• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Time Online

    265d 1h 47m 41s

Community Reputation

2099 Excellent

About Deep-Green-X

  • Rank
    Comlog Addict
  • Birthday 02/16/1986


  • Location Belfast Northern Ireland


  • ITS PIN G5759
  1. The game relies heavily on skill but it's still a dice based game and the dice can always roll badly, I speak from experience that you can watch online. Also Criticals are a thing, any semblance of pure skill based advantage even with a dice based system goes out the window with Criticals. As an aside I feel your still coming at this from a competitive win-lose mindset for the campaign, where actual winns and losses for a faction matter in some grander more meaningful scheme. The campaign is and always has been more focused on the taking part than the winning, it's a fun community event not a competitive tournament. If the relative winns and losses of your faction matter so much that your going into metrics to try and create some sort of supremely balanced competitive system then perhaps it's time to take a step back and look at what the Campaign is actually supposed to be and if what you want matches what the community or CB wants.
  2. People are giving you feedback and your ignoring or deliberately misconstruing what they say. Do you want a discussion or do you just want to be "right".
  3. Not the case at all. Numerically larger factions were not guaranteed victory, they had more locations to defend and when the AI historian crunched the numbers for different locations factored in the initial bonus the factions had in them from control. How well a faction did is far more influenced by the quality of their battle reports, what fraction were "bad" reports filtered out by the historian and how well organised the faction command were in seizing locations. If your maths were correct then the likes of Tohaa and Aleph, even CA wouldn't have stood a chance yet Tohaa have done very well for themselves.
  4. Ah the grammar criticism, last grasping argument of those with nothing to say. To add some stuff for future campaign suggestions. How about some areas that start off being not under the control of any faction but that can be claimed once specific objectives are met. These areas then provide some bonus or small advantage to the faction that controlls it such as a small bonus to SWC in a scenario, advantage in securing objectives for a mission or making another area easier to secure. I'm thinking along the lines of how some of the mechanics from Campaign Paradise and that Campaign expansion for the original Dawn of War worked.
  5. This feels like the view of those who only cared about "winning" the campaign for their faction rather than takeing part in a narrative based event. If your "farming winns from noobs" (a silly concept to begin with) then both you and they are still playing games of Infinity and if you wanted them to count towards the campaign results then you still have to write up a decent report which is the whole point of a narrative based campaign. Indeed the whole concept of demanding that games are played in a particular theatre, seeking out noobs to play and "taking advantage of weaker people" so you can gain a small advantage in an online wargaming campaign that is supposed to be for fun stinks to high heaven of a bad attitude. It may be a case of people taking things far to seriously and confusing fun faction based interactions for hyper competitive live and death situations. This wasn't a massive ITS tournament with prizes and Interplanetary invites at the end, nobody's life is going to alter dramatically as a result of an online wargaming campaign event. TL:DR Flamestrike and Wotan were only garbage if your attitude going in was garbage. If you wanted to take part from the experience rather than for the win at all costs then you might have enjoyed them more.
  6. Utter nonsense
  7. Ha ha Do you have any proof that the story has been railroaded or is this another of your campaign conspiracy theories like the AI historian not existing or BOW staff fiddling with the results? Campaign history is being worked out by CB writers based on the results and the faction leasions. That's the facts anything else is speculative fiction.
  8. No idea, the last I've heard is that it's due after the interplanetary.
  9. It was another thread and on Facebook too I believe. The facts are that the final results have not been published yet so making claims about who has won and why this might be is speculation. Claiming that players have had no effect on the outcome or narrative is also speculation without basis in fact. Your relentless complaints about the campaign, the players participating and various conspiracy theories about the campaign results being faked or the AI historian not existing etc mean that if you said the sky was blue I'd look out the window.
  10. You guys seem awfully sure PanO have won the campaign when the final results haven't been released yet. You also seem awfully sure that players actions had no effect on the campaign and that it was a railroad. Maybe don't make any assumptions until the final results are released?
  11. I don't see any ill-advised or unhelpful posts from Warren. He's been engaged with the forums and the warconsole throughout the campaign and has been courteous and more than patient. If I had to deal with half of the stuff he has during the campaign I would have lost my temper long ago. Especially with those who liked to complain about stuff on a constant basis, contributed nothing to the campaign but negativity and have called into question the validity of the campaign throughout, one sentence answers is what they've earned. The fact that he has not lost his temper and is still here is a testament to how much of a professional he is.
  12. Was going to write up a long rebuttal to Hecaton but Warren has sumerised it far better.
  13. Your a big fan of alternative facts aren't you... People asked (in some cases demanded, multiple times, daily) what was the minimum requirements for a battle report to "count" in the final results, they asked this so they could do the bare minimum and "game the system". This information wasn't given out specifically because it would allow people to game the system. The point of the campaign from both BOW & CB's perspective was to create an enjoyable community event where players would create a narrative and write some good battle reports. Some people were more focused on "winning" the campaign above having fun and in fact actively made the campaign less fun for others. If those who were so focused on "winning at all costs" had relaxed a bit and used their time to play games and write reports instead of nitpicking players reports and trying to game the system maybe they would have found it more enjoyable. At the end of the day though some people will never be happy and seem to derive enjoyment from ruining other peoples days.
  14. Does that list use the updated points cost for the Kamau?
  15. I thought they looked like an up armoured version of the original Mobile Brigada, with the pipe/dreadlocks and faceplate design