Quote Originally Posted by Toast78901 View Post
Why is this even a thing to begin with? I guess polling public opinion is nice and all, but it does and means absolutely nothing. In case you are unaware, FC is a WARSIM community. With Armies. And not exactly what one could call a democratic environment. Whether or not the community likes the decision of WC is irrelevant; WC, the members entrusted with decision making authority for this community, have made their decision. Fin.


Every decision I make as a leader of this community is on the basis that it pushes the community forward in a way we all want it to. Put simply, my War Council vote is always meant to be the culmination of what those in the community want. Sometimes that's not as clear as others. But for something like this, it is a very clear thing. Community members hold more power than War Council ever will, and have the power to destroy, manipulate, and build FC from nothing to everything and back again. My vote as a community member is to keep all the games in the war. But as a leader, I will always vote for and push for what the community wants and enjoys. Never mistake the two.

As for the topic at hand, it's important for everyone to understand that everyone is going to have varying experiences with each of the games, and I really think it's unfair to say any game in MCC is any less of a disaster than another. They all have connection issues somewhere. H2A crashed on the same matchup twice. However, H2A and H4 are stronger games when it comes to shot registration, so that's why I think they're perceived as "more stable". If that results in a better experience for everyone, that's fine, but claiming anything in MCC is less broken than something else is just going to go in circles.

And claiming that any game within MCC is going to be much, if any, different than it is now in 3 weeks is just as crazy. These games were admittedly never stable to begin with in terms of ingame connection.