Brothanoomsy wrote: simonsez wrote: Dauthi wrote: PVP is pretty important, and in order to do well you have to play an unfun and extremely stressful metagame called "shield hopping" that was in no way intended. And you think trying to get to 1300 without shield-hopping is going to be fun and extremely stress-free? For crissakes... Which s why Francky thought Phantron and Dauthi were related. Or married.
simonsez wrote: Dauthi wrote: PVP is pretty important, and in order to do well you have to play an unfun and extremely stressful metagame called "shield hopping" that was in no way intended. And you think trying to get to 1300 without shield-hopping is going to be fun and extremely stress-free? For crissakes...
Dauthi wrote: PVP is pretty important, and in order to do well you have to play an unfun and extremely stressful metagame called "shield hopping" that was in no way intended.
Vertigozooropa wrote: I still don't understand what the point of this change is. Check the comments on Balance of Power. Taking away the possibility of an advantage makes winning arbitrary. Actually, it puts victory in the hands of the players with the most OP characters, thus negating the idea of strategy. David might kill computer Goliath, but human Goliath will never fear the Davids. In the Bible, David picked five smooth stones with which to kill Goliath. Coincidentally, the same number of heals we get. Imagine if David had to kill a hundred Goliaths. He only had five stones. If he could kill three then shield while he picked up more stones, he'd have a chance. My point is, there's an army of nine-foot-tall badasses out there, and they will squash me flat if I challenge them without a chance to escape. I really don't get what the intention is. I don't see the value in this. It's going to make it so that the only way not to lose is to have a team so strong nobody will challenge you. A team where the computer's incompetent play style is stronger than any player's best strategies. The winner of the next PVP will have fielded 4Thor, X-Force, and the featured character at level 166. Second through fifth place will be determined by the number of other characters playing that roster. Shields won't matter because they only ever do anything when you take a few potshots then buy another. Maybe if...no. Maybe...no. How about...wait. Okay, so what if they made points progressive? Like, instead of losing points when someone beats you, you only lose points when you lose? Your ability to win would be limited by your survival plus your heals. Okay, so you can buy heals to keep going, but you can do that now. Progression rewards would have to be much higher, but this blue shell nonsense has to stop, and this is the only way. It's not fair that doing well means becoming a target. That just discourages doing well. Let's encourage excellence.
stephen43084 wrote: simonsez wrote: stephen43084 wrote: So how do you explain that they adjusted the progressions in PVE that anyone that plays a reasonable amount can hit the top progression no problem? The top progressions in PvE are 3*, not 4* like in PvP. So? If they did not want players to reach them in PvP they could just make them higher (or remove them altogether). simonsez wrote: stephen43084 wrote: I have seroius doubts that making the progressions unreachable (or even making more money off shields) is one of them. Then once again, they've solidified their status as masters of unintended consequences of which anyone seriously playing the game can foresee.
simonsez wrote: stephen43084 wrote: So how do you explain that they adjusted the progressions in PVE that anyone that plays a reasonable amount can hit the top progression no problem? The top progressions in PvE are 3*, not 4* like in PvP.
stephen43084 wrote: So how do you explain that they adjusted the progressions in PVE that anyone that plays a reasonable amount can hit the top progression no problem?
simonsez wrote: stephen43084 wrote: I have seroius doubts that making the progressions unreachable (or even making more money off shields) is one of them. Then once again, they've solidified their status as masters of unintended consequences of which anyone seriously playing the game can foresee.
stephen43084 wrote: I have seroius doubts that making the progressions unreachable (or even making more money off shields) is one of them.
Brothanoomsy wrote: I think that Operation PayHarder made D3 decide that they needed to limit the ability of the players to score so high. The progression reward remains at 1300, yet I and other players, consistently score over 2000. My average score last season was 1861@PvP. Rather than encourage the players to score higher, D3 is doing what they can to throttle "over-scoring".
Ghost79 wrote: What I'd like to see is something that I think has sort of been said by others in this thread, some sort of cap on the number of times you can get drilled in a certain time period even if its only 30 min or something. That way, if your playing and you get beaten on defense you know that for the next 30 your safe to try and grind out as many victories as you can, rack up some points and pop a shield and walk away for while waiting for the cool down to expire. This way you can choose to set your sights on gradually working your way up to the progression rewards over the full two days of the pvp event instead of just mad scramble shield popping for the final two - three hours of the event and praying a bunch of people don't target you and nail you while you are in the middle of a fight. May be a little less stressful too if that's what people are after.
mohio wrote: Ghost79 wrote: What I'd like to see is something that I think has sort of been said by others in this thread, some sort of cap on the number of times you can get drilled in a certain time period even if its only 30 min or something. That way, if your playing and you get beaten on defense you know that for the next 30 your safe to try and grind out as many victories as you can, rack up some points and pop a shield and walk away for while waiting for the cool down to expire. This way you can choose to set your sights on gradually working your way up to the progression rewards over the full two days of the pvp event instead of just mad scramble shield popping for the final two - three hours of the event and praying a bunch of people don't target you and nail you while you are in the middle of a fight. May be a little less stressful too if that's what people are after. I do like the idea behind this as there needs to be some mechanism to prevent people from dropping so many points in a short time. The issue though is basically exactly what you brought up as an example. You essentially are handing out free shields to people for whatever x-amount of time that the limit is set to. It certainly can't be too long cause then you'd just get drilled in 5-10 minutes and then be shielded for the next 50 minutes. 30 minutes might be reasonable. It's all about what the limit is I suppose. If you assume people can average a match in 5 minutes then maybe you cap losses to 150 points every 30 minutes (conveniently 25x6, which is how many matches you can do in 30 minutes on average). Then you can at least make some progress if you can queue enough >25 point matches and finish them in the same average time. The benefit of this method is that it allows the people who would otherwise shield for 30 minutes to continue to play and progress without having to shield. So now people should really only be shielding when they are away from the game, which (I'm assuming) is what they were intended for in the first place.
Brothanoomsy wrote: Dauthi wrote: I wouldn't say it harms zero players, those not in the specified alliances won't have a chance in hell to score 1st or 2nd etc. I will say it doesn't harm me, as I am not a player interesting in scoring 2k to get a reward. Oh, so you REALLY don't care about any of this yourself, you just wanna hate on those who do care? You have no dog in this fight and it doesn't effect you but you are trying to be "Captain Save-a-hoe" when there's no hoes and no saving that needs to be done in the first place? I'm only stating this here for your benefit. We all figured out you were a malcontent from your original post.
Dauthi wrote: I wouldn't say it harms zero players, those not in the specified alliances won't have a chance in hell to score 1st or 2nd etc. I will say it doesn't harm me, as I am not a player interesting in scoring 2k to get a reward.
Dauthi wrote: Like tanking, it wasn't intended and should be fixed, however it is viable to use until then. See? You say it's ok if YOU CAN DO IT, but if somebody else can do it and you can't because you can't seem to make enough friends... Well then that is an injustice and needs to end because it's an exploit and it's unethical to use an exploit so shame on us!!!!!!! You realize you just showed everyone how hypocritical you truly are with that post, right. First you say exploits are bad because everyone can't use them, then you turn right around and say that you use them yourself. Wow. Do yourself a favor and stop talking now, before the true level of your understanding, or lack thereof, becomes more apparent.
Dauthi wrote: Like tanking, it wasn't intended and should be fixed, however it is viable to use until then.
lukewin wrote: I have to believe at this point that you are a troll. Since you are taking the time to address every post. That or you have plenty of free time and feel like responding/countering every post that you have conversed in. I don't mean to defame you by my belief, but that is my opinion. I would say that you are more like arktos than phantron, except you are shilling for the devs/pubs, as opposed to against them. Thank you for omitting what I have bolded in my original quote, which makes it seem like I am just calling you a troll to call you a troll. Since you have a life outside the forums, as you put it, and didn't get the Phantron reference ( I did not either ), maybe you don't know what I meant by troll. I have copied/pasted from Wikipedia and highlighted why I think you fall in this category. In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]
lukewin wrote: I have to believe at this point that you are a troll. Since you are taking the time to address every post. That or you have plenty of free time and feel like responding/countering every post that you have conversed in. I don't mean to defame you by my belief, but that is my opinion. I would say that you are more like arktos than phantron, except you are shilling for the devs/pubs, as opposed to against them.
ark123 wrote: People engaging in flame wars in a message board about a match-3 cellphone game...smh
Dauthi wrote: Lastly, I came here for information and to debate and ended up surprised at how many people lashed out at me for not knowing something. I can understand a troll or two, but I was actually down-voted for asking a question by multiple people, why? If you ever wonder why there are forum users who stay silent/guests, read this thread. If you want new forum users, an attitude of superiority isn't going to help.