Experienced vs inexperienced players' opinions

[Lewin]

This issue has turned up in a number of topic so I thought it can have one for itself, so people can understand our views. The arguments on the other topics were mostly deleted because they were offtopic or offensive. We will still be deleting offensive posts here, so please respond politely.

I'll give an example of some people's behaviour here recently:
I think To and Da Revolution use their experience to provide good arguments, while some people such as EDMatt and Mr Bo think their experience automatically makes them correct and we should just do what they say.

I would guess that the majority of our players are inexperienced, and they probably have completely different views on issues such as tower balance to experienced players. We're not just making this game so that experienced players can have ultimate skill matches, we also want inexperienced players to have fun. Neither of those things are less important. Inexperienced and experienced players both deserve the right to have fun in the game and have their opinions/complaints heard. If we just did what the experienced players wanted in every case the game could stop being fun for inexperienced players or become inaccessible so you can only really play it if you are highly skilled. Conversely, if we just did what the inexperienced players wanted the experienced players might not like it because the fine details of the balance means they can exploit things using their experience and understanding of the game.

Every player matters, we want as many of them as possible to be happy. Whether they are experienced or not does not matter in this regard, everyone's enjoyment of the game is important.

However, experienced players can still get their opinions to be taken more seriously than inexperienced ones in these discussions, because an experienced player can provide good examples and details about the problem which an inexperienced player can't do as easily. Experienced players should be able to point out the flaws in arguments more easily because they know the game better, and inexperienced players will more often make flawed arguments. On an individual basis an experienced player's "vote" doesn't count for more. But if their arguments stand up better than others that argument will be listened to more seriously than a different flawed argument. This doesn't mean the person will be taken more seriously or matter more, it means that specific argument (which makes more logical sense than another) matters more. We don't judge whether people are right based on their experience, we judge it on whether their arguments make sense.

Politeness also plays an important role, I don't have time to listen to people who are not polite and I don't want to have a discussion where I am insulted, so I will never get to ask them questions about their opinions/ideas and become convinced of their view.

So in summary, a player's opinions are only worth more if they are polite and provide good arguments, which experienced players should be able to much more easily.

[Lewin]

Mr Bo gave a comparison to a hospital operation, with an expert surgeon and two assistants. The expert says to do one thing, the assistants both say to do something else, but obviously the expert's opinion is much more important in this case and could save the patient's life.

I think this argument doesn't relate to KaM Remake balance discussions, because in the case of the operation, there is one clear goal: Make the patient better. In our discussions the goal is something more like: "make as many players as possible enjoy the game as much as possible". In this case every player's opinion is important because his opinion represents one of the goals. Unlike the hospital, there are no right and wrong answers here, there are just answers that will make certain people enjoy the game more or less. We want the answer that makes the most people possible enjoy the game as much as possible. Of course we'll never please everyone but we want to please as many as possible. We don't care whether these people are experienced or if they don't even know what a serf does. We want them both to enjoy the game. In fact, making the game appeal to inexperienced people is very important to us, because we want to attract new players to KaM and players who haven't played it since they were 10 years old.

So unlike the hospital there are no "KaM experts who know what is best for everyone" here, instead we have a whole lot of people making suggestions for what they personally think would make the game best for themselves (as well as others, but their suggestions aren't necessarily what others want). The expert surgeon doesn't have any personal interest there, he's ONLY thinking in terms of the goal, make the patient better. That's a clearly defined thing, making 15,000+ people you don't know enjoy the game is a completely different thing. If you were an expert on KaM players' opinions then your views would be more useful, but you'll never know enough players to say with any confidence what most people want, you'll usually only be meeting a specific sample of the players, the other ones who are experienced because you don't play with inexperienced players as much. And also you'll favour your own personal bias anyway because you have your own strong view on the matter.

[Krom]

I'm not as good with words as Lewin and I write much less, just letting everyone know that I share his point of view on the issue 100%.

[Siegfried]

I want to add a thought about the 'pro' word that was floating around.

What does it mean? Originally, the word was used to describe players that earn some money by entering tournaments and making it to the finals. For KaM this is meaningless as there are no prize money tournaments. So there are no professionals in the original meaning.

The other meaning of the word 'pro' is the opposite of 'noob'. Therefore it means players with lots of experience, which automaticalley makes them a better player. But this fits on every person joining the discussion on these threads.
When I look back, I remember most of them already playing the remake in the very first day when the multiplayer part was released last year. I think I already forgot some names, but I think I remember people like Krom, Lewin, Shadaoe, Anti-Viruz, TDL, xzaz, Matt, SaintK, pawel and some more (I want to apologize for those who I forgot to mention). All of these people play the remake since the beginning, they've seen all the changes that were made to the battle system during these times. So these people are the real 'pro' in the sense that they have a lot of experience. No claim made by anyone changes that.

And look at the discussions. It's mainly these people that are discussing. Plus a load of people that I don't know from the first days, but from which I know that they have played the remake very much in the recent time. So they are likely to have quite as much experience as well. This fits to nearly the rest of persons discussing here.

So all in all Lewin is absolutely right. It's almost only people with lots of experience in the game who are discussing right now. So no need to claim that any of these guys have no experience and therefore should shut up.
I bet, if we would put any of the forum members into a game with a random guy playing the remake, the forum member will win in most of the times. This does not mean that there is no difference in skill among us, this only means that all of us know the game very well.

And then there are some single persons which may not have that rich experience. There are some, but from all of them I know that they tried to point out their point of view politely and providing good points to back them up. It's good that Krom and Lewin don't completely ignore them. Because they have something that all of us lack already: a not biased view on the gameplay. This is of value.

[Private.NL]

I would guess that the majority of our players are inexperienced, and they probably have completely different views on issues such as tower balance to experienced players.

I agree on the point that most players are inexperienced.

Every player matters, we want as many of them as possible to be happy. Whether they are experienced or not does not matter in this regard, everyone's enjoyment of the game is important.

If every player matters and the mass is inexperienced, then I think it is good to make a compromis on subject like balance, towers and wine... The experienced players will get some of there needs, but the game remeans fun for the inexperienced players as well. You must realise (I do think you do realise), that when you lose the inexperienced players, you will lose the Remake.

We don't judge whether people are right based on their experience, we judge it on whether their arguments make sense.

As Siegfried agrees with me the majority of the players on the forum are experienced player. So there will always be a group of pro players winning the discussion in this way. I am representing a big group of inexperienced players here, but I don't really like all the discussions going on here. The way people react to each other is just getting really crazy. That is why I am not going to react there. I know, I will get a lot of experienced players reacting to what I will write there. This leads me to quote of Lewin:

Politeness also plays an important role, I don't have time to listen to people who are not polite and I don't want to have a discussion where I am insulted, so I will never get to ask them questions about their opinions/ideas and become convinced of their view.

I won't have a discussion at all here at the moment. I know the discussion will lead to arguments that don't make sense at all. In holland we have a saying: comparing apples to pears (appels met peren vergelijken) (i know there are a couple of dutch people who will exactly know what I mean...). We say this when someone is making a comparison which does not make sense. It is like you are having a discussion on apples and you come up with an argument on pears...
This is exactly what happened here:

Mr Bo gave a comparison to a hospital operation, with an expert surgeon and two assistants. The expert says to do one thing, the assistants both say to do something else, but obviously the expert's opinion is much more important in this case and could save the patient's life.

Wait a second. Comparing KaM Remake to a hospital?! That is like comparing apples to pears imo. The comparison just does not make sense. And it can hurt people who have got someone who is laying in hospital. In the rest of the post Lewin is explaining just what I want to say with comparing apples to pears

And look at the discussions. It's mainly these people that are discussing. Plus a load of people that I don't know from the first days, but from which I know that they have played the remake very much in the recent time. So they are likely to have quite as much experience as well. This fits to nearly the rest of persons discussing here.

So all in all Lewin is absolutely right. It's almost only people with lots of experience in the game who are discussing right now. So no need to claim that any of these guys have no experience and therefore should shut up.
I bet, if we would put any of the forum members into a game with a random guy playing the remake, the forum member will win in most of the times. This does not mean that there is no difference in skill among us, this only means that all of us know the game very well.

Exactly! I agree with Lewin and Siegfried! I do want to say for one more time: the inexperienced players are not on the forum really, so the outcome of a discussion here must be nuanced. I don't go into a discussion here, because I know there will be many reactions with arguments that don't make sense to me.

I think it will be good that Lewin or Krom informs inexperienced players as well via the website, so they know it as well, and they do have a possibility to react there.

[Fried Chicken]

Guys, I must make something clear. I entered this community about 2 months ago as a newbie/inexperienced player. I have always loved this game and when I heard there was this remake of it I instantly dowloaded it and I started playing online. I could handle myself between all the more experienced players but soon realised that they were al faster, smarter and better then me. I wnated to be as good as them so I watched replays, shoutcasts and just generely tried to improve my game. Now I play with the more experienced/pro players in this community.
You must realize that if u asked something about towers or knights I would have had a completely different opinion 1 month ago than I have now. Simply because I'm more experienced now
The point that I'm trying to make is that any inexperienced player will get good at some point because if u do something a lot u will get good at it. There fore the fun for the experienced play will come automaticly and the game doesn't have to be tweaked or changed becuz a small minority of inexperienced players have a certain opinion on something. Also the reason why we listen to our parents, teachers, coaches, etc is becuz they have more experience in life, math, football etc. That's why you listed to them. So thats why certain more experienced player "can" have a "better" opinion on a point, simply becuz they are more experienced.

This is just my opinion on this topic.

[Lewin]

I was using inexperienced to mean "not a top player", I would count myself and Krom as fairly inexperienced because we don't play often.

You must realize that if u asked something about towers or knights I would have had a completely different opinion 1 month ago than I have now. Simply because I'm more experienced now

When you were less experienced you wouldn't have been able to give good reasons for your ideas, or answer other people's counterarguments against your ideas and provide evidence. Inexperienced players are free to write whatever they like, but they need to be able to support what they say with good arguments and logic. But now that you're more experienced it doesn't mean that we'll believe what you say without questioning it (which is what some people have suggested in other topics, and the main reason I started this topic), you still need to prove what you say just like anybody else. That's my main point on this topic, you can't just say "I'm right because I'm experienced" and expect people to take you seriously when you can't be bothered to explain.

The point that I'm trying to make is that any inexperienced player will get good at some point because if u do something a lot u will get good at it.

Not everyone wants to play the game at the very top level, a lot of people seem happy playing the game at a lower/average level and don't feel the need to improve lots. There's nothing wrong with that, we don't want to make a game where you have to spend months mastering it before you can really play it or enjoy it.

There fore the fun for the experienced play will come automaticly and the game doesn't have to be tweaked or changed becuz a small minority of inexperienced players have a certain opinion on something.

What I was meaning was more that we shouldn't make the game inaccessible for new players because it's been optimised for skilled players only. And I don't think the inexperienced players are a minority, I think they're a majority of players. We wouldn't make a change based on what a small group of people said, we'd like to see agreement between players of different skill levels.

Also the reason why we listen to our parents, teachers, coaches, etc is becuz they have more experience in life, math, football etc. That's why you listed to them. So thats why certain more experienced player "can" have a "better" opinion on a point, simply becuz they are more experienced.

Yes, if an experienced player can explain his reasoning and show the less experienced players why his opinion is better then we should definitely listen to him more because he's using better logic. But if they just say something without convincing us then we'll be left wondering why we should believe them. When your maths teacher shows you something and you ask "why?" he'll explain it to you step by step through his process of getting to the answer, not just say "because I'm experienced", that doesn't help you understand his experience and learn from it. And if he insulted you for not understand (which is what has been going on here at times) then that wouldn't help at all.

I'm quite happy for the experienced players to be teachers/coaches, teach us about the balance of the game and explain your ideas and we'll take your views more seriously than less experienced players who can't explain as well But teaching is not just someone telling you that he's right because he's experienced, it's about someone EXPLAINING to you why he's right so you can understand it for yourself. If the pupils don't understand, then you're not a good teacher. And if you're rude to the pupils and tell them they're stupid and don't know anything, then you're definitely a bad teacher.

[sado1]

the reason why we listen to our parents, teachers, coaches, etc is becuz they have more experience in life, math, football etc. That's why you listed to them.

I know Lewin adressed this part in his post but I must improve his metaphore - if you ask a teacher "why (...)?" and he answers "BECAUSE i SAY SO, DON'T YOU DOUBT MY AUTHORITY AS A TEACHER, I'M MORE EXPERIENCED THAN YOU", is he a good teacher?

[Private.NL]

I entered this community about 2 months ago as a newbie/inexperienced player. I have always loved this game and when I heard there was this remake of it I instantly dowloaded it and I started playing online. I could handle myself between all the more experienced players but soon realised that they were al faster, smarter and better then me. I wnated to be as good as them so I watched replays, shoutcasts and just generely tried to improve my game. Now I play with the more experienced/pro players in this community.
You must realize that if u asked something about towers or knights I would have had a completely different opinion 1 month ago than I have now. Simply because I'm more experienced now

The turn you made by becoming a better player will be seen by more players, but there will always be new players joining, and that is exactly the thing you seem to ignore. The experienced players should not be able to get their ideas through exactly as they want to. Point is, that the new players must be kept on board of the ship. When they jump out, the Remake project will be over in my opinion. So the choice is yours. Making a compromis, or giving the experienced players what they want, but blow up the community. (Assuming experienced players will stop playing once....)

Fried Chicken wrote: The point that I'm trying to make is that any inexperienced player will get good at some point because if u do something a lot u will get good at it. There fore the fun for the experienced play will come automaticly and the game doesn't have to be tweaked or changed becuz a small minority of inexperienced players have a certain opinion on something. Also the reason why we listen to our parents, teachers, coaches, etc is becuz they have more experience in life, math, football etc. That's why you listed to them. So thats why certain more experienced player "can" have a "better" opinion on a point, simply becuz they are more experienced. Sado1 wrote: I know Lewin adressed this part in his post but I must improve his metaphore - if you ask a teacher "why (...)?" and he answers "BECAUSE i SAY SO, DON'T YOU DOUBT MY AUTHORITY AS A TEACHER, I'M MORE EXPERIENCED THAN YOU", is he a good teacher?

Wait a small minority?! Yes, a small minority on the forum, but no not a small minority in the actual game, and that is where it is all about, isn't it? I listen to my teacher because they are better in lets say math? No, of course not! I am listening to my teacher because I do want to learn something. . I am sorry but I have to say, that you are assuming things you just simply can't assume and therefore you argument does not make sense to me... Then Sado1 is more correct imo. When a teacher tels me that, I would say he is not a good teacher, but a bad one. I am not listening or reading stuff from a experienced player with an argumentation like that.

Sidenote: I think assuming experienced players will stop once is correct, but assuming that looking at the players on the forum there are more experienced players is not correct. To compare: yesterday there was 'nieuwsuur' a dutch television program on the elections. The partyleader of the party 50+ was there. He said something like the amount of people who are 60+ in the 'second chamber' is not enough. Set, I want to know how many old people (60+) we have in holland and go to the second chamber count the amount of people who are 60+, that would be 11/150 and then just say well how is that for whole holland (17 million citizens, would be: 1,2 million, not enough.). If you assume that it is correct if you will count it like this, you will make the same mistake as Fried just made.

[Leeuwgie]

I think it's a bit sad some people need to be told in the KaM community (of all places) that they need to be polite against other people. I can image that some people spend many time playing this game on a daily basis (including myself). Still it's not intended to be the place where we need to tell others how to behave. I hope that in real life you've already learned that you should treat someone else like you want to be treated yourself. Yep, your're right it's called respect. Anyway, I can continue about this but I think I shouldn't because (even if this topic is to discuss things like this) we rather spend our time discussion gameplay itself (and improving the Remake in particular).

However, I like to say 2 more thing here regarding the gameplay in general:

1. Since the original TSK came out I've always played singleplayer, there was no other option. I think the AI wasn't the worst of all I've seen comparing to other games I played but even if the developers manage to improve the AI it will never be better then playing against humans. Maybe only if you let the AI use cheats or something but that's not real skill is it? I've always wanted to play multiplayer. Before the Remake we used Gameranger but it didn't work like it should. TPR couldn't be played at all in multiplayer. My point is this, why should I play singleplayer again? I've done that for 15 years and it's not much fun or challenging playing the campaign for the 16th time. Yes, bored with playing the same maps again I also created maps for myself and played some maps I found on the internet back then. Ofcourse I understand that some people like to play singleplay in the Remake. But I think the real change the Remake brought us is that (finally after all those years) you can play a bugless multiplayer game. I also think that's the main reason the Remake is this popular. Since I have no part in programming myself I shouldn't tell you what to do but my advice is to keep focussed on the multiplayer aspect of this game.

2. With that being said I like to respond on what Lewin said about not wanting to make the Remake to difficult to master for beginners. I think in general that besides having fun when playing any game (could be Pac Man or KaM) there is also the factor competition/contest. I never heard of people who like to lose a game. Loosing a game isn't bad aslong as you learn from it. Improve your strategies/gameplay and you might win next time. Yes, KaM shouldn't be hard to play for beginners but I think it's really difficult to master the game. I have never saw someone play a flawless game. In other words there is always something to improve. This can be said of most games but I think it's in particular true for KaM. If this game was easy to master I think I've stopped playing it by now. I think playing it on a ''high level'' is very demanding. Maybe that's the reason why the game runs this slow. Common mistakes for instance are not having enough coal to keep your coal demanding buildings running. Another one is noy having enough wood to keep building and producing weapons at the same time. Or have your build ready before peacetime ends. And the list goes on and on. This game is all about making the right decisions at the right time And this is even more true for things like managing your army. Do I spam a unit more then another, will I use horses this time, should I flank the enemy or not, etc. So the fun factor is different for people, some like to attack while others rather defend. Some like to rush with many militia only while others like to train small groups of different units to effectively counter enemy forces. However, I assume the competition factor is for everyone the same since nobody likes to lose. In order to improve yourself and win more often players need to be experienced. And especially in multiplayer games you learn to play better since humans are smarter then computerplayers. You learn even faster if you play with players with a ''high level'' like Fried Chicken explained.
Some of us simply master the game better then others. That's the reason skilled players like to play together. It's no fun to beat a beginner. Besides that if you know against who you are playing you also know they won't leave the game for nothing or lag too much and things like that. I'm not saying we never play with someone we don't know. It's even better to invite 2 of them to make teams balanced. My point is that if you play with the best players available you improve the most. At this level of gameplay we see certain buildings (towers) or units (mass crossbows + mass lancers) being abused. These things might be overlooked by people who play at a ''lower level''. That's why we bring things like this up here at the forum in the hope it will be fixed somehow. This is not the topic for discussion about towers or lancers so I won't complain about it here. BTW I don't like words like pro or noob either but everybody seems to understand what they mean, thats also important.

Thanks for reading,
To

[Lewin]

the reason why we listen to our parents, teachers, coaches, etc is becuz they have more experience in life, math, football etc. That's why you listed to them.

I know Lewin adressed this part in his post but I must improve his metaphore - if you ask a teacher "why (...)?" and he answers "BECAUSE i SAY SO, DON'T YOU DOUBT MY AUTHORITY AS A TEACHER, I'M MORE EXPERIENCED THAN YOU", is he a good teacher?

Exactly, that's the main issue here. If experienced players politely explain things to us then we'll definitely be listening and want to learn from them.

I think it's a bit sad some people need to be told in the KaM community (of all places) that they need to be polite against other people. I can image that some people spend many time playing this game on a daily basis (including myself). Still it's not intended to be the place where we need to tell others how to behave. I hope that in real life you've already learned that you should treat someone else like you want to be treated yourself. Yep, your're right it's called respect. Anyway, I can continue about this but I think I shouldn't because (even if this topic is to discuss things like this) we rather spend our time discussion gameplay itself (and improving the Remake in particular).

Yeah I agree. I guess people do it because on the internet they're anonymous and can say whatever they like without affecting their real life. I know this is how it often is on the internet, but until recently it has not been like this in the KaM community. It is indeed sad, and very unproductive.

1. Since the original TSK came out I've always played singleplayer, there was no other option. I think the AI wasn't the worst of all I've seen comparing to other games I played but even if the developers manage to improve the AI it will never be better then playing against humans. Maybe only if you let the AI use cheats or something but that's not real skill is it? I've always wanted to play multiplayer. Before the Remake we used Gameranger but it didn't work like it should. TPR couldn't be played at all in multiplayer. My point is this, why should I play singleplayer again? I've done that for 15 years and it's not much fun or challenging playing the campaign for the 16th time. Yes, bored with playing the same maps again I also created maps for myself and played some maps I found on the internet back then. Ofcourse I understand that some people like to play singleplay in the Remake. But I think the real change the Remake brought us is that (finally after all those years) you can play a bugless multiplayer game. I also think that's the main reason the Remake is this popular. Since I have no part in programming myself I shouldn't tell you what to do but my advice is to keep focussed on the multiplayer aspect of this game.

Yes, we are primarily focused on multiplayer because that's probably the most popular feature of the Remake. For example we nerfed archers a while back to balance multiplayer better, which required most of the campaign missions to be slightly adjusted in some way to balance it. Some people who like singleplayer complained, but we believe we made the right decision. Some players do just want to play the campaigns again with all the new features of the Remake, and those people shouldn't be ignored. So we're happy to tweak the gameplay to make multiplayer better, but we don't want to completely break singleplayer. Both are important, but multiplayer will usually dictate which balance changes are needed. However I don't believe either is needs to be compromised by any balance changes. Singleplayer missions can always be adjusted a bit to compensate. That said, I don't like the idea of changing the core features of KaM, for example hunger should be an important factor in gameplay (as it is now) and towers should be able to kill more than 1-2 units per 5 stones (I think tower spam can be fixed other ways). We shouldn't change KaM massively just to solve minor issues encountered by skilled players, I think we can find ways to solve these issues without seriously messing with the game mechanics. But we're happy to discuss it as always.

2. With that being said I like to respond on what Lewin said about not wanting to make the Remake to difficult to master for beginners. I think in general that besides having fun when playing any game (could be Pac Man or KaM) there is also the factor competition/contest. I never heard of people who like to lose a game. Loosing a game isn't bad aslong as you learn from it. Improve your strategies/gameplay and you might win next time. Yes, KaM shouldn't be hard to play for beginners but I think it's really difficult to master the game. I have never saw someone play a flawless game. In other words there is always something to improve. This can be said of most games but I think it's in particular true for KaM. If this game was easy to master I think I've stopped playing it by now. I think playing it on a ''high level'' is very demanding. Maybe that's the reason why the game runs this slow. Common mistakes for instance are not having enough coal to keep your coal demanding buildings running. Another one is noy having enough wood to keep building and producing weapons at the same time. Or have your build ready before peacetime ends. And the list goes on and on. This game is all about making the right decisions at the right time And this is even more true for things like managing your army. Do I spam a unit more then another, will I use horses this time, should I flank the enemy or not, etc. So the fun factor is different for people, some like to attack while others rather defend. Some like to rush with many militia only while others like to train small groups of different units to effectively counter enemy forces. However, I assume the competition factor is for everyone the same since nobody likes to lose. In order to improve yourself and win more often players need to be experienced. And especially in multiplayer games you learn to play better since humans are smarter then computerplayers. You learn even faster if you play with players with a ''high level'' like Fried Chicken explained.

Of course we don't want KaM to be easy to master, we want it to be easy to play when you are a less skilled player without struggling too much. Of course you shouldn't do nearly as well as an experienced player, but you should be able to have a game without starving to death every time and feeling completely overwhelmed by the complexity of the game. Experienced players will be much faster and make better decisions, but if a group of equally inexperienced players all sit down at a LAN party and have a game, they should have a fun and fairly balanced game, although it would probably take them 2 hours to make as many troops as an experienced player makes in 1 hour. The competitive side of the game is important, but it shouldn't become so focused on competitive play that it's not possible for some random guys to sit down and have a fun game when they're not skilled. For example we could make the game a lot harder, more hunger, less resources available, higher trade rates at the market, etc. and these things might be popular with highly skilled players, but if it becomes so hard that new players starve and run out of resources every time they play then they'll get completely put off by the game and stop playing. Yes these players will probably all want to learn and improve, but if they can't have a bit of fun while they're learning then they won't keep playing the Remake. We need a balance between making the game good and fair for experienced players with lots of depth to improve your skill, and making the game fun for less experienced players who want to play more casually.

Some of us simply master the game better then others. That's the reason skilled players like to play together. It's no fun to beat a beginner. Besides that if you know against who you are playing you also know they won't leave the game for nothing or lag too much and things like that. I'm not saying we never play with someone we don't know. It's even better to invite 2 of them to make teams balanced. My point is that if you play with the best players available you improve the most. At this level of gameplay we see certain buildings (towers) or units (mass crossbows + mass lancers) being abused. These things might be overlooked by people who play at a ''lower level''. That's why we bring things like this up here at the forum in the hope it will be fixed somehow. This is not the topic for discussion about towers or lancers so I won't complain about it here. BTW I don't like words like pro or noob either but everybody seems to understand what they mean, thats also important.

I agree, experienced and highly skilled players will notice things that are exploitable and abusable, and we really want these players to tell us about these things, because they'll be the ones that notice these kind of issues. But if those players can't be polite about it, and can't explain the problem and just saying something like "you should take our word for it because we're experienced" then we'd rather they didn't post at all. We need to understand the problem and understand why their suggested solution makes sense. And the suggestions to solve it should not compromise the game for beginners or people who like singleplayer (e.g. by making the game . We need to balance the changes across the entire spectrum of KaM, not just for the highly skilled games. Of course a lot of the balance issues encountered by skilled players won't affect the less skilled player's enjoyment of the game and can be solved fairly easily.

So I agree with what you wrote To, and we really do want the experienced players to tell us of the kind of balance problems they encounter! But politeness and respect in our community matter a lot to us, we really don't want to see the community pulled apart by people being rude and arrogant. I don't care how experienced you are, if you don't have time to be polite then I don't have time to care about your opinion. I'm not being paid to listen to you (in fact I'm given up my free time), so if it's not enjoyable for me then why should I bother? And I don't find it enjoyable when people refuse to be polite and don't respect other people.

[TieSTo]

To be honest, it's the same wherever you go on the internet.