MLG: Not interested. Not even as a spectator.

It hasn't been done successfully before, not at the level of much smaller-scale arena shooters that often have 12 or less participants.

League play is usually at squad level, as it's easier to maintain a squad than a whole platoon.

It'll be m-u-c-h more difficult to communicate and coordinate 48v48. Heck, even trying to keep a full roster.

Just look at WoW 25man raiding is practically dead. It's down to 10mans now, and even that at the "pro" level those guilds are folding...and that's the most populated MMO.

that's exactly why i'd love to see something like this pulled off :3

The prizes would already be small and they'd be divided 48s ways, or knowing guild/outfit drama, be divided in a top-heavy fashion to leaders with crumbs for the rest.

I can't see this being viable, now or in the future, unless this game somehow expects to get 48 times the attention, sponsors, and MLG-based revenue.

This is a fool's venture.

Won't happen on a weekly basis, simply because trying to field that many players for scrims -- let alone actual league play -- takes too much effort.

There's also the problem of trying to monitor cheats with so many players (and yes, the leagues regularly find them) and that just for titles. RL money, expect even more cheaters trying to win a cash prize.

One huge obstacle for enforcement is the great wall of denial I see here. Apparently PS2 has next to no cheaters, because of the memetic mantra of "you can't prove it, you're just jelly, the people you accuse are just better than you."

Unless they have some bold claim to make about how cheat-proof this game is (it isn't), there is no reason that the same cheaters that are in just about all other shooters aren't polluting this one too, some even pretending to be "pro" at the same time.

Well, that's a mantra now being "promoted" in FPS games. Back in 2007 with BF2142 the EA moderators would go after the obvious cheaters, but BF3 came out the EA moderators would *defend* cheaters, claiming the same excuses.

It's a disease now, where Lance Armstrongs are regarded as heroes, instead of ridiculed for bringing down sportsmanship. It's all so not to offend the guys who think nothing in buying auto-updating cheatware to look "pro".

The denial is the very worst part of it to me.

When people are making videos of these things in action, when statistics show some obscene performance percentages from typically gibberish-named throwaway characters, the mantra seems to be "it doesn't happen or it doesn't happen that much" with a smug "ur just bad lol" added immediately afterward.

I strongly suspect a good chunk of the most smug and obnoxious self-declared "elite" in game and on this forum are script kiddies.

Its pretty clear that SOE has no clue when it comes to competitive PvP, just having showcase matches and the vegas stuff for IRL money happening on the live servers boggles my mind.

Fixed it for you. The man himself is the only one really pushing for MLG

This game is made to be competitive just like Starcraft, etc. If you can not handle that then you know where the exit button is.

This game is meant to be balanced at all levels. Whether or not this game had MLG, it would still be this way. People might say that they can handle a slight imbalance but the truth is even 1% difference between weapons will drive some people crazy wanting nerf hammer to the OP weapon/Vehicle.

I've grown used to this competitiveness in my multi-player games because that is why I play them and apparently most other players like it as well or it wouldn't be a driving factor in game design.

What a tired old thought-terminating statement: "If you don't like X then you can leave".

We can say the exact same thing with equal validity about your apparent need for mirrored weapons between factions: If you don't like asymmetry there's plenty of games that are more rigidly even between factions.

I actually love the differences but the traits they picked make it nearly impossible to balance between the factions. Also if those things bothered me and I knew it would never change then I would leave.

Your earlier comment however was about the woes of competitiveness. This is the core of the game. People do not play multi-player PvP FPS games like WOW. They play them because they want to be competitive. This will never change and if it does then they will alienate their core audience for this game. So when you complain about the MLG scene thinking that it is the problem it is not(at least when your talking about the balance issues). Even with out MLG, people would still want balance and would still expect the things they do.

Since that is the way things are, if you can't handle it, you know where the door is.

Hurf-blurfing again about "there's the door" doesn't eliminate the fact that you're broad-brushing the definition of competition.

There's quite a large percentage of people who play Planetside 2 that don't give the slightest care or interest for MLG except they may take offense when MLG's particular demands affect their gameplay styles and the weapons they use.

It's very presumptive to say that every balance issue in PS2 can be solved precisely with what the e-sport/e-arena people are demanding: it's one thing to have a use and a good place for vehicles, AOE weapons, and guided weapons, and its another thing entirely when the MLG people often demand their outright removal because of their narrow self interests.

Your "there's the door" nonsense can be applied even more firmly to your own demands. This is a large-area FPS wargame, not a dinky little arena shooter. Until it is somehow made that way, the door's there for you, as you like to put it.

The reason I said there is the door is because you were complaining about all the nerfs that have come because the "MLG" community were, guessing here, whining about them. When I said that even with or without the MLG community those things would have been called for.

Also I also know a large percentage of the game that can not stand the idea of MLG but still call for the same nerfs and buffs.

I also NEVER stated that MLG would solve the or even help out with the balance of the game.

It is also not MLG players that are calling for these things to be changed or removed but average players, that could care less about MLG, because they do not know how to use or counter those weapons. If anything most players that are worthy of MLG are against a large portion of nerf complaints or at least not as severe.

Also this game is not a dinky arena shooter but does that mean it shouldn't be balance because of it. The last time I checked PS2 was not a simulator. It was also not a Fantasy MMO with dragons and fairies. It is, and at its core is wanting, to be a competitive PvP fps combined arms game. This means things being added or changed to be COMPETITIVE not because they are "COOL" and go "BOOM" but because they add play styles and depth and require some skill to use instead of just being"OMG EASY FUN MODE".

I think you might want to redefine competitive since the world seems to automatically mean MLG to you.

In conclusion to what I was trying to say. It would not matter if MLG was in this game or not. Balance would always be striven for and FAIR competition would always be the communities goal with or with out MLG.

^Which is why I said if you can not handle people constantly complaining, because they find it the best interest for the game, about weapons and balance then you know where the door is. Because this will happen with or without MLG. If they never announced MLG the game would still have progressed the way it has.

So in other words, MLG is not the problem for you, people are.

Your definition of "balance" is still very up in the air here.

Do you mean that grossly unproportional weapons should be checked and underpowered ones boosted? Or are we talking about the MLG-shared extreme of "every weapon counterpart for every faction is the same except for a different colored tracer?"

Every weapon should be different and have a role and be useful without one being better than all the rest except in their defined role.

Balance is not about carbon copies but each weapon should have comparable performance. Take the Serpent, GD7F, and well the Lynx/Jaguar(chose one) since the last two are pretty close to each other. They should all have the same role and same performance but should not be carbon copies of each other. TR should have the ROF, Vanu should be in the middle with good RoF and Good damage, while the NC need large damage and slow RoF. The DPS should be the same and overall stats should be comparable but the actually feel of the guns would be completely different but none would have a definite advantage.

Edit: I'll add two more examples. The Vanguard weapons. None of them can compete with AI kills like the Prowler can. To make things more balance you might add a bit more spalsh or some other trait to make the Vanguard equal to the prowler at AI options while the Prowler gets a boost to equal the Vanguard at AV capabilities. This way neither tank preforms better against the other in those categories but still retains their differences.

Also the Rocket Launches. Currently the Stryker and the Annihilator feel the same role. This should never happen. Every weapon even on the same faction should have defined roles. Also the Stryker should feel different but perform equally compared to another rocket launcher on both the VS and NC.

Does this spread of weapon differences apply across factions to you? As in, would you like it if, say, NC weapons did decisively hit harder than TR weapons but TR weapons had more ammo per magazine and a higher rate of fire, and VS weapons had a third property to give them a purpose between the first two?

I am for anything that makes the factions keep their differences while maintaining their equality.

From the examples that you gave. I'll use TR and NC since I have no idea how to balance VS into it.

NC have 30 round guns that hit hard while the TR have faster firing guns with 40 rounds. Each does the same DPS and take about the same time to empty their mags and neither have a true advantage but their feel is still different.

However you should be able to go onto any faction and with a bit of practice easily use the weapons because their roles are the same and their TTK is the same but their overall feel is different. This is achievable but no where near the current design.

Also from the "MLG" guys I know and from reading posts of other "MLG" guys I find that this is what they want as well. True balance that allows different but equal. Same functionality without carbon copy. It is possible without dumbing down or making guns exact copies of each other.

Those must be some nice folks you know but I haven't seen much sign of them on these forums, that's for sure.

No big complaints about what you said, though I wouldn't mind taking it a step further where each faction might have a superior key piece, somewhere. Theoretically, for example, if the magrider had enough hover power to clear over walls consistently, it might be hard to "balance" directly against a Prowler or a Vanguard, but might give it a niche, some chemistry. I think with the MAX differences they tried this already, to very mixed results.