Please fix the point gap in PvP, and shield hopping.

Stax the Foyer

LXSandman wrote:

Clearly the developers don't mind people doing this, so I have to assume they don't consider it cheating at all. I imagine they are quite happy with how the system works right now, since everyone needs to buy shields and do hops.... and I imagine that shield hoping might be less common if you couldn't coordinate to get large targets.

I don't think you can read much into the developers' actions.

Fundamentally, timing matters in PvP. If you're skipping when someone is out, you'll get a high-value target. If you attack someone when they're shielded, you both benefit.

Without drastic changes to PvP to make timing irrelevant, communication can always be able to be used to give players an advantage in terms of timing. The exact method for doing so doesn't really matter, it's like math, where sometimes it's enough just to know that there is a solution, without worrying about what form that solution will take.

If you take away names, people will find other ways to uniquely identify themselves (through team composition, through leveling to 269 instead of 270, etc.). Even if you take away those identifiers, just knowing when an action is being taken has value. If you know someone is breaking their shield at a certain point level, you can skip until you find someone at the expected point value, whether it's the person that you knew was breaking, or someone else.

So you can't say that the system allowing people to benefit from outside communication is necessarily intended by the developers. It would happen whether they wanted it to or not.

Unknown

scottee wrote:

sagapo wrote:

My issue was very clear, not being able to find targets worth points since I don't coordinate (and I feel that you don't need to, of course that's how it is today because that's what you MUST do in order to do well), I'm asking for that to change. I consistently hit 1k as well, and when the reward is worth it, 1.3k as well since it costs HP to do so. I'm not the only person with this issue, I am the person that is vocal about it to try and get it addressed, that's what the forums is for? Or maybe this should have been posted in the suggestions instead.

This is how the game IS, and I am asking for a change, not a big deal.

Lastly, let me help you clarify that my friend. It is a bracket of 500 people, but it is still 1v1. I am not facing 500 people in a match, that would be impossible to win. Hearthstone is 1v1. WoW Arena has 3v3, with many people in the bracket, it still is a 3v3 arena match. Each match in this game is a 1v1 with 3 characters, which the exception of survival nodes in PvE.

Points are real, no one said that it wasn't, however points are not easily obtained without communication!

Someone also suggested to spend ISO and search, this is what I've been doing, I probably spend 4 times the ISO and still can't find a good opponent, there are times when you do catch someone shield hopping though (this is all w/o communication). I don't mind spending ISO, but even when you spend a lot and still can't find anyone worth points? That's an issue.

There must be more strategy you're missing.

As a person who doesn't use Line and doesn't coordinate with alliance, it's possible to beat those on Line, but it takes more iso and time. While shielded, cycle through to find high point targets. When you don't find them, give it a rest and come back in 10 min. Close the app and re-open, and then search through targets again. You can increase your changes by checking at the times people are likely to be unshielded. Also, keep refreshing your leaderboard. (Hit my rank, top ranks, over and over.) If you're #2, watch for when #1 hops and save him in a node. Same if you're #1 and he's #2. The use that node later when he starts another hop (or right away if you caught him early in his hop). If not, save it for the end of the PVP and hit it with 3 min left.

There's a meta strategy, in addition to saving high point targets. You have to think like the other player you're competing against, and see when they're going to unshield/reshield. You have to figure out when others in your slice are probably going to hop. You have to anticipate when others are going to be looking to save YOU in a node.

Those who coordinate don't have more shields or more points available to them. It's the same for everyone. All they have is better timing. You can counter this with increased checking (helps to be OCD) and extra iso to cycle nodes.

That's pretty much the only way to do it w/o communication, unfortunately, that's what I've been doing and it's quite a hassle and a waste of ISO sometimes and still can't find a target. People also don't always have time to cycle through nodes every 5 minutes throughout the day, when all the other players have to do is communicate.

I think if they address this, we wouldn't have to worry about it. People that enjoy socializing outside of the game can still do so, but it doesn't give them an edge in terms of gaining more points.

I think we've spoken enough on this topic, hopefully it gets some attention by the BA's/Devs at D3.

*Puts on permanent shield for this thread to avoid attacks, I'm not worth any points now (or ever on the forums!)*

scottee

And that's just it. If you and I are in the same bracket competing for #1, neither of us coordinated, and I'm willing to cycle nodes more than you, who should win?

san

sagapo wrote:

My issue was very clear, not being able to find targets worth points since I don't coordinate (and I feel that you don't need to, of course that's how it is today because that's what you MUST do in order to do well), I'm asking for that to change. I consistently hit 1k as well, and when the reward is worth it, 1.3k as well since it costs HP to do so. I'm not the only person with this issue, I am the person that is vocal about it to try and get it addressed, that's what the forums is for? Or maybe this should have been posted in the suggestions instead.

This is how the game IS, and I am asking for a change, not a big deal.

Lastly, let me help you clarify that my friend. It is a bracket of 500 people, but it is still 1v1. I am not facing 500 people in a match, that would be impossible to win. Hearthstone is 1v1 even with millions of players in the bracket. WoW Arena has 3v3, with many people in the bracket, it's still a 3v3 arena match. Marvel VS. Capcom 3 is 1v1 with 3 characters, still a 1v1... you get the idea. Each match in this game is a 1v1 with 3 characters, with the exception of survival nodes in PvE.

Points are real, no one said that it wasn't, however points are not easily obtained without communication!

Someone also suggested to spend ISO and search, this is what I've been doing, I probably spend 4 times the ISO and still can't find a good opponent, there are times when you do catch someone shield hopping though (this is all w/o communication). I don't mind spending ISO, but even when you spend a lot and still can't find anyone worth points? That's an issue.

The same can be said of many other aspects of life. A previous poster mentioned the example of using a GPS versus simply using road signs. Sure, you can use the road signs to navigate, but you can't ask the government to ban GPS just because someone else has an advantage of getting to the same location faster.

Another example, and perhaps a question... When you stand in a store lineup and the person behind you notices that another checkout just opened, and jumps on the opportunity to queue up before you - what do you do? Do you complain to the store manager to change the rules because someone found a quicker way to the checkout?

XandorXerxes

san-mpq wrote:

The same can be said of many other aspects of life. A previous poster mentioned the example of using a GPS versus simply using road signs. Sure, you can use the road signs to navigate, but you can't ask the government to ban GPS just because someone else has an advantage of getting to the same location faster.

Another example, and perhaps a question... When you stand in a store lineup and the person behind you notices that another checkout just opened, and jumps on the opportunity to queue up before you - what do you do? Do you complain to the store manager to change the rules because someone found a quicker way to the checkout?

Your analogy doesn't really check out compared to what he's saying. From what I've read, his only real complaint is the lack of targets once he gets high in points. People can (and should) co-ordinate, but that doesn't mean that people who don't co-ordinate should be unable to play effectively.

The solution to his problem is just to make it so that shields don't hide you from the queue 100%. They're already making you impervious to point losses. Sure, that lets more people queue up against you for when they shield-hop and increases your chances of being hit randomly while you're hopping, but allowing people to see shielded people only puts more points into everyone's coffers (unless you are being specifically targeted by another person / alliance so that you lose points while hopping repeatedly, in which case your alliance can step in and repay the favor).

Granted, that may be exactly why shielded people are removed from the queue - to artificially lower the points. I'd say that's a terrible way of doing it though, and against the devs interests. What's the point of increasing point values if you're trying to artificially lower points?

san

XandorXerxes wrote:

san-mpq wrote:

The same can be said of many other aspects of life. A previous poster mentioned the example of using a GPS versus simply using road signs. Sure, you can use the road signs to navigate, but you can't ask the government to ban GPS just because someone else has an advantage of getting to the same location faster.

Another example, and perhaps a question... When you stand in a store lineup and the person behind you notices that another checkout just opened, and jumps on the opportunity to queue up before you - what do you do? Do you complain to the store manager to change the rules because someone found a quicker way to the checkout?

Your analogy doesn't really check out compared to what he's saying. From what I've read, his only real complaint is the lack of targets once he gets high in points. People can (and should) co-ordinate, but that doesn't mean that people who don't co-ordinate should be unable to play effectively.

The solution to his problem is just to make it so that shields don't hide you from the queue 100%. They're already making you impervious to point losses. Sure, that lets more people queue up against you for when they shield-hop and increases your chances of being hit randomly while you're hopping, but allowing people to see shielded people only puts more points into everyone's coffers (unless you are being specifically targeted by another person / alliance so that you lose points while hopping repeatedly, in which case your alliance can step in and repay the favor).

Granted, that may be exactly why shielded people are removed from the queue - to artificially lower the points. I'd say that's a terrible way of doing it though, and against the devs interests. What's the point of increasing point values if you're trying to artificially lower points?

I could be wrong, but the OP appeared to complain about an issue that could be easily resolved by joining an alliance. He CHOOSES not to join such an alliance, and believes that just because others do this, they ought to be prevented from doing so. Out of game communication, which OP appears to have an issue with, happens in all sorts of games, and goes back to the early days of gaming. Sure, it gives some what can be perceived as an unfair advantage, but it is a part of gaming.

There are many more solutions than just removing shield invisibility. You can enter the slice late/fresh, you can be shielded yourself and check leader board of the slice you're in for top 10 players, you can join a coordinated alliance. Any of these solutions are perfectly fine, and doable within the current gaming system. What the OP asks for, is that the SYSTEM be changed for HIM and HIS benefit, simply because HE CHOOSES to play the way he does. This is what I was illustrating in my examples. I'm not claiming that the examples are perfect, but I think they illustrate the ridiculousness of wanting a system changed because you can't play it the way you want to. Adjust, my friend, adjust.

Dauthi

Colognoisseur wrote:

There is absolutely nothing the devs can do about the out of game communication happening on LINE and elsewhere. The only solution would be to upgrade the in-game chat so that it allowed one-on-one conversations and out of alliance groups. Then it would be available to all within game. The reason this probably won't happen is I imagine the resources necessary to upgrade the in-game chat to this level of functionality is just not available. They aren't going to take programming time away from things that make them money and help most of the players to fix something that affects only a few.

This is probably the most constructive comment, and relative to the point: Line is not MPQ, so why is a 3rd party program giving an advantage? If it's not part of the actual game, then I would also argue it's not intended to give advantages to others who don't use Line.

Sure, you can obtain outside information about any game to improve yourself, but typically you can figure out all this information yourself if you play the game long enough too. You can't figure out when a high point player is jumping by playing the game longer however.

I see nothing wrong with the OP being upset that he is forced to download a 3rd party program to be competitive.

Dauthi

aesthetocyst wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

Colognoisseur wrote:

There is absolutely nothing the devs can do about the out of game communication happening on LINE and elsewhere. The only solution would be to upgrade the in-game chat so that it allowed one-on-one conversations and out of alliance groups. Then it would be available to all within game. The reason this probably won't happen is I imagine the resources necessary to upgrade the in-game chat to this level of functionality is just not available. They aren't going to take programming time away from things that make them money and help most of the players to fix something that affects only a few.

This is probably the most constructive comment, and relative to the point: Line is not MPQ, so why is a 3rd party program giving an advantage? If it's not part of the actual game, then I would also argue it's not intended to give advantages to others who don't use Line.

LINE is not the only system in use. What about ... email? Gchat? texting?

What about players who happen to know each other offline, hanging out and playing in the same space, talking face to face? My gods, say it isn't so!

We both know Line is used because it is efficient at what it needs to do, while these other options you listed are ridiculous. It can inform the most people the easily and quickly. I could argue that without a program this efficient we wouldn't see such a significant problem.

You know why the in-game chat is so limited? Because it's a Wired world. The devs don't need to reinvent the wheel. They know players will use existing tools to communicate. And choose what works best for them. The MPQ devs are engaged in designing and supporting a GAME, not communication channels!

That is an assumption, and it also doesn't answer the question to why others who download a 3rd party program should have an advantage. We both know the devs could fix the issue dispite it being a "wired world".

Nellobee

Wouldn't the easy thing to do be removing people from your queue if shielded?

GothicKratos

LXSandman wrote:

GothicKratos wrote:

It gives them an advantage. That's it.

You are right Gothic. That's the simplified answer - It gives you an advantage to coordinate out of the game.

Here is a question though - Do people think it's right that you should get an advantage by using a source external to the game? If you use scripting to get an advantage in another game isn't that considered cheating?

That's not an easy question to answer, mostly because it's steeped mostly in morality, so it really boils down to an opinion.

I've mentioned this in other posts in the past, but I come from a background of competitive MvC/SF and CoD - there's a lot of opinions on what's "cheap" or "cheating" or "unfair" in those games.

For example, a big one in fighting games, especially in MvC, is infinite comboing/juggling. There's no denying that infinites are pretty lame, as in, they're not fun for the person doing it or the person on the other end, but it is part of the game. You know when you're facing down Magneto in MvC3, if you let him catch you with the right moves, he's going to juggle you and it's going to hurt a lot, and if he doesn't screw up, he's going to kill you on a reset, so you play accordingly. Don't let him hit low and don't let him close enough to command grab. On the other hand, as the person playing as Magneto, you can be the best player in the world, and it honestly doesn't matter because all you need to do is be patient and wait for that opening.

A big example for CoD was in MW3 - SitRep Pro. This perk was a freaking beast. SitRep by itself just highlighted enemy equipment from a distance (and it could highlight through walls), so it was good, but not game breaking, but once you destroyed enough equipment to get StiRep Pro, well, it was arguably broken. It amplified the sound of footsteps. If you had Dead Silence (makes your steps silent) they would now be normal level noise - if you didn't they were even louder than normal. Combine this with the prevalent headset culture that CoD attracts, and yeah, you practically had to be using it too, or you had to crouch walk everywhere. There was literally no straight up counter play. It sucked, but you learned to deal with it. Some people argued that by forcing your opponent into a situation where you're using the same things, you're playing based on straight up skills, but that's realistically only partially true (there's a lot of things beyond literal "skill" that decide a game of CoD - game and map awareness mean a lot more than reflexes in a lot of game types). That's not the big argument though - the big argument is it's overpowered. It levers so much of an advantage just having it that not having it is stupid - think pre-nerf Sentry or pre-nerf Thoress - because it gave you information about where you opponent is and where they are going that you can relay to their team without even doing anything proactive themselves - let alone the information it gives before and going into an engagement. It gave such an advantage that it was banned in MLG/GameBattle play.

Now, let's compare that to LINE. LINE is maybe, kinda like SitRep, because it gives you information, but the difference is, SitRep gave you information like where your opponent is coming from, how many there are, even what weapons they're using - all stuff that helps you going into the engagement to win - LINE gives you information about how to get more point, which in a round about way kinda helps you "win", but you still have to do the hard work of, well, actually winning.

Dauthi

GothicKratos wrote:

Now, let's compare that to LINE. LINE is maybe, kinda like SitRep, because it gives you information, but the difference is, SitRep gave you information like where your opponent is coming from, how many there are, even what weapons they're using - all stuff that helps you going into the engagement to win - LINE gives you information about how to get more point, which in a round about way kinda helps you "win", but you still have to do the hard work of, well, actually winning.

In my experience I spend 100-200 ISO every 30 minutes or so looking for good queues when I hop. It can add up pretty fast, so that is what others who don't use line are losing. If I am lucky or time my hops during other hops, I can save some ISO. It isn't going to be even close to the ISO saved as someone who is guaranteed that queue though.

acescracked

scottee wrote:

And that's just it. If you and I are in the same bracket competing for #1, neither of us coordinated, and I'm willing to cycle nodes more than you, who should win?

Simple, OP would open new thread in forum stating it's unfair that you did more skips than he was willing do. Devs should change the game to suit his singular way of playing the game.

Unknown

acescracked wrote:

scottee wrote:

And that's just it. If you and I are in the same bracket competing for #1, neither of us coordinated, and I'm willing to cycle nodes more than you, who should win?

Simple, OP would open new thread in forum stating it's unfair that you did more skips than he was willing do. Devs should change the game to suit his singular way of playing the game.

I wouldn't say that. I do think there's an issue in hitting certain point totals(at least in certain brackets according to my un-scientific research(viewtopic.php?f=6&t=31255) which is why I suggested high level seed teams.

Nellobee

aesthetocyst wrote:

Nellobee wrote:

Wouldn't the easy thing to do be removing people from your queue if shielded?

Easy conceptually but not in practice. Qs are stored on user devices. To make this happen the server would have to actively ping every user device and actively manage the queue s for that event...every time any player shields!

This would create a lot of confusin and frustration. And increase data traffic.

Not really. The client would ping the server to see if the target was shielded when you "open" the node (before you get to click the fight! button).
Minimal traffic required. One minor blip per open node.

Dauthi

aesthetocyst wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

GothicKratos wrote:

Now, let's compare that to LINE. LINE is maybe, kinda like SitRep, because it gives you information, but the difference is, SitRep gave you information like where your opponent is coming from, how many there are, even what weapons they're using - all stuff that helps you going into the engagement to win - LINE gives you information about how to get more point, which in a round about way kinda helps you "win", but you still have to do the hard work of, well, actually winning.

In my experience I spend 100-200 ISO every 30 minutes or so looking for good queues when I hop. It can add up pretty fast, so that is what others who don't use line are losing. If I am lucky or time my hops during other hops, I can save some ISO. It isn't going to be even close to the ISO saved as someone who is guaranteed that queue though.

Players using LINE .... And other comms....burn tons of Iso skipping. 1000s per event.

EDIT: To add, no one is "guaranteed" a q. No can discuss anything on line that can't be discussed in game chat. A player might tell his alliance, hey just qd "so-and-so in this event for fat pts", and his alliance mates might go chase that q, and some of them might even get it. Or none of them.

So you are trying to say that there is no advantage when it is absolutely certain that a player with a lot of points is unshielded in your time slice? That you will spend just as much as someone who is flipping through players with no certainty that its there? Come on... I am having a lot of trouble buying that.

aesthetocyst wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

LINE is not the only system in use. What about ... email? Gchat? texting?

What about players who happen to know each other offline, hanging out and playing in the same space, talking face to face? My gods, say it isn't so!

We both know Line is used because it is efficient at what it needs to do, while these other options you listed are ridiculous. It can inform the most people the easily and quickly. I could argue that without a program this efficient we wouldn't see such a significant problem.

You know why the in-game chat is so limited? Because it's a Wired world. The devs don't need to reinvent the wheel. They know players will use existing tools to communicate. And choose what works best for them. The MPQ devs are engaged in designing and supporting a GAME, not communication channels!

That is an assumption, and it also doesn't answer the question to why others who download a 3rd party program should have an advantage. We both know the devs could fix the issue dispite it being a "wired world".

No, I don't see a problem at all. What would the devs fix and how?

Expand in-game chat. Make this advantage available to everyone.

Players who work harder, smarter, and more creatively are potentially more successful and potentially enjoy the game more and have more fun. Players who use online resources like the Wiki and this forum are more knowledgeable than those who don't have have an advantage.

As others and myself pointed out earlier, this isn't the same as Wiki info. This is insider information that is unavailable otherwise. Players can explore a game and find all the info themselves that a Wiki can offer, you can't however explore MPQ and suddenly know when others are unshielded.

If it wasn't a wired world, MPQ would not exist. Anyone who is equipped to play MPQ is equipped to communicate about MPQ. I know alliances that only use game chat and do well. I know players who limit themselves to game chat for various reasons and recognize they are handicapping themselves. That's life.

I and others encourage you to reach out and give it a shot. It's silly to post on the Forum about some secret "fight club". What "secret" info do you imagine is being shared? ALL it is is players talking about the game. The answer to almost every "How do I do [X] better in PVP?" question is the same: talk to other players!

I'm not arguing whether its a secret, but whether it is right to get a clear advantage using a 3rd party program when shield hopping.

acescracked

Dauthi,

You are really giving way to much credit to battle chats to acquire good queues.

First off the number of people in any one bc for each slice is not that great. Secondly, there are alot of 1400 plus point players who use *zero* communication with others during their PvP play. In S.H.I.E.L.D there are only three of us who utilize a multi alliance battle chat.

Sure, knowing a few good queues here or there help out but for the most part I'm skipping alot just like anyone who isn't in a battle chat. This idea that bc is a huge advantage is a misnomer. EDIT: xmen bc might be more of an advantage... But I'm not in that one.

Getting way back the original post, the complaint was that five people in the same alliance were in the same bracket hopping together. They don't need line for that they could use the ingame chat. Then it would be viewed as OK?

Sword user

This is a radical idea, and will cause point inflaction, but how about the person in 1st place is always able to be queued regardless of shield status? Yes, they're going to get hit hard, but then when they are outside of shield, they'll be hit hard no matter what. Let's say first and second are switching first, there's enough numbers of people that they'd have trouble increasing their score.

The person in first might not like it, but it'll make the top of each bracket a lot more dynamic and interesting.

Ding

acescracked wrote:

Dauthi,


Getting way back the original post, the complaint was that five people in the same alliance were in the same bracket hopping together. They don't need line for that they could use the ingame chat. Then it would be viewed as OK?

Game, set, and match (3)

ClydeFrog76

The entire notion of shield-hopping is ridiculous and just proves how fundamentally flawed the MPQ PVP model is.

Flare808

Dauthi wrote:

If it wasn't a wired world, MPQ would not exist. Anyone who is equipped to play MPQ is equipped to communicate about MPQ. I know alliances that only use game chat and do well. I know players who limit themselves to game chat for various reasons and recognize they are handicapping themselves. That's life.

I and others encourage you to reach out and give it a shot. It's silly to post on the Forum about some secret "fight club". What "secret" info do you imagine is being shared? ALL it is is players talking about the game. The answer to almost every "How do I do [X] better in PVP?" question is the same: talk to other players!

I'm not arguing whether its a secret, but whether it is right to get a clear advantage using a 3rd party program when shield hopping.

Honestly, if D3 wanted us to use the in game chat over Line, they would have spent more time making in game chat more functional. No way to talk to anyone outside your alliance, no spell check, no cut/paste, no pictures, compatibility issues, etc. Aside from some bug fixes, chat hasn't been improved since its implementation.

Sword user wrote:

This is a radical idea, and will cause point inflaction, but how about the person in 1st place is always able to be queued regardless of shield status? Yes, they're going to get hit hard, but then when they are outside of shield, they'll be hit hard no matter what. Let's say first and second are switching first, there's enough numbers of people that they'd have trouble increasing their score.

The person in first might not like it, but it'll make the top of each bracket a lot more dynamic and interesting.

Treating a single person (first place) with a separate set of rules doesn't make sense. Right now, there's normally a couple minute window where you can safely (for the most part) get a match or two in and shield again. By making this change, you turn unshielding into Russian Roulette where you could get hit the second you start. It's already frustrating enough to get -70s as it is now.

ClydeFrog76 wrote:

The entire notion of shield-hopping is ridiculous and just proves how fundamentally flawed the MPQ PVP model is.

Normally when you disagree with the way something is run, providing a solution is more constructive than just complaining about it. How would you fix the "fundamentally flawed MPQ PvP model"?