1. Everything about them SCREAMS that they were designed to be outside the main strategic flow. When HT approved THIS map, he approved the implications of the design as well. That means that HT expected the Donut itself to be a dogfighting center from the beginning.
A seggragated dogfighting sanctuary impervious to outside influences by practically eliminating all elements for tactical capture?
Or simply a part of the map that is clearly more advantageous to a certain type of fighting, and yet still influenceable when the limiting conditions can be overcome by collective effort?
That's a big difference between the two. I've always viewed the FT as the latter, never the first. No place in the map should just be separated from the rest to serve a specific purpose of a certain interest group.
2. Any talk of "the capture battle flowing over fightertown" as a natural event is bogus, plain and simple. FT captures are deliberate griefing attempts, except for the ONE time (IIRC) that a FT base was the final capture of a reset.
An explanation that is so conveniently self centered. Anything that's fun for you can be as much grieving as any for someone else, on the receiving end. It's all relative - no matter how dweeby a cherry picker can be, we got no right to dictate what we think is fun over others.
Granted, you guys are merely separating yourselves and not dictating your own methods to others. However, you also have this peculiar attitude in general that your own fun and passion towards AvA fights must be defended at all costs - even if it means shutting off a certain part of the map and claiming it as your own.
Then, in the same sense, perhaps someone else should request that the rest of the game map excluding FT should be declared as an all-strat zone - no individual flying, no hording on whim, every movement on the map be coordinated by players. Any reckless, individual flying at the all-strat zone will be considered as an outright attempt to grief people who enjoy strategic aspect of the game.
You think that's fair?
3. "Cant bother to defend their bases" is also bogus. FT captures essentially always occur during low number times, when a dozen guys can completely cap and vulch nearly unopposed. When there are only 40 on a side, and no nearby bases, you cannot defend against an implemented cap.
How is it bogus when the very words came out from one of your very own? Look at mars01's comment. He clearly states in those exact words that furballers are at FT to furball, not defend anything. This clearly implies that despite conditions are given that FT may be adequately be defended, you people will still refuse to be bothered by defending anything, does it not?
So it seems to me that what happened was NOT HiTech giving in to whiners. It seems to me that after months of watching the community wrangle, watching the effect of a few griefers repeatedly subverting the obvious intent of the map -- and seeing that subversion likely to continue each and every rotation -- he acted to defend the majority from the few who were trying to screw things up.
What makes you think you're the majority? Because you guys are more vocal in the BBS?
Think about those few who glitched the system by using the film recorder in game to find enemy GVs. When that minority subverted the game's obvious intent, HT fixed it FOR THAT REASON, and not because the majority shines about it.
In that case, HT fixed a bug.
In this case, HT allowed the community be split up in the MA by with virtual inaccessibility.
Call it what ever you want - intentional griefing, or just trying legitimate capture against bases where there are people. HT took one preference of how people play the game, which was totally legitimate by MA rules and standards, and removed it from the FT as a no-tresspassing zone by removal of critical game element.
In the end, no matter which way you look at it, of the two different preferences in how people want to play in the MA, HT picked a side, and made a special arrangement.
Nothing bullsh@, nothing hypocritical at all. This one isnt hard, bro....
Not really. It is quite elaborate from the beginning to the end. It shows how much the self-proclaimed 'vets' are self-centered with obvious hypocritical double standards in judging what is right or wrong, when their own interest is involved.
The FT being overrun sucks. I never disagreed with that.
Nor am I one of those people who screw FT over. Having your favorite battle zone being ruined sucks, anyone understands that.
But there are plenty of things that can happen in the MA that sucks. Plenty of people come to the boards in protest about how some people are ruining what they think is fun. Everytime those posts are up, the vets show up ridiculing the protester, saying how they should just deal with it. Post funny internet photos of wine bottles and cheese.
When it comes to their own interest, an isolated event such as this comes up (I mean really, how often does the FT get conquered by one side during the entire span of the map?) and immediately they run to the boards and start a flogging contest on how tardly everyone else who don't share the same sentiments are.
What makes you guys so special that your own fun should be protected over others? I don't know what the hell the FT conquering boys were thinking, but I'll bet they had plenty of fun conquering it, driving out everyone else and claiming sole dominion. I don't give a shi* about its ethics because capturing territories is a way this game is played. They played by the book, aided by favorable circumstances in player numbers, and earned the right by conquest as any other field in the game could be.
Now, that's been blocked. No fun for the FT-busting boys.
So their way of having "fun" is not important as your own?
If this ain't blatant hypocrisy, then I don't know what is. HT probably decided on the most effective and immediate method to soothe the whiney buggers, and perhaps what he did was good. Frankly it's his game so he may do whatever he wants it. No, I got no beef with HT.
The only beef here's with the hypocrites, and I accuse them of their double standards and bigotry in general matters concerning AH.
