Quote Originally Posted by Martok
Okay, I'm going to add my two cents here:

There's nothing at all wrong with multiplayer battles per se. It's just that for many of us who play singleplayer, we prefer their be some sort of context behind battles. The respect of one's peers (and bragging rights, can't forget that!) simply isn't enough for a lot of us. We need our battles to *mean* something.

When I play historical battles, I'm trying to recreate the victories of some of the world's most famous commanders. When I fight a battle in MTW's campaign, I know that it's in some way important--possibly even crucial--to the success/survival of my faction. There, the battles matter.

The very few times I fought battles online, I just didn't feel the same sense tension and urgency. I didn't sweat with nervousness as to whether I would win or not, because what was I fighting for? I won't say that multiplayer battles aren't somewhat fun, but they don't hold me in thrall the way the singleplayer campaign does.
Even Still, it be to hard to do. Sure, you got over 1600 signing, but howmany are from the same people or people who don't care,but sign it anyhow?

Ok, take off 400 people due to those 2 resons, got 1200 then, for example, so ok.

Battles mean something online. You don't need to "defend" a town on a MP Camapgian to make it worth something.

I like to play serveal games a day, not wasting my time doing 1 campaign a month. Why?

When I play MP games, I meet people from Around the World. I care about how good they are, BATTLE-wise. Online, No One Cares about how good you are on SP. We want to see your MP Skills. Battles mean something. It shows, who is the best online. Playing a Campgian doesn't show anything m8. you still going to fight games anyhow. That's my thoughts.