While we discuss gameplay, remember this!

Before yet another post is made in the unhelpful format of "game haz bugs FIX IT" that plague not only this but other forums of other games too, consider at the very least defining your use of any of the following:

Balance.
Metagame.
Skill.
Casual.
"Broken".

"Balance" does not necessarily mean "nerf what I don't like or don't use, buff what I like or what I use."

"Metagame" seems to be turning into a word that is said for its own sake to be a part of the conversation.

"Skill" is used a lot like "balance" but with more posturing.

"Casual" is an insult, usually. Implying of course that this game could keep afloat with the presence of only the "skilled" MLG-ready outfit of your choice and a few unwitting volunteers to kick around.

"Broken" is especially silly. If it works but it works on you, that doesn't mean it's "Broken". Same goes for stuff you use but can't use for everything. Example of this: NC anti-infantry MAXes aren't broken, even if their current role is awfully short range.

Do your part to make your arguments better. If you use the words up there, define them. Flesh them out. Make it clear that you have something to say other than "give me things and give everyone else less things". You may find you will be listened to more often, that you will be more persuasive.

All right, that's that. Flame away. Say "TL;DR". Question my K/D ratio. OR, optionally, enjoy the advice and happy posting.

As long as we all agree that NC needs better vehicle AI weapons (and AV weapons too) then you can use whatever diction you like.

We need not agree (even if I do, actually, on this particular point you bring up).

The important thing is that instead of saying something like "THIS IS BROKEN FIX IT NEED BALANCE MY ENEMIES HAVE NO SKILL", you say something such as "This NC vehicle weapon has (insert statistics here) and is very limited in use compared to (insert other statistics) and needs to be improved so it can compete".

A call for civility on the forums? On these forums? You have my support, but the road ahead is a harsh one.

you know what else would be nice? if people could, you know, make posts about PS2 gameplay in the gameplay section of the forum instead of rehashed complaint and criticism posts about other people's posts...

I've given up here to be honest.

You get such a massive churn of players and they are a mix of adults and children. You try to talk to one like an adult then realise its completely futile because they are at an age where they don't understand fair.

I don't think too many people understand Metagame anyway. It seems to be used to describe the high end game.

What Metagaming actually is is doing things outside of normal play. Like getting spys into opposing forces and causing havoc, or artificially creating rifts and discord on forums, and invading opponents team speak and disrupting it.

Go read up on EvE Online if you want a correct definition of metagaming. It has nothing to do with high level strategy.

The community would grow immensely if more time was spent talking about how to be good at the game instead of begging for the game to be good to us.

I've been on, and posted heavily on, much worse forums.

World of Warcraft's community especially comes to mind.

This is actually one of the less horrible forums. It even beats Mechwarrior Online's forum after it took a turn for the neckbeard with its obsession with the "skill" of jumping up and down behind rocks and shooting 3-4 sniper rifles into a single location of a slow moving target.

Careful, this post is dangerously close to the canned "casuals are killing this game" posts that contribute nothing and impress no one.

That was my point. "Metagame" is said so often yet most dont even seem to agree what the hell they mean by it.

For some "metagame" means "lets babble about e-sports teams and who is worth how much pretend money".

Sadly, chronological age isn't a reliable indicator of biological age.

I've met people in real life barely out of their teens that were well-composed, emotionally developed adults. And I've dealt with people in their late 40s acting (and living) like teenagers.

Seems to be mostly nitpicking at semantics tbh. When someone says something is broken, for example, they don't actually mean it's broken. They mean the disparity in performance between whatever is broken and its competition is imbalanced.

See, words are ********. As long as you understand the point someone is trying to make, that's all that matters. Worst you can really do is disagree with their point, which is an opinion. Disagreeing with the words they used to make the point is trivial. It's like the story of the farmer who refused to say "hello" because the word "hell" in it offended him.

Don't be that farmer.

As much as I absolutely hate to agree with you, this. Though, this is borderline impossible, because anyone that does this is suddenly labeled elitist. As soon as someone labels them as such, thread devolves into MLGRUININGTHEGAME - even though it has nothing to do with MLG, it's the safety net of people who don't want to bother getting better. Or as Mattherson's very own Roamcel has said, the top 20% on the leader boards are all cheaters/hackers. Ha, this community.

Agreed on AI.

Disagreed on AV, but only in the sense that the Enforcer is exactly the right balance for an AV Turret and things like the Vulcan should have their AI capabilities reduced to match.

you mean "Ha, every competitive community ever"...

it's sad but that's just how it goes... in general it's much easier to blame the game or every single other player and make excuses than it is to actually put in effort and improve yourself... tho honestly with the lengths I see some go to to pass the buck it may actually be less effort if they just practiced and got better... lol

That's one take on it. Another take is that the fact that while TR/VS got these completely LOLMode weapons, NC got the Enforcer ML85, a completely balanced and niched weapon that's not ambitious in the slightest is an embarassment to the NC faction. One that I believe deserves retribution.

Er, well yeah I suppose I'm more for discussing the logical role of an AV turret. (Good against vehicles; below average against infantry; just like the Enforcer.)

Which makes me pretty lousy to discuss the topic with if all you care about is vengeful emotional retribution.

Nitpicking at semantics, perhaps, but there IS a very real problem I mentioned.

How do we even discuss "metagame" if the people involved can't even agree on what it means? Or "balance" for that matter? How can a room of people all demand "balance" and what they mean instead is "nerf everyone else, give me things"?

Semantics are one thing, but sometimes they are relevant, and they are now.

One more issue here: We DONT understand each other all the time, so the "point we're trying to make that is all that matters" is indeed endangered here.

See my above post.