07-04-2014, 03:14 AM
Yeah the orginal issue is being mutated by a myriad of generalistic opinion.
Surrey which bit would not be fixed by removing forcecap? Nothing in my post would be affected by the removal of forcecap. Possibly quoted wrong post?
You do touch upon an element worth taking into account - if the 4 ppl holding winning freq and the 1 person they wanted to force too, feel solid enough on their desires that they would change arenas, then, great! That's what the point of the whole debate is about. They're not a squad, so, change arenas if you want to keep playing together.
We (Dropships) do it often. Of course we do it in Prac arenas. You want to know why? Because forcecap is not an option there. SO in essence you have people using !forcecap for the wrong reasons in !forcecap-enabled arenas, and us putting squads in prac arenas where they don't belong because of the issue of forcecap abuse.
In comes someone else who gets !cap while we're happily putting in an hour or so of intras, so we just up and leave with all 8 or 10 players to the next available arenas. "It's an odd thought, I grant you. But there it is."
Just reiterating my intitial concern : I don't think !forcecap should be removed. I believe there should be rules in place for its use. The "gentleman's agreement" has gone. Decide once and for all if !forcecap should have restrictions on its use, and legislate.
Due to your not reading the entire thread, here's the issue :
In the incident that is in question, neither competing freq was a squad. Sure one freq was top-tier, but the other was kindah middle. No offence intended but I do watch a lot of play and that's where I'd put a playing team which includes High Voltage, Blazer-Elite and Greg (and I can't remember the fourth). Mr B.Hole's cap had come up and he was about to play (I don't remember the full holding freq now but Three was there under alias and he had three freqmates who were similar level but it wasn't all CM).
If Mr. B-Hole had taken !cap he would have invited in 3 and quite likely ended up with the most attentive players there at the time, quite possible High Voltage, Blaze-Elite and Greg. Mr. B is learning the ropes and imo can play a great solo game but has a lot to learn on team play - and was very keen to learn. Again, imo, there would have been very little lost to the challenging team's competitive advantage between the two options. The resultant .pred was in the 30/70 range I think - remember that the holding freq were aliased so .pred was skewed.
I stated "Don't forcecap!" It was a groan, not a directive. Then we had ourselves a right kerfuffle.
So you see, forcecap wasnt used to resolve danger to the arena's liveliness. I wasn't used to commit the arena to a squadprac. It wasn't used to ensure the correct level of competitive play. It was used, in my opinion, frivolously - and I believe from the pit of my gut no-one won out of it, but the game lost a player.
Maybe he should employ more patience. But that's his job to adjudicate on, not ours. I have appealed for Mr B to come back.
So, there it is.
Surrey which bit would not be fixed by removing forcecap? Nothing in my post would be affected by the removal of forcecap. Possibly quoted wrong post?
You do touch upon an element worth taking into account - if the 4 ppl holding winning freq and the 1 person they wanted to force too, feel solid enough on their desires that they would change arenas, then, great! That's what the point of the whole debate is about. They're not a squad, so, change arenas if you want to keep playing together.
We (Dropships) do it often. Of course we do it in Prac arenas. You want to know why? Because forcecap is not an option there. SO in essence you have people using !forcecap for the wrong reasons in !forcecap-enabled arenas, and us putting squads in prac arenas where they don't belong because of the issue of forcecap abuse.
In comes someone else who gets !cap while we're happily putting in an hour or so of intras, so we just up and leave with all 8 or 10 players to the next available arenas. "It's an odd thought, I grant you. But there it is."
Just reiterating my intitial concern : I don't think !forcecap should be removed. I believe there should be rules in place for its use. The "gentleman's agreement" has gone. Decide once and for all if !forcecap should have restrictions on its use, and legislate.
Due to your not reading the entire thread, here's the issue :
In the incident that is in question, neither competing freq was a squad. Sure one freq was top-tier, but the other was kindah middle. No offence intended but I do watch a lot of play and that's where I'd put a playing team which includes High Voltage, Blazer-Elite and Greg (and I can't remember the fourth). Mr B.Hole's cap had come up and he was about to play (I don't remember the full holding freq now but Three was there under alias and he had three freqmates who were similar level but it wasn't all CM).
If Mr. B-Hole had taken !cap he would have invited in 3 and quite likely ended up with the most attentive players there at the time, quite possible High Voltage, Blaze-Elite and Greg. Mr. B is learning the ropes and imo can play a great solo game but has a lot to learn on team play - and was very keen to learn. Again, imo, there would have been very little lost to the challenging team's competitive advantage between the two options. The resultant .pred was in the 30/70 range I think - remember that the holding freq were aliased so .pred was skewed.
I stated "Don't forcecap!" It was a groan, not a directive. Then we had ourselves a right kerfuffle.
So you see, forcecap wasnt used to resolve danger to the arena's liveliness. I wasn't used to commit the arena to a squadprac. It wasn't used to ensure the correct level of competitive play. It was used, in my opinion, frivolously - and I believe from the pit of my gut no-one won out of it, but the game lost a player.
Maybe he should employ more patience. But that's his job to adjudicate on, not ours. I have appealed for Mr B to come back.
So, there it is.
One of the three most dangerous people in Subspace.