Unholy Outlaw Jan.11-14

whitecat31

to _APOCALYPSE_ of immortal Rage

I want to thank you for quadruple sniping me.
With the new shield system out there, it is almost impossible to make up those points. So yeah I might not get that Thor cover.
I want to thank you, because you showed me that there really are still people out there who enjoy griefing people and don't care about the fact that they represent their Alliance or how hard it is to earn points now.
Immortal Rage is the alliance that has Soundwave in it, and I always assumed that he was the only jerk of the bunch and I have avoided hitting you guys unshielded.
In fact, I tend to be rather nice about trying not to hit people including you _Apocalypse_. I usually just wait until they are shielded and save the node for later.
Heck I had even avoided sniping Soundwave for quite a while now.
So to the people of Immortal Rage if I hit you while you are unshielded, please consider it payback for what your commander did.

Whitecat

loroku

whitecat31 wrote:

to _APOCALYPSE_ of immortal Rage

What I'm about to say is so amazingly unrelated to the thread it's not even funny, but:

It has always been fascinating to me what rules people come up with in their heads and decide to apply to games and especially to other players.

For example: getting hit by someone 10 times in a row is a 100% valid, legal, and in all ways totally legit way to play this game, as the programming allows it and there are exactly zero other rules to a video game other than what is allowed by the programming. But a person might decide they don't play that way, or wish others wouldn't play that way, and then attempt to not only refrain from making legal, valid actions in a game, but then try to apply social pressure to get others to follow the completely made-up rule that they invented. It's like if I were playing chess and decided that queens cannot attack bishops. The reasoning behind my motives for that rule are completely immaterial; maybe I feel like it's an attack on my religion or something, I don't know - it doesn't matter. But by adhering to that rule that doesn't otherwise exist in my playspace, I only limit my own ability (and anyone else's I convince to adhere to the same rule) to compete.

Certainly sportsmanship and sportsmanlike conduct are important when playing games against others, but these are not games in which sportsmanlike conduct is even possible to define (or to define when it is being violated). One person may think 2 snipes is too many; another may think any sort of retals are bad. There are no clear rules because none exist; we're not really interacting with others in a face-to-face way, so the billions of nuances that exist in face-to-face sports are lost. It's just rules on a page. And anything beyond the rules on that page are entirely of your own creation. It's especially true in games like this, where actual interaction is extremely limited. One person might envision an action as intentional griefing, but that other person wasn't even paying attention and just hitting buttons. In this case, it is possible (not saying likely) that the person who attacked the same target 4 times wasn't even aware that it was the same target: they were just gaining points. Or it may have been an intentional, strategic move to deny another person resources to protect one's position at the top of the pack. Either scenario is equally likely given the complete lack of context available, and may be interpreted in any fashion one chooses.

There is a gray area when it comes to exploits or actual hacks; most companies will punish you for actually breaking the rules of their game, although some exploits are very difficult to draw a line between rule bending and simply amazing strategy. But purely social constructs - like whether or not to "hit" someone or how many times - are 100% artificial. Nothing even exists as a guideline - it's purely your own mind setting limits that aren't otherwise there, and your own mind interpreting events that otherwise have no ability to be interpreted. It's like a rorschach test; there is no correct interpretation, but you made one for yourself.

Another example: I remember someone once mentioning that they intentionally avoid attacking names in PvP that they recognize from these forums. I remember thinking at the time: I've never once looked at the name on the node I am playing against. It's just interesting to me how people chose to change games to make them their own individual experience.

(Sidebar to my sidebar: please note that I am not advocating any position or action, or taking any side here - just observing.)

Unknown

The game never queues up anyone worth more than about 30 if it can avoid doing so. A lot of the time it's not even willing to give you anyone more than 20. Skipping doesn't solve this problem. Even coordination only matters if your score is high enough for the game to give up looking for the usual 15-25 matches. If you're shielded at 500 I don't care how many people you're working together in a shield hop, you're not going to find someone worth 45 points by just hitting skip. It works for high points because if you're sitting at say 1200 the game might not be able to find anyone in the 15-25 point range so if you've the right guys unshield the game is willing to take that guy on a first come first served basis because it can't find anyone else. But this only works if your score is high enough that the game can't find anyone in its preferred range.

Spider_Jerusalem

Wait...how can you tell if someone is shielded or not?

I've been playing this game exactly one year yesterday (PINK DINO RESUPPLY WHAT WHAT!) and have never noticed where it tells you if your opponent is shielded.

Please enlighten me.

squirrel1120

If they are in your bracket, and within point range so they are on your leaderboard score list, it'll show a shield icon. This is pretty commonly seen toward the top of scores. I've only managed top 25 a few times lately, and have noticed someone near my score as a name I just saw unshielded in that screen, on the rare occasion I even look at the names in the nodes.

scottee

For opponents with similar points, I might consider:

-attacking someone unshielded in your bracket knocks back their ranking to you climb easier

-attacking someone you know is shielded ensures that they won't get a retaliation node from you

Not something I always look for, but things I sometimes consider near the top or when setting up a shield hop.

Spider_Jerusalem

squirrel1120 wrote:

If they are in your bracket, and within point range so they are on your leaderboard score list, it'll show a shield icon. This is pretty commonly seen toward the top of scores. I've only managed top 25 a few times lately, and have noticed someone near my score as a name I just saw unshielded in that screen, on the rare occasion I even look at the names in the nodes.

Oh right. But like, when you are just pulling up people in nodes and playing the game, there is no way to know whether someone is unshielded is there? This is not the first time I've read someone complaining about "sniping" unshielded players and it sounds like a major offense but I have no clue if that's something I do or not. I am surely not going to take the time to look at the leaderboards on the off chance that player is one of the other nine people shown on my leaderboard page at that exact moment.

Unknown

I have an amazing team this pvp. Hood is one of my best characters (lvl210) and my other 2 characters best in this combo is captain america and patch. Easy climb so far, no way anyone is going to retaliate at the point total im at (410ish). Picked a different slice than i usually do but hope i can still get top 100 cuz doctor doom covers would be nice. When will they ever reward punisher?!?!?

squirrel1120

if there is, I certainly haven't noticed it...

mohio

Spider Jerusalem wrote:

squirrel1120 wrote:

If they are in your bracket, and within point range so they are on your leaderboard score list, it'll show a shield icon. This is pretty commonly seen toward the top of scores. I've only managed top 25 a few times lately, and have noticed someone near my score as a name I just saw unshielded in that screen, on the rare occasion I even look at the names in the nodes.

Oh right. But like, when you are just pulling up people in nodes and playing the game, there is no way to know whether someone is unshielded is there? This is not the first time I've read someone complaining about "sniping" unshielded players and it sounds like a major offense but I have no clue if that's something I do or not. I am surely not going to take the time to look at the leaderboards on the off chance that player is one of the other nine people shown on my leaderboard page at that exact moment.

For someone like whitecat, or anyone else in a top alliance I usually check their score through the top alliances scoreboard a couple of times to make sure it's not changing to see if they are shielded or not. I will usually do this for just about anyone I can, but only while setting up a shield hop. If you're just furiously climbing then there's no way you can take the time to check if someone's shielded or not, although if they keep showing up in your queue there's a great chance they're not. I'm not gonna get into the should or shouldn't. If he was the only guy worth more than 20 points in all his nodes and skips then can you really blame him?

defixu

Dave Sirlin actually theorized whitecat31's argument:

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win

It's a fun read and really changed how I look at people who complain about other people not adhering to their made-up rules. Even though it has lead to a choleric friend of mine smashing his xbox controller because he kept loosing in Street Fighter 4 with his hard to play character (Cammie) against my easy to play character (Ryu).

Unknown

defixu wrote:

Dave Sirlin actually theorized whitecat31's argument:

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win

It's a fun read and really changed how I look at people who complain about other people not adhering to their made-up rules. Even though it has lead to a choleric friend of mine smashing his xbox controller because he kept loosing in Street Fighter 4 with his hard to play character (Cammie) against my easy to play character (Ryu).

OFFTOPIC ENGAGED: Ryu has always been decent in SFIV, sadly your friend sounds like he needs to put in some practice if he wants to main Cammy.

Please ignore what I just said I barely get to talk about fighting games anymore *verbal throwup*

Carnage_78

defixu wrote:

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win

A very good read mate...

I think that this game has a good many "scrubs" that try to make up unwritten rules to bring down the top tier players outside of the game...I personally admire them!

I want to put in the time & effort to get there at some point. If they have good combos of characters that make them beat anyone it is only because they developed those characters over time. I say good on them...if you are unhappy about it then stop complaining & put in the effort to get those characters or realise that you can compete within more reasonable expectations...or stop playing if non of that sounds good to you...no one is forcing you to compete against them...but the truth is that it is a reality of this game.

If you are unshielded...you will get hit...either retaliate or find other unshielded targets to get the points back. No one gets to the top like they are (or in any tier of the game for that matter) by waiting for this or that...hit them, get the points, move on...in some ways there would be an argument for waiting for shielded players & that is that they won't get a chance to retaliate which is cautious but might be an effective way to keep more of the earned points...but that is an advantage that each of us choose to apply or not...no one should expect every player to make the same decisions or play the same strategies.

I am actually impressed how this game is able to sort players out in different events...sometimes you will be higher / lower than usual but mostly equilibrium will be reached with you ending up where the combination of your roster & efforts says you should be. There are no free pass in this game...which I like...everything needs to be fought for.

I am personally a 4 months player...I am not technically a transitional player yet (by choice mind you as I have a number of soft capped at 94 right now until I get a good critical mass of usable ones) so I don't expect to compete for Top 10 in PvP (unless I decided to dump a boatload of money into the game to buy covers...which to me would break my fun of earning my stripes). These type of performances won't happen for me right now. My challenge at this point is to consistently get into the Top 100 to earn some more covers...and I am happy with that for now. Expectations are so crucial in any competition...no one is going to give you an inch...the competition is after all the fun of this game.

There also seems to be a lot of "entitled" players that think they should get everything handed to them without any proper effort. I should get this or that because whatever...if you did not get it then it is because you did not earn it. Everyone is playing the same game...yes, some reward structures might be somewhat stingy but it is the same for everyone. If it is out of your reach then pick somewhere else where you can do better...like PvE for example...if you put in the time you will earn good stuff in that environment no matter your roster (which is something that I am doing to accelerate my roster growth).

To me it comes down to...

Play the game, build up your roster a notch, get better performances...repeat!

Unknown

Don't people feel obligated to hit rosters weaker than theirs when they receive 25+ points from doing so? I thought that was on the game's mission statement?

I try not to hit someone 4 times in 10 minutes unless, of course, their roster is pathetically easy to knock off and I'm trying to get these blasted progression rewards with the old progression requirements.

Unknown

Got top 100 again following BGrimm's assessment of "new" PVP. I was much fonder of getting to 600 points and shielding, but that was then. If this is what I have to do to secure top 100 at even less points, I'll do it.

Unknown

Was in a death bracket with top 10 being 1100+.

Pretty relaxed for me, though. Got up to 720 getting hit only twice and threw up a shield. Ended up in 53rd.

hex706f726368

Mattfal wrote:

I have an amazing team this pvp. Hood is one of my best characters (lvl210) and my other 2 characters best in this combo is captain america and patch. Easy climb so far, no way anyone is going to retaliate at the point total im at (410ish). Picked a different slice than i usually do but hope i can still get top 100 cuz doctor doom covers would be nice. When will they ever reward punisher?!?!?

This is your lucky week, punisher covers will be the rewards for Doctor's Orders.

Unknown

I thought slot 3 was one of the "off/easy" slices, but my top 10 was 1050 pts and top 50 was 800. Way harsher than I've seen in the previous 3 events

Unknown

This was an odd event. I did not get hit a single time prior to shielding, save for the one hit which was a retal. Hovered around 6-700 on day one, went to 800 today, sat around unshielded at that level, ground to 1072 before I ran out of points but not health packs. Wasn't going to do fights for 3-10 points. So I shielded up in 2nd with 7 hours to go. A defensive win for +9 and two shield bounces was all I got the rest of the event. That was good enough to take 3rd. Really odd.

Apologies to CaptainAmurika if my three hits in a row cost you anything but you were about the only points out there and I figured from alliance scores that you were probably shielded by then and just queued in my nodes.

Seasick Pirate

Has anyone ever experienced this one before? I placed #10 (by 6 points) but only got rewards for being top 25.
I took a screenshot of the rankings but don't have one of the rewards saying top 25 as I actually thought I was #11. I didn't realize I was really #10 until just now. Seeing how they halved the amount of my HP and iso rewards, this sucks!