TB: NOW
- Imchicken1
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Junior Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 23
- Thank you received: 0
6 years 11 months ago #14581
by Imchicken1
TB: NOW was created by Imchicken1
Good evening,
Had an issue on the server I was trying to rectify with Haley in all chat.
Do you guys want 69th + FFG to be on one team (and get blamed for stacking), or to split us up (and get blamed for ghosting)? Just looking for some clarification.
Thanks!
Had an issue on the server I was trying to rectify with Haley in all chat.
Do you guys want 69th + FFG to be on one team (and get blamed for stacking), or to split us up (and get blamed for ghosting)? Just looking for some clarification.
Thanks!
- =HOG=Haley11thACR
-
- Offline
- Administrator
-
Less
More
- Posts: 3118
- Thank you received: 496
6 years 11 months ago #14583
by =HOG=Haley11thACR
Replied by =HOG=Haley11thACR on topic TB: NOW
The problem is its 69th, TZ, IVT and the usual hangers on...u guys just run the table with 10 to 20 players on one side with all of the assets.When we switch you guys you just switch back, along with 5 or 10 other players...so even if we switch u and then try to manually switch players they just switch back...
Its making the teams so unbalanced that the scores are often 300 to 400 points apart at the end. We only care about the server. We want reasonably balanced games so more players will enjoy playing. U guys are no help.
We went thru a similar problem in the past with H. We asked them several times to not stack and asset whore....no luck. Now here we are again...we ended up having to ban most of them. We do not want to ban u guys. We just want the game play to attract players and not make it suck for them.
Its making the teams so unbalanced that the scores are often 300 to 400 points apart at the end. We only care about the server. We want reasonably balanced games so more players will enjoy playing. U guys are no help.
We went thru a similar problem in the past with H. We asked them several times to not stack and asset whore....no luck. Now here we are again...we ended up having to ban most of them. We do not want to ban u guys. We just want the game play to attract players and not make it suck for them.
- Imchicken1
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Junior Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 23
- Thank you received: 0
6 years 11 months ago #14585
by Imchicken1
Replied by Imchicken1 on topic TB: NOW
Rather than trying to split up our group, swap the other groups and clans to the opposite team. IE IVT vs 69th. There is a reason we always ask to have our whole group swapped, or request asymmetrical maps where our team will be at a disadvantage.
Another thing you can do is swap the decent squadleaders to the opposite team as us. The majority of us are good at pointing and clicking but are shit at making decisions regarding the whole map.
Another thing you can do is swap the decent squadleaders to the opposite team as us. The majority of us are good at pointing and clicking but are shit at making decisions regarding the whole map.
- =HOG= __Super_6__5__
-
- Offline
- Administrator
-
Less
More
- Posts: 4057
- Thank you received: 754
- Imchicken1
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Junior Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 23
- Thank you received: 0
6 years 11 months ago - 6 years 11 months ago #14588
by Imchicken1
Replied by Imchicken1 on topic TB: NOW
That is not at all what I said. You're either misinterpreting or twisting my words.
We enjoy a balanced match, but we also want to play together. I'm offering suggestions on how to ensure one team does not get steamrolled. The only thing I'm really requesting is that you guys not put 69th people on seperate teams. The average night has only a squads worth ( 8 ) of us anyways.
We enjoy a balanced match, but we also want to play together. I'm offering suggestions on how to ensure one team does not get steamrolled. The only thing I'm really requesting is that you guys not put 69th people on seperate teams. The average night has only a squads worth ( 8 ) of us anyways.
Last edit: 6 years 11 months ago by Imchicken1.
Time to create page: 0.131 seconds