Rabidnid wrote:People play the games they want to play. If you don't want to play their games host your own.
I mean, it feels nice and righteous to say that, but it's not a very thoughtful position.
So because people play the games they want to play, does that mean that anything goes? What if people want to play games with 100 starting points per player? What if they want to play games with 10,000 starting points per player? This position is problematic because how is a new player supposed to know what optimal, sane settings are for lobbies? New players will join matches with sub-optimal settings and conclude 'Well this game is retarded, why should I waste my time with this?'
Furthermore, what's the point of Eugen trying to balance the game if it's just going to be anything goes? Adjusting the cost of tanks is meaningless if everyone is hosting 'very high income' games with tons of extra starting points. How can you balance availability if everyone is playing 10v10s, where of course people leave all the time and thereby give availability buffs to their allies?
The fact of the matter is you cannot have this current state of anarchy, where game settings amount to 'if it feels good, do it'. Because this state makes it nearly impossible to have a cogent, consistent balance for a competitive multiplayer game. It's just not good for long-term health of the game.