)... so how it is affected is up to you. :)

 

For me, in your described situation, I'd probably give a match where it was a blowout because of bad team balancing an FFR of 1 or 2, and a match that was a blowout because our team should have been capable but dropped the ball as a team would get a 3 or 4.  Any match where the score was really close... I'd probably give that a 5.  I love nothing more than close-call matches.

[MechFighter5e3bf9]

everyone, have fun. NOW.

 

This is interesting.
I have sometimes been in matches where I felt like I forever was running backwards against a well coordinated enemy team as we proceeded to be stomped decisively ~40-20 and at the end, many of my teammates were refreshed and invigorated by how fun the match was, while I felt a bit drained and frustrated.
There certainly was a difference in perspective.
Last night, in contrast, was another ~40-24 match where my team lost to a better, more coordinated team, but because I was not getting flustered, and remained pretty focused, I had a lot of fun.
(I wonder how this would bork my FFR.)

This was my historical routine in any competitive game i played until i found hawken at the same point in my life i shed my weight (ego) and love it ever since

[Hyginos]

Well, your FFR is something that YOU vote on at the end of each match (in my hypothetical scenario)... so how it is affected is up to you. :)

 

For me, in your described situation, I'd probably give a match where it was a blowout because of bad team balancing an FFR of 1 or 2, and a match that was a blowout because our team should have been capable but dropped the ball as a team would get a 3 or 4.  Any match where the score was really close... I'd probably give that a 5.  I love nothing more than close-call matches.

 

 

Meanwhile someone on the winning side of a blowout might give it a 5. People have fun winning.

 

The intent is solid but the implementation of this would be complex and questionably useful. At the very least, you would need something much more descriptive than a single number, and in the worst case you would need a separate rating for every single player interaction (up to numplayers^2-numplayers). All this stuff becomes arduous to work with and produces an extremely subjective number of dubious accuracy.

 

If you are going to allow people to rate matches, use that number to asses the quality of the regular skill-base matchmaking algorithm, not to rate the players themselves.

[WmMoneyFrmMissouri]

FFR sounds great. I'd prefer this type of rating as I play for the fun/lols first and generally take it a lot less serious than a lot of my fellow robros. I'd love for siege to award points differently. I can't tell you how many times I've sacrificed myself to hold off the aa being captured so reinforcements could arrive and stabalize our defense. There are no bonuses in this game mode to recognize these sacrifices currently and in fact playing like this will drag down your mmr quite quickly.

[dorobo]

FFR sounds great. I'd prefer this type of rating as I play for the fun/lols first and generally take it a lot less serious than a lot of my fellow robros. I'd love for siege to award points differently. I can't tell you how many times I've sacrificed myself to hold off the aa being captured so reinforcements could arrive and stabalize our defense. There are no bonuses in this game mode to recognize these sacrifices currently and in fact playing like this will drag down your mmr quite quickly.

 

Somekind of inside aa solo statistic.. should be easy to implement as game recognize inside aa as is.

[StubbornPuppet]

I don't really take the implementation of FFR as a serious suggestion... and realize it's not very feasible, at least not without a total overhaul.

 

Heck, I suppose I'd be satisfied if it was just a visual representation next to my name which showed my average Fun Factor Rating... so that other players knew how much fun I usually have. :P

[Charcoal]

Space Yelp for Pilots?

[MechFighter5e3bf9]

we need webcams to monitor our smiles and frowns feeding that data to the FFR

[ATX22]

FFR = # of Days played in Hawken / # of Days owned a Hawken account?  And reset each year.

[MechFighter5e3bf9]

IF (smiletime > frowntime) FFR++ 

[Flifang]

Or you know ya'll could stay in the damn lobby until things balance out. Not calling out anyone specific or targeting anyone so don't have your jimmies rustled, but it takes everyone in a match for balance to work, so even one leaver can screw things up.

 

I most often see people leave because of server quality, that's something that needs to be stabilized asap if it hasn't. (I wouldn't know because I don't get wifi till the 15th!)

 

I know most people aren't used to higher ping and latency as well as sporadic hit reg, but I implore you to stay a little longer. I get that it sucks the first few matches where you feel handicapped, but you will learn to deal. And when those good servers show up, you'll feel like a god. I had to play with 200+ ping my first two years of hawken so I'm battle hardened in this way. Sometimes, I swear I hit my projectiles better at that ping because of my familiarity with it.

 

If you can account for drop distance when firing something in real life or when shooting a basketball you can adapt to and account for differences in ping by merely fiddling around with over-leading your shots. Hitscan will still be very difficult but projectiles you can get the hang of 100% at even 300 ping if you're persistent.

 

If you truly aren't worried about your MMR this shouldn't be too hard of a thing to try out. I realized recently the reason why my mmr tanks so hard is because I will find any 2-3 star server and stay until I've played a map rotation (my own time willing) or until I'm the only player left. Regardless of quality of play. I played 5 matches on my new laptop that had 15 fps max. That didn't go over well, but I was playing so I was happy.

 

Rant/speech over. Carry on. 

[Nept]

I didn't read this thread, but I saw people discussing Siege!  Siege is a terrible gametype that desperately needs a drastic rework.  Hurrah! 

[Xacius]

I didn't read this thread, but I saw people discussing Siege!  Siege is a terrible gametype that desperately needs a drastic rework.  Hurrah! 

inb4 "but nerpt, uve never even playd seege and u think u kno everthing it has 2 offer? ur wrong u just need 2 play it more"

[LaurenEmily]

I didn't read this thread, but I saw people discussing Siege!  Siege is a terrible gametype that desperately needs a drastic rework.  Hurrah!

 
but nerpt, uve never even playd seege and u think u kno everthing it has 2 offer? ur wrong u just need 2 play it more

[Darktim300]

He doesn't need to play it to know that static positions held by a superior team will not be fun for the others involved. It more or less was his strat in straight line missile assault maps. Hold center, break advances on sides. Profit. 

[Nept]

 
but nerpt, uve never even playd seege and u think u kno everthing it has 2 offer? ur wrong u just need 2 play it more

 

I'll have you know that I happen to lead Hawken's top Siege team.

[crockrocket]

I'll have you know that I happen to lead Hawken's top Siege team.

Huh, it's almost like dm skill carries over to other game modes.



To be fair, I love siege and I still think it could use a rework.

[ATX22]

Or you know ya'll could stay in the damn lobby until things balance out. Not calling out anyone specific or targeting anyone so don't have your jimmies rustled, but it takes everyone in a match for balance to work, so even one leaver can screw things up.

 

I most often see people leave because of server quality, that's something that needs to be stabilized asap if it hasn't. (I wouldn't know because I don't get wifi till the 15th!)

 

I know most people aren't used to higher ping and latency as well as sporadic hit reg, but I implore you to stay a little longer. I get that it sucks the first few matches where you feel handicapped, but you will learn to deal. And when those good servers show up, you'll feel like a god. I had to play with 200+ ping my first two years of hawken so I'm battle hardened in this way. Sometimes, I swear I hit my projectiles better at that ping because of my familiarity with it.

 

If you can account for drop distance when firing something in real life or when shooting a basketball you can adapt to and account for differences in ping by merely fiddling around with over-leading your shots. Hitscan will still be very difficult but projectiles you can get the hang of 100% at even 300 ping if you're persistent.

 

If you truly aren't worried about your MMR this shouldn't be too hard of a thing to try out. I realized recently the reason why my mmr tanks so hard is because I will find any 2-3 star server and stay until I've played a map rotation (my own time willing) or until I'm the only player left. Regardless of quality of play. I played 5 matches on my new laptop that had 15 fps max. That didn't go over well, but I was playing so I was happy.

 

Rant/speech over. Carry on. 

 

If everyone that has d/c'ed or completely left Hawken over server infrastructure issues (for this example, I know many more issues exist) instead trudged through all of Hawken's problems with unyielding determination and kept on playing; Reloaded (and ADH in the past) wouldn't be very motivated to do anything about the poor server quality.  Reloaded isn't this benevolent entity that has your gaming experience and well-being in mind, they're in this for the $$ and finding ways to maximize how much $$ they can make.

[Flifang]

If everyone that has d/c'ed or completely left Hawken over server infrastructure issues (for this example, I know many more issues exist) instead trudged through all of Hawken's problems with unyielding determination and kept on playing; Reloaded (and ADH in the past) wouldn't be very motivated to do anything about the poor server quality.  Reloaded isn't this benevolent entity that has your gaming experience and well-being in mind, they're in this for the $$ and finding ways to maximize how much $$ they can make.

There is a difference between leaving a match, and discontinuing play all together. I made that distinction in my post.

 

I mentioned nothing of Reloaded in my post, so I have no idea why you mentioned them at all in your response.

 

Your personal bias has been noted.