PvP Gameplay & Etiquette Questions

blargrx

Malcrof wrote:

There is a long long thread somewhere about all of this, from a few months ago.. can anyone link the original? That thread changed the way i play, and i haven't missed a 1k i wanted since.

If anyone can find that thread I'd be it interested in reading, making the transition to pvp and always looking for tips and etiquette so I don't end up on someone's snipe list

DrNitroman

Here what I found

Do you play with etiquette?
by Square » Fri 25 Sep, 2015 4:14 pm | 96 posts; 5p
https://d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33121&p=416237&hilit=etiquette#p416237

So, Etiquette. Your Thoughts? Probably this one you were looking for?
by IamTheBiggs » Sat 01 Aug, 2015 9:15 pm | 213 posts; 11p
https://d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=31846&p=392278&hilit=etiquette#p392273

PvP shield hop etiquette Q
by Trisul » Thu 05 Mar, 2015 11:48 pm | 61 posts; 4p
https://d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=24925&p=308642&hilit=etiquette#p308642

PVP Etiquette
by AsianInvasion » Mon 13 Jan, 2014 10:01 pm | 17 posts; 1p
https://d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2179&p=30735&hilit=etiquette#p30706

Raffoon

Drummerboycroy wrote:

Honest question, and likely one shared by others in my situation:

If I am playing PvP with L130 3* heroes, how worried am I about all the etiquette stuff?

I'm facing teams with levels between 250-270 (boosted 3*s & XFW, other less covered 4*s, a few single cover $$s) usually, and I basically skip (usually 10-15 times) until I find one that is potentially doable (primarily favorable team compositions, hopefully someone with heroes <L200).

So, put succinctly, how worried should I be about etiquette faux pas at my current level? Is there a level at which PvP players should start paying more attention? I've only seen a few Fistbusters, Jean Greys, and the like, so can I just play the game normally?

Oh, I should also mention I don't tend to score above 300-400 points, if that matters. I get hit a bunch (roughly 2-3 defenses for every 1 offense) after 200 points by teams I have virtually no chance of beating as well, if that helps.

DBC

I think it mostly comes into play at the later levels when people begin to shield. I'd say 600 and higher, but that's a completely arbitrary number I just came up with from nowhere.

If you're at 300-400, then people that are worth 68-75 points to you are probably up around 800-900 and so they might be hopping and may plan to shield soon. It would be nice to wait for something like 10 minutes in case they are hopping, but it's still your call.

If it's a 40-50 point queue at that level, they're less likely to be shielding soon, so it makes less difference.

puppychow

BlackSheep101 wrote:

mags1587 wrote:

BlackSheep101 wrote:

Is there a point level at which you start seeing people outside your bracket (and, presumably, also become visible outside your bracket)?

You are always visible to everyone in the slice/shard.

Weird, I could have sworn I read that once you reach a certain point threshold you become visible to a broader audience.

It used to be true. I'm not convinced this is true anymore. What happened was that during the summer, D3 changed the scoring mechanics by giving 50% more points on wins; the converse though is that you can LOSE more points too.

Second change is that the points band was removed; previously the AI would offer matchups based on your points and offer targets within a few hundred points of your score. High scoring alliances would run up scores like crazy to exploit this; once their scores are too high, the AI won't offer them as targets to 99.9999999% of the players in the shard. D3 took the band down, meaning that a 0 point attacker could find a target carrying 1,000+ point differential. So yes, the high scorers became more visible to a wider audience than previously. However, the past few seasons I haven't been able to find the high scorers consistently. Instead of 70 point guys with scores a few hundred points above mine, I'm usually finding 50s and an occasional low 60s. could be bad luck on my part; who knows?

Unknown

Raffoon wrote:

Drummerboycroy wrote:

Honest question, and likely one shared by others in my situation:

If I am playing PvP with L130 3* heroes, how worried am I about all the etiquette stuff?

I'm facing teams with levels between 250-270 (boosted 3*s & XFW, other less covered 4*s, a few single cover $$s) usually, and I basically skip (usually 10-15 times) until I find one that is potentially doable (primarily favorable team compositions, hopefully someone with heroes <L200).

So, put succinctly, how worried should I be about etiquette faux pas at my current level? Is there a level at which PvP players should start paying more attention? I've only seen a few Fistbusters, Jean Greys, and the like, so can I just play the game normally?

Oh, I should also mention I don't tend to score above 300-400 points, if that matters. I get hit a bunch (roughly 2-3 defenses for every 1 offense) after 200 points by teams I have virtually no chance of beating as well, if that helps.

DBC

I think it mostly comes into play at the later levels when people begin to shield. I'd say 600 and higher, but that's a completely arbitrary number I just came up with from nowhere.

If you're at 300-400, then people that are worth 68-75 points to you are probably up around 800-900 and so they might be hopping and may plan to shield soon. It would be nice to wait for something like 10 minutes in case they are hopping, but it's still your call.

If it's a 40-50 point queue at that level, they're less likely to be shielding soon, so it makes less difference.

Cool, thanks for the response to my question!

I don't think I've ever seen a 60+ point fight, and I'm not likely to see 600+ points on my end any time soon, so I'm guessing I can just play PvP normally.

Edit: Before I was ready to post this, I ended up, mostly out of desperation, fighting a team that was quite a bit stronger than me (XFW at level 287(?), SG and SRCA, both obviously boosted) and won handily, so perhaps things aren't as bleak as I thought? Not a lot of points, like 30-something, but still, reason for hope…

DBC

squirrel1120

Drummerboycroy wrote:

Cool, thanks for the response to my question!

I don't think I've ever seen a 60+ point fight, and I'm not likely to see 600+ points on my end any time soon, so I'm guessing I can just play PvP normally.

Edit: Before I was ready to post this, I ended up, mostly out of desperation, fighting a team that was quite a bit stronger than me (XFW at level 287(?), SG and SRCA, both obviously boosted) and won handily, so perhaps things aren't as bleak as I thought? Not a lot of points, like 30-something, but still, reason for hope…

DBC

When you are at the lower end of the field you can skip a LOT and not see the same person in the queue twice. Once you break a certain score range (varied by how far in the event is), it becomes much more common. It also becomes a lot easier to double or triple hit a player at the high end of scoring because the queue buffer starts to offer the same target again right after you beat someone because of a lack of targets. Thus, the game setup kind of encourages bad etiquette at the higher end.

If you are in a 300-400 point range, not double hitting someone for 40-45 points is kind of an easy decision. Skip and you'll get more targets. While shield hopping up over 1k, it's on the easier side too... I mean you are literally sitting there safely picking your best target, often from among your own alliance or truce, where you know you aren't going to ruin someone's hop. For me, the tricky bit is the stretch from 800-1k, and doing it without being a double tapping jerk or accidentally hitting a friendly.

Once you've been through a few gauntlet iterations, it becomes pretty apparent that it's possible to beat teams higher than you. Once you get to the point where preserving your points becomes worth it for placement, itll become a pretty necessary trick to reach up into that next higher tier a couple times before shielding. Unfortunately it's not like it used to be where 800+ assured a 3* from placement. I've squeaked out 1006 points in shard 4 last season to hit my 1k before shielding and was ranked 97th when it finished.

Unknown

Just took the route of "play nice" with those that show up as 60+ points. Waited 15 minutes, then hit.

Point value actually awarded...24.

This didn't seem to be a team you'd think would drop value that fast.

Oh...and I lost 110. So, looks like that's a winning technique......for others to get points off of us shlubs.

PeterGibbons316

Splarne wrote:

Just took the route of "play nice" with those that show up as 60+ points. Waited 15 minutes, then hit.

Point value actually awarded...24.

This didn't seem to be a team you'd think would drop value that fast.

Oh...and I lost 110. So, looks like that's a winning technique......for others to get points off of us shlubs.

You are doing it wrong.

The only etiquette should be between people that are shield hopping. If you aren't hopping and need those 60 points to hit your next progression before someone else hits you, then you are a fool to wait.

You would only wait to hit a target if you queued it up while you were shielded and were able to wait until the target shields before you hit them.

dr tinykittylove

Splarne wrote:

Just took the route of "play nice" with those that show up as 60+ points. Waited 15 minutes, then hit.

Point value actually awarded...24.

This didn't seem to be a team you'd think would drop value that fast.

Oh...and I lost 110. So, looks like that's a winning technique......for others to get points off of us shlubs.

When you're within range to climb to shield, you need to move fast. My concession to giving others as much time as possible has been to run a rotating search/climb system.

When I'm around 600/700s, I slow down and fill up all three nodes with good targets, maybe pause to regen my characters/health packs a little, then hit the oldest node. Then I find a new target to replace that node, and go to the next oldest node, then find another target there, and go on, repeat until I get hit/run out of health/start feeling unsafe. I skip anyone I remember having hit before.

I run an underlevelled (but all buffed) 3* team, and can generally get to 900/1k before I shield. Sometimes the targets have lost points, it also happens even if you attack right away, just keep moving. So far, without line communication, I have fairly peaceful climbs without more than one or two hits. Occasionally after I shield, I find a few of the people I tapped while climbing bounce off me for 60 or more points. We all profit.

Linkster79

mgallop wrote:

Linkster79 wrote:

mgallop wrote:

You can see all players in your shard (assuming they aren't shielded), even if they aren't in your bracket.

The appropriate etiquette for hitting someone is to wait a while. If its been 15+ minutes, they aren't on a hop, and you can hit away. This is especially true if someone has way more points than you and is worth 60+, if they're worth around 40, hitting isn't that bad unless they're hopping, because the retal node you leave will be worth 40ish.

As a person always wanting to poke a hornets nest, that is a portion of the forums ettiquette and not everyone here agrees with it. Personally I say if the points are worth and you can beat them easily, double, triple heck ride their **** all the down to less than 38 points. If you can do it quick enough only 1 retaliation node will appear on their screen. Free points!

Linkster, as a piece of friends advice, be careful who you do that to. If people get doubled/tripled/quadrupled they remember, they share the name of people who do it, they retaliate in other events while climbing. I've seen screenshots of people tapping a known sniper 15+ times, I've seen a gift card bounty on a sniper. Following etiquette is positive sum and let's everyne in the shard get higher scores, but that's not the only reason to be nice.

This is what I take great umbridge with. What purpose does organised bullying like that serve? To enforce some unwritten rule that some have no knowledge of and unless the player being bullied is a member of these forums or other game related chats will never know why they are being targeted? I use the term being bullied because that is exactly what it is.

I keep reading about letting players do their precious shields hops undisturbed as if it is for The Greater Good[/], but guess what? It is player versus player and the way to win is to score more points than everyone else and the best way to do that is to take points of those who are your direct rivals. I would love to see an event that has a prize so great that none could resist it, an event that has no shards and no brackets just one big pool of players and it is winner takes all with no alliance prizes. Let's see how so called ettiquette works out then!

fight4thedream

Linkster79 wrote:

This is what I take great umbridge with. What purpose does organised bullying like that serve? To enforce some unwritten rule that some have no knowledge of and unless the player being bullied is a member of these forums or other game related chats will never know why they are being targeted? I use the term being bullied because that is exactly what it is.

I keep reading about letting players do their precious shields hops undisturbed as if it is for The Greater Good[/], but guess what? It is player versus player and the way to win is to score more points than everyone else and the best way to do that is to take points of those who are your direct rivals. I would love to see an event that has a prize so great that none could resist it, an event that has no shards and no brackets just one big pool of players and it is winner takes all with no alliance prizes. Let's see how so called ettiquette works out then!

Actually, if alliances and shield hopping have proven anything it is that the best way to score well in PvP is to join a serious PvP alliance and coordinate shield hops. I can assure you the people at the top are not playing the way Linkster is advocating. I am not against the idea of a true PvP event but our current PvP system is not that: it is linked intimately into the Alliance system, for better or worse.

I think Raffoon's explanation describes our current PvP situation best:

Raffoon wrote:

As Mgallop mentioned, one of the biggest benefits to following etiquette is that it results in higher points for everyone in the slice.

When you hit an unshielded person, the overall amount of points in the system stays relatively stable: You gain some and they lose a slightly different amount.

When you hit a shielded person, the overall points in the system increases: You gain some and they lose nothing.

If more people played like Linkster does, then everyone in the slice would get less progression rewards overall. This is why it's good that "snipers" like him who do not follow this etiquette are recognized and targeted. It changes the incentive structure so that engaging in selfish behaviors like that are less desirable. Yes, he got another 80 points immediately by hitting someone 4 times. In the future, when others are choosing targets, he'll be the first one they go for.

In short, by not being a jerk, we all get more prizes. Wait a little while to hit people so they can finish their hops

A question I have posed repeatedly in the past to players who take up Linkster's point of view is: What are alliances for? If PvP is supposed to be this "every player for themself" idea that they espouse, why have the devs decided to tie alliance awards to these events? Hopefully this time someone from that school of thought will take the time to give a thoughtful reply.

mgallop

Linkster79 wrote:

mgallop wrote:

Linkster79 wrote:

mgallop wrote:

You can see all players in your shard (assuming they aren't shielded), even if they aren't in your bracket.

The appropriate etiquette for hitting someone is to wait a while. If its been 15+ minutes, they aren't on a hop, and you can hit away. This is especially true if someone has way more points than you and is worth 60+, if they're worth around 40, hitting isn't that bad unless they're hopping, because the retal node you leave will be worth 40ish.

As a person always wanting to poke a hornets nest, that is a portion of the forums ettiquette and not everyone here agrees with it. Personally I say if the points are worth and you can beat them easily, double, triple heck ride their **** all the down to less than 38 points. If you can do it quick enough only 1 retaliation node will appear on their screen. Free points!

Linkster, as a piece of friends advice, be careful who you do that to. If people get doubled/tripled/quadrupled they remember, they share the name of people who do it, they retaliate in other events while climbing. I've seen screenshots of people tapping a known sniper 15+ times, I've seen a gift card bounty on a sniper. Following etiquette is positive sum and let's everyne in the shard get higher scores, but that's not the only reason to be nice.

This is what I take great umbridge with. What purpose does organised bullying like that serve? To enforce some unwritten rule that some have no knowledge of and unless the player being bullied is a member of these forums or other game related chats will never know why they are being targeted? I use the term being bullied because that is exactly what it is.

I keep reading about letting players do their precious shields hops undisturbed as if it is for The Greater Good[/], but guess what? It is player versus player and the way to win is to score more points than everyone else and the best way to do that is to take points of those who are your direct rivals. I would love to see an event that has a prize so great that none could resist it, an event that has no shards and no brackets just one big pool of players and it is winner takes all with no alliance prizes. Let's see how so called ettiquette works out then!

You do you Linkster. People respond to incentives. Currently, the progression rewards are way better than the placement rewards, therefore, behavior that puts more points in a shard is good. I've been fighting someone for first in a PvP, and I've still shield-checked them, and they've shield checked me, and they ended up getting the 4* cover I wanted, and I would continue to do it.

Hitting people who are known snipers is not just bullying, its also protection people. If you are getting hit a bunch, you will lose your queues and be forced to shield up earlier. This is good for the people you would hit immediately for "free points". Cooperation is hard, but given the current reward setup in PvP, it is to the benefit of everyone to have higher scores in a shard, and people have developed institutions to help get higher scores and protect those higher scoring players from defection by people who just want "free points".

To DBC: if you see points that imply someone is over 900 (75 points, 60 if you're around 5 or 600),its nice to wait a bit to let them finish their hop. If they're around 500 to 700 points, they are usually floating and therefore hitting them is slightly annoying, but they won't really care. If they have a team that you think is weird for having that many points -- 2*s and a Loaner -- then you really really really should give them a few minutes before hitting. Especially if you look at their roster/alliances and they have well covered 4s. In that case, they are intentionally putting in a team that is easy to beat and planning to shield to help other people. If you snipe such a team, you discourage them from providing this public good, and people will get very upset with you. On the other hand, if you wait, you will have a very easy team to get 70+ points off of in 5 minutes.

Der_Lex

If pvp is a no holds barred fight where only scoring counts, then why are some people complaining about those using teamwork and group coordination to win? Anything goes, right?

Unknown

Der_Lex wrote:

If pvp is a no holds barred fight where only scoring counts, then why are some people complaining about those using teamwork and group coordination to win? Anything goes, right?

Unknown

mgallop wrote:

…

To DBC: if you see points that imply someone is over 900 (75 points, 60 if you're around 5 or 600),its nice to wait a bit to let them finish their hop. If they're around 500 to 700 points, they are usually floating and therefore hitting them is slightly annoying, but they won't really care. If they have a team that you think is weird for having that many points -- 2*s and a Loaner -- then you really really really should give them a few minutes before hitting. Especially if you look at their roster/alliances and they have well covered 4s. In that case, they are intentionally putting in a team that is easy to beat and planning to shield to help other people. If you snipe such a team, you discourage them from providing this public good, and people will get very upset with you. On the other hand, if you wait, you will have a very easy team to get 70+ points off of in 5 minutes.

This might be the single most useful and informative thing I have ever read in this forum, and that's saying something.

Considering this type of team would be a dream for me at my current level of play, knowing that waiting a bit benefits them and me, is well, almost immeasurable in its value, especially in light of what currently remains of my PvP game post $$.

So you're saying I can actually hit them eventually, just not immediately? I think I've somehow missed that piece all along, and it really lessens much of my anxiety and frustration with the current PvP "status quo…"

To the point where I would consider racing to the 166 "finish line" and getting in on some of that sweet, sweet, Line-y goodness…

Thank you so much for offering the perspective, and cheers!

DBC

Unknown

aesthetocyst wrote:

Linkster79 wrote:

This is what I take great umbridge with.

Personally, that is what I take great umbrage with. Heh. Unless you really did mean an "umbridge" ... a property of being by or around a bridge. I like that neologism. Could prove prove very useful on the interweb's forums!
______________

Calling the most efficient way to play PVP "etiquette" is a silly passive aggressive way of trying to deny the obvious. There are more efficient ways to play, and less efficient ways to play. Playing like a bull in a china shop is very inefficient. You're needlessly contributing to PvP being a more miserable experience for all. Do you enjoy misery? Take pleasure in making others miserable?

I set my highest score ever by barely playing at all. Achieving an excellent return on time invested. That's efficient.
______________

I think this may be the thread Malcrof was referring to. It's a rambling PVP advice thread:

Need help, i want to hit 1k progression this season!

... in this thread, Malcrof celebrated his firat 1K, with this post.

In this same thread, both the bull in a China shop and PvP etiquette have been declared right. If you have the big roster and are in an alliance or line chat, you play nice, the set up is there to maximize points. If not, you should get the points you can and be happy. I have spent the last two weeks shield hopping without coordinating and snagged 1k in all the pvps I want....collossus event I didn't bother. Coordination of shields keeps a decent # out of the pool and these threads to keep repeating.

Quebbster

Drummerboycroy wrote:

So you're saying I can actually hit them eventually, just not immediately?

Pretty much. Give them a chance to shield up if you can afford to wait. The main risk you run is someone hitting you while you wait and overwriting that node. That risk increases as you climb up the scoreboard, obviously.

JVReal

Linkster79 wrote:

This is what I take great umbridge with. What purpose does organised bullying like that serve? To enforce some unwritten rule that some have no knowledge of and unless the player being bullied is a member of these forums or other game related chats will never know why they are being targeted? I use the term being bullied because that is exactly what it is.

I keep reading about letting players do their precious shields hops undisturbed as if it is for The Greater Good[/], but guess what? It is player versus player and the way to win is to score more points than everyone else and the best way to do that is to take points of those who are your direct rivals. I would love to see an event that has a prize so great that none could resist it, an event that has no shards and no brackets just one big pool of players and it is winner takes all with no alliance prizes. Let's see how so called ettiquette works out then!

So, when you are in a race, you are ok with tripping the guy ahead of you to gain time and distance? That is exactly what you are implying, not just performing better, scoring more, but to target those ahead of you and reduce their points to increase yours. There is no sportsmanship in that.

It's bullying when a sniper is targeted (theoretically you), but not bullying when your competitor for 1st place is targeted by you? Interesting.

PeterGibbons316

JVReal wrote:

Linkster79 wrote:

This is what I take great umbridge with. What purpose does organised bullying like that serve? To enforce some unwritten rule that some have no knowledge of and unless the player being bullied is a member of these forums or other game related chats will never know why they are being targeted? I use the term being bullied because that is exactly what it is.

I keep reading about letting players do their precious shields hops undisturbed as if it is for The Greater Good[/], but guess what? It is player versus player and the way to win is to score more points than everyone else and the best way to do that is to take points of those who are your direct rivals. I would love to see an event that has a prize so great that none could resist it, an event that has no shards and no brackets just one big pool of players and it is winner takes all with no alliance prizes. Let's see how so called ettiquette works out then!

So, when you are in a race, you are ok with tripping the guy ahead of you to gain time and distance? That is exactly what you are implying, not just performing better, scoring more, but to target those ahead of you and reduce their points to increase yours. There is no sportsmanship in that.

It's bullying when a sniper is targeted (theoretically you), but not bullying when your competitor for 1st place is targeted by you? Interesting.

That's absurd. Is it bad sportsmanship when a football team plays defense? This is what you are saying. If you are trying to finish in the top spot then you should absolutely be searching for people that are above you to go unshielded and then hit them immediately.

The problem with "bullying" is that most times the target being bullied has no idea how or why they are being targeted, or what they did to deserve it. So it's mostly vengeance, likely doesn't alter behavior, and doesn't really help the community.

Der_Lex

PeterGibbons316 wrote:

JVReal wrote:

Linkster79 wrote:

This is what I take great umbridge with. What purpose does organised bullying like that serve? To enforce some unwritten rule that some have no knowledge of and unless the player being bullied is a member of these forums or other game related chats will never know why they are being targeted? I use the term being bullied because that is exactly what it is.

I keep reading about letting players do their precious shields hops undisturbed as if it is for The Greater Good[/], but guess what? It is player versus player and the way to win is to score more points than everyone else and the best way to do that is to take points of those who are your direct rivals. I would love to see an event that has a prize so great that none could resist it, an event that has no shards and no brackets just one big pool of players and it is winner takes all with no alliance prizes. Let's see how so called ettiquette works out then!

So, when you are in a race, you are ok with tripping the guy ahead of you to gain time and distance? That is exactly what you are implying, not just performing better, scoring more, but to target those ahead of you and reduce their points to increase yours. There is no sportsmanship in that.

It's bullying when a sniper is targeted (theoretically you), but not bullying when your competitor for 1st place is targeted by you? Interesting.

That's absurd. Is it bad sportsmanship when a football team plays defense? This is what you are saying. If you are trying to finish in the top spot then you should absolutely be searching for people that are above you to go unshielded and then hit them immediately.

The problem with "bullying" is that most times the target being bullied has no idea how or why they are being targeted, or what they did to deserve it. So it's mostly vengeance, likely doesn't alter behavior, and doesn't really help the community.

Except that the 'bullying' is exactly the kind of defensive play you're referring to, but now enacted by a whole alliance or other group of players. Again, if anything goes, teamwork and cooperation is perfectly valid too.