| 1 |
[q] Perhaps more to the point, I for one would be unwilling to further compromise the game experience of everybody else for the sake of the minority who want larger and larger and more degenerate cluster games. [/q]
|
1 |
[q] Perhaps more to the point, I for one would be unwilling to further compromise the game experience of everybody else for the sake of the minority who want larger and larger and more degenerate cluster games. [/q]
|
| 3 |
You are twisting my words @Aquanim. What I wrote was suggesting, that maybe it is not about compromising the game experience for everyone for the sake of minority who want bigger (in your words more degenerate) games, but maybe that almost everyone now has PC that would be able to run even 40 v 40. If it was either 10 people waiting in the lobby, unable to join, or 2 people having lag, I would maybe consider allowing more people into the game. It is essentially only about this. Maybe I am wrong and more people would have problems running 16+ v 16+ games, but that is why I posed it as an open question.
|
3 |
You are twisting my words @Aquanim. What I wrote was suggesting, that maybe it is not about compromising the game experience for everyone for the sake of minority who want bigger (in your words more degenerate) games, but maybe that almost everyone now has PC that would be able to run even 40 v 40. If it was either 10 people waiting in the lobby, unable to join, or 2 people having lag, I would maybe consider allowing more people into the game. It is essentially only about this. Maybe I am wrong and more people would have problems running 16+ v 16+ games, but that is why I posed it as an open question.
|
Please add another teams all welcome