Morale - pointless discussion for record

[Josephs_Piano]

Sorry - did you really just say that discussion of suppression and how it might be made to work is unrelated to discussion about suppression??

I am comfortable with people having different opinions - but I do get pissed off at the instant “that won’t work here” responses that attempt to shut down discussion and exploration of alternative ideas.

I enjoy reasoned discussion and discovering new thoughts and processes - but only where there is clear and/or at least interesting reasoning beyond the simplistic “it won’t work”.

And that is pretty much all I’m getting in response to putting up new ideas here - and why I bowed out of “another thread” with an angry response.

like, in order to make an enjoyable game, everyone has too think and please at least the majority of the same people on a same level.

It has to be enjoyable to the people who play the game - but there are always those who do not. So it is up to the publishers to decide what is their target market.

For example I do not play any of the BF or CoD series - as a middle aged bloke with heaps of money and a 50-year interest in and study of WW2 I am looking for a more realistic game, and won’t spend any more money on this if it turns out to be the same as those “but with bots”.

Shrug - clearly I’m quite used to not being the target market for FPS type games, but I have an opportunity to make my case for the sort of game I want and I’m damned if I’m going to shut up just because it isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.

if Enlisted turns out to be something I don’t want then I’ll go back to spending my money on “more serious” strategy games.

[ErikaKalkbrenner]

@Josephs_Piano

Sorry - did you really just say that discussion of suppression and how it might be made to work is unrelated to discussion about suppression??

no, it’s unrelated your judjment about that idea. that’s what i meant.

we see thousents of ideas different between each member.
that’s not the issue.
the issue is people not respecting others opinions like half of the time you do, thikining that YOUR idea is worthed more. and the fact that most of the counter argue that people brought to you, for you it’s like, non existant.

although, i’m not entirely sure you actually understand what people are typing to you.
and examples, could be message between you and cat. but not only with him, your general answers makes no sense at all. someone make a points, and you just simply deny it with like " you’re the one being crazy " or, " take your personal problem else where " almost like you can’t stand an argument.

and i don’t have to ping you each message mentioning those. your profile is furfilled with those.

which brings me to the next point:

@Josephs_Piano

I enjoy reasoned discussion and discovering new thoughts and processes - but only where there is clear and/or at least interesting reasoning beyond the simplistic “it won’t work”.

you just don’t accept the fact that sometimes this literally cannot work.
i’m sorry that i sound a bit too basic.

@Josephs_Piano

It has to be enjoyable to the people who play the game - but there are always those who do not. So it is up to the publishers to decide what is their target market.

that is truee.
but at least we can make a game as i said for everyone, not just for me or you, or any individual person.
but as a community. made of many people.

of course a game can’t please EVERYONE. but at least, the majority.

@Josephs_Piano

For example I do not play any of the BF or CoD series - as a middle aged bloke with heaps of money and a 50-year interest in and study of WW2 I am looking for a more realistic game, and won’t spend any more money on this if it turns out to be the same as those “but with bots”.

you don’t have to, and i don’t think bf or cod are this complex. surely they have a better progression system, that’s for sure. but this is why we are here to at least try to change something.

@Josephs_Piano

Shrug - clearly I’m quite used to not being the target market for FPS type games, but I have an opportunity to make my case for the sort of game I want and I’m damned if I’m going to shut up just because it isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.

i mean, being for the fps market type of games or not, has nothing to do with making ideas that are accepted or not by the community.

one thing that most often people don’t remember, is that we are the community. we are mainly the people that play this game, and right now we are the people that are gonna tweak this game to be bought in open beta. as such, if we don’t like this game, we can simply abandon it. and it’s gonna be a huge back slash for the whole project as it’s going to be " halted " by the lack of people playing it.

the main point, is that we have, or otherwise this game won’t live past OB. and no, i’m not being crazy, passional or whatever. i played many games to understand what’s right, what’s wrong, what does actually make money, and what doesn’t.

but as we are all in this togheter. cooperation is a must need.
and again, i’m sorry " buddy ". but you cares too much on your end than the overhall size of the product.

and i don’t think you should care that much of your idea not being liked.
we all have ideas that people might, or might not like.
but like almost everyone does, get over with.

like, at this point, none would make a damn thing out of it if everyone gets angry and start rant against the others just because people didn’t liked their idea. this sounds more like a problem of EGO.

@Josephs_Piano

if Enlisted turns out to be something I don’t want then I’ll go back to spending my money on “more serious” strategy games.

i’m sorry to dissapoint you, but looks like it’s going to be that way.
not only for you, but for many people. might be me included as well.

because this game turnes out not being so much realistic as it should or proclaimed to be.
plagued by potential microtransation and overwhelming RNG system.

we’ll have to se.

[TheCatequil]

@Josephs_Piano

So here’s a challenge - rather than dissing the idea out of hand because the current game mechanics don’t support it (as you see things) - why don’t you explore what would it take to make it useable in the game?

That is not my responsibility, as I have no interest in this mechanic. Instead you come up with something that works, and if it does, I might support it. Just how I can support some of tchof’s suggestions despite me and him having drastically different views on things. I do not care whose idea it is. Only whether it is good or bad.

@Josephs_Piano

Sorry - did you really just say that discussion of suppression and how it might be made to work is unrelated to discussion about suppression??

Topic name: Morale - pointless discussion for record

@Josephs_Piano

“that won’t work here” responses that attempt to shut down discussion

Come up with ideas that might work, then. Instead of ideas that simply would never work.
That’s why I get mostly positive responses when I make suggestions - I think in advance how it would work for the majority of players and incorperate that into the suggestion.

@ErikaKalkbrenner

i’m sorry to dissapoint you, but looks like it’s going to be that way.
not only for you, but for many people. might be me included as well.

because this game turnes out not being so much realistic as it should or proclaimed to be.
plagued by potential microtransation and overwhelming RNG system.

we’ll have to se.

Yup. I might also quit the game with how the progression currently stands. It’s worse than crossout and it killed crossout too so I won’t attach myself to a game for 4 years only to watch it whither away.

[Attic_Annie]

Really I don’t see any intuitive way of adding suppression beyond existing mechanics.
Players already react well enough to MGs and IDF. Bots actually seem to to a degree as my time playing tanks showed me that bots like to go prone as soon as you fire an MG at them. They could be improved so they no longer run directly to their death, but the intention is already there.