Any word on them giving this game a point?

The problem of PS2 is there is no winning or losing.
It's like playing with a yoyo. The more you play, the better you get. And you can have fun doing so. But you never really win...

/Sigh...

If one of my soldiers had ever said this to me I would have smoked the sh*t out of him.

If you can't make good use of available cover then you need to seriously reconsider what you are doing. There are fortified defenses at EVERY base in this game.

I think you need to call up Merriam-Webster because you just invented a new definition for the word "fine".

fine 1 (fn)
adj. fin·er, fin·est
1. Of superior quality, skill, or appearance: a fine day; a fine writer.
2. Very small in size, weight, or thickness: fine type; fine paper.
3.
a. Free from impurities.
b. Metallurgy Containing pure metal in a specified proportion or amount: gold 21 carats fine.
4. Very sharp; keen: a blade with a fine edge.
5. Thin; slender: fine hairs.
6. Exhibiting careful and delicate artistry: fine china. See Synonyms at delicate.
7. Consisting of very small particles; not coarse: fine dust.
8.
a. Subtle or precise: a fine difference.
b. Able to make or detect effects of great subtlety or precision; sensitive: has a fine eye for color.
9. Trained to the highest degree of physical efficiency: a fine racehorse.
10. Characterized by refinement or elegance.
11. Satisfactory; acceptable: Handing in your paper on Monday is fine.
12. Being in a state of satisfactory health; quite well: I'm fine. And you?
13. Used as an intensive: a fine mess.
adv.
1. Finely.
2. Informal Very well: doing fine.
tr. & intr.v. fined, fin·ing, fines
To make or become finer, purer, or cleaner.

That tells you you didn't read it.

Explain to me how taking bases and losing bases changes anything in PS2. I mean permanent changes or at least something you have to live with for while.

Your wording doesn't make any sense.

Exactly what are you progressing towards?

I'd like to not just cap bases for the remaining lifespan of this game. I'm not a robot.

Look if you're going to say something, then say it. Stop beating around the bush.

I did say it. I said you didn't read it.

I did read it but that's neither the point nor the argument. You had issues with my question regarding what was a worthy objective, rather rudely stated, and refuse any further information regarding what you mean.

If the ultimate goal is to get PS2 as close as possible to PS1, or stay extremely similar in atmosphere, PS1 lore is the inspiration; PS1 lore, however, can not guide us past where PS1 left off and that's the real future for this game begins. That is my thought process. If you have a different opinion, then suggest how the lore defines any objective outside of an unending war between three sides. It might be a beautiful vision, but I can't even see the edges.

You do realize PS2 has their own lore right?

Yes, I have read that too. Once again, neither the point to be made nor the argument to be had. If I may toss it out voluntarily, though, PS2's lore still seems too adolescent to chart any direction other than the war we currently have on hand.

Your responses are terse and unhelpful and, most importantly, dodging the question. I must conclude you have nothing worth arguing in support of your own opinion, whatever it is.

a better question is if there is any word on when this thread will have an actual meaningful point...

doesn't say perfect anywhere, you're presuming superior quality means perfect which it doesn't.

I'm trying to agree with you stop making it difficult.

Well you'll never beat a yoyo with that attitude.

My point is the PS2 lore is filled with wonderful bits of information that you can literally pull out and out into the game. An example would be the artifact Henry Briggs found. Why aren't the VS looking for that?

See how easy that was.

Game to me is fine for what it is, and is the only thing out there that even comes close to Dark Age of Camalot RVR (realm vs realm), if anyone remembers that game.

Three factions battling over a huge continent, with multiple objectives, stealth war going on on the side which was almost a different game, benefits going to the faction who controlled territories, etc. This game can learn a lot from that one, without even having to reinvent the wheel.

They will be adding purple swords and dragons soon. Then the game will have meaning and be well worth all of our time.

Did DAoC have an overall point to the PVP? In WAR it was to make your way to the capital city and raid it. PS2 has no overall point, you take territory but for no reason or point. WAR actually had a point to taking territory.

Or they could make it so theres a reason to take territory. But if purple swords and dragons are your thing maybe youll get lucky.

That must be because you don't know how to PTFO.

Um, there has to be an objective to play it.