(05-10-2025, 11:52 PM)L1ght Wrote: Telling one side to move while another continues engaging, giving infinite respawns instead of literally pming people to switch, but hey I guess us pvpers leaving after we noticed that the fight is being micro managed instead of letting it evolve organically gave Barrier the BAF win that he wanted ( which he could've just gotten either way if he pmed us but you know). As I said if you're going to micro manage a fight to sway the snowball to the other side, simply state it so we don't waste time logging in. I'd rather play minecraft than engage in predetermined pvp fights and I already know I'm not the only one feeling that way.
This just goes to show that no matter how much objective consideration or critical thinking you are doing, when you're on the losing side of a fight, your opinion becomes unreasonably biased. Remember, I respawned anyone currently dead on the Molly side before the last engage. The last engage then turned out to be a snowball where the smaller side won - it happens. But from this sequence of events, you instead take the unshakable conviction that the whole point was to rig the situation in the BAF side's favor. Ok.
If you aren't interested in being convinced by hard data, I have no other way of supporting my argument. So I suppose you can do what you will, since clearly anything I say about the matter is irrelevant. That goes for anyone else who clings to this opinion after the above summary. I try my best to explain why I did what I did, but if you won't listen, there isn't much I can do here. I'll just continue ensuring events have as many players on each side as possible.
I left while Mollys were winning chief so your bias accusations are completely irrelevant, I have limited free time and I'd rather not waste it on predetermined pvp outcomes so next time just state it in the event thread.