Hit 13 times in one hour by one person

nonnel

Thank you for this thread. I usually avoid the forums cause there's so much internet rage here. But this was an entertaining read

jobob

STOPTHIS wrote:

Jarvind wrote:

I have no idea what's going on in this thread but I saw Homestar Runner and that makes me happy.

...look, can I just call you tinykittys?

From a quick browsing I believe this thread is about Mean Girls-esque cliques that dominate high level PvP.

I wouldn't call Judy and other snipers a "Mean Girls-esque clique." For one, I don't think there's the level of coordination required to call it a clique. Also, while they may be acting totally in their own self-interest, I wouldn't call Judy "mean" in this instance.

It's probably more accurate to compare them to wolves... With the enforcers trying to keep them at bay so they don't prey too much on their flock. To be fair though, shepherds can't add a wolf to the flock, which is a major motivation in enforcing. So I suppose the most accurate metaphor for this situation is that Spiderkev is Jesus.

Hope the summary helps.

SpiderKev

False - it's even easier now for Rhycar to do what he does. Before he would have to hit someone's A team for 75pts while they hit 2 CC teams for 150. Because these folks were not into team play and never had the cajones to put up a low team for their allies after hitting weak team after weak team there was never a chance to even it up.

Now he can hit someone for 2x (or 13x) for -150 while they hit someone for 75. The more Rhycars in a shard the less likely people will visit that shard. S2 has great end times but no one visits it because everyone knows it's a dry point shard with a low population base avec les requiens comme Shamsali circling the beaches.

It's kinda funny; looking at the alliance leaderboards it seems the ones who were exploiting the scoreboard are the ones who weren't actually putting in the weak teams.

Ding wrote:

Rhycar wrote:

Speaking as someone who has been on the receiving end and giving end of these hits, it's all part of the game. It adds to the challenge and fun of it all. I enforce for s4 now, and my goal is to get snipers and moochers to leave the shard next event or play friendly and contribute (and there are hundreds who play friendly and shield check). Like Jamie said, play however you find it fun. Just understand that your fun might not be seen the same way, and you might find your climb more challenging. Especially in the last few hours of an event.

I think you're fighting a losing battle on that one. It's far more fun to play without a Cattle Chat and with the removal of cupcakes the rewards have greatly diminished. I'm surprised that #check rooms still exist.

But I totally agree with play how you find fun. If getting hit is an issue for you, then PvP isn't for you

simonsez

jobob wrote:

It's probably more accurate to compare them to wolves... With the enforcers trying to keep them at bay so they don't prey too much on their flock.

Trying to figure out who I am in this analogy, since I generally end up getting hit by both the wolves and the shepherds. Maybe I'm a sheep turd getting smushed amid all the confusion...

Spudgutter

jobob wrote:

STOPTHIS wrote:

Jarvind wrote:

I have no idea what's going on in this thread but I saw Homestar Runner and that makes me happy.

...look, can I just call you tinykittys ?

From a quick browsing I believe this thread is about Mean Girls-esque cliques that dominate high level PvP.

I wouldn't call Judy and other snipers a "Mean Girls-esque clique." For one, I don't think there's the level of coordination required to call it a clique. Also, while they may be acting totally in their own self-interest, I wouldn't call Judy "mean" in this instance.

It's probably more accurate to compare them to wolves... With the enforcers trying to keep them at bay so they don't prey too much on their flock. To be fair though, shepherds can't add a wolf to the flock, which is a major motivation in enforcing. So I suppose the most accurate metaphor for this situation is that Spiderkev is Jesus.

Hope the summary helps.

The mean girls reference, I am assuming, is about the enforcers being a clique, and keeping out people that aren't considered "cool."

As far as spiderkev being Jesus, you either don't know what a metaphor is, who Jesus is, or either. And I'm not trying to be flippant or anything, so if it was meant as a joke that I didn't get, my bad. I just don't see eye to eye with you on this subject, so I thought I would get a little dig in where I can lol

aesthetocyst

Ding wrote:

I'm surprised that #check rooms still exist.

That's silly. Such chats predate the recent pastry mania. They're as old as shields. The cake meta was born in such chats. They continue on, performing the same functions they always have.

Stax the Foyer

Spudgutter wrote:

As far as spiderkev being Jesus, you either don't know what a metaphor is, who Jesus is, or either. And I'm not trying to be flippant or anything, so if it was meant as a joke that I didn't get, my bad.

(A) A metaphor comes in two separate packets, like epoxy, and then you mix them;

(2) Like a beaver emerging from his dam in spring, SpiderKev has returned to the forum after an absence of several months, so the comparison seems apt;

(D) Stop trying to make fetch happen.

jobob

Spudgutter wrote:

The mean girls reference, I am assuming, is about the enforcers being a clique, and keeping out people that aren't considered "cool."

No, that's not it. Mean girls don't play nice and try to include as many people as possible in the "cool" group. They don't usually stand up for people who have less than they do, either, do they? I'm pretty sure he was putting JJ in the "Mean Girls" group, which I get but I don't think it's fair. Regardless, it's a bad comparison, I think we can all agree.

As afar as spiderkev being Jesus, you either don't know what a metaphor is, who Jesus is, or either. And I'm not trying to be flippant or anything, so if it was meant as a joke that I didn't get, my bad. I just don't see eye to eye with you on this subject, so I thought I would get a little dig in where I can lol

Jesus is my personal Lord and Savior, a cool dude, and the Son of God to boot... So please don't speak ill of him. Now, I'm not saying Spiderkev is all those things, but he is definitely doing the Lord's work to cast the demons out of S4 so that the meek may inherit the earth. And Pontius Pylgrim is definitely trying to nail him to a cross... So, you know... the similarities continue.

As far as understanding metaphors go... A metaphor is a stone tablet written in a long-dead language... I can't understand it at all.

SnowcaTT

Wobby wrote:

With a roster like JJ's it is hard to imagine an outside communication source like Line ISN'T being used. And if it is, then JJ looks exactly like one of these people who are on Line, but take a perverse delight in trying to ruin people's day vs. giving a few moments for them to shield on a hop.

I could give you screen-shots of our in-game alliance chat or Line alliance chat: both are INCREDIBLY quiet compared to most chat rooms. Bunch of old casual vets, we take different slices, play different styles, and rarely even ask each other if we're #'d. Part of that is due to room rules - since we're all over the place we're all in different rooms - and none of us say anything because most rooms say specifically to NOT put any info from that room to any other room. In memory, I've never seen either a CC or KOS called out in thirty seasons in either of those spots.

Now...this is the internet...folks have been known to make false identities and claims! Shocking, I know! But usually that info leaks over time, if it was being done here I say - well done, thespian, for keeping your two identities completely separate!

But this entire thread brings up another point...it's nice that people CAN play their different styles. There is FFTD here saying "let's go, punk". There's Judy, saying "I'll play my way." There's many saying "Play with the unwritten rules", and almost as many saying "there shouldn't -be- unwritten rules".

WelcomeDeath

A couple things. First, many are pretty ardent about having names removed from the game. Understand, its because of coordination that points are built up. Any hits on a live target > 1k are a zero net sum, no points are added to the shard. If the hit bounces off a shield, all of those points are added to the pool, allowing people to climb. They already removed cc which drastically cut scoring. If they remove names, etc, scoring will take another big hit. For those that hit progression without coordinating, good for you. But understand that you are able to because of people coordinating and building up points. To my understanding, this type of teamwork is as old as shields are. Without it, scores would be even harder to get, regardless of roster (unless you have level 550 5*, maybe. I for one am not interested in making progression even harder to achieve.

Spudgutter

jobob wrote:

Spudgutter wrote:

The mean girls reference, I am assuming, is about the enforcers being a clique, and keeping out people that aren't considered "cool."

No, that's not it. Mean girls don't play nice and try to include as many people as possible in the "cool" group. They don't usually stand up for people who have less than they do, either, do they? I'm pretty sure he was putting JJ in the "Mean Girls" group, which I get but I don't think it's fair. Regardless, it's a bad comparison, I think we can all agree..

Maybe I am showing my age a little, but maybe "Heather's" is the more appropriate movie to reference. If you aren't playing the way those at the top want you to play, you get bullied into another slice. Like I said, we don't see eye to eye on this topic, and I maintain that everyone is allowed to play however they want. It just bugs me with what I perceive to be a slight cognitive dissonance. Everytime someone mentions they are just looking out for everybody, they turn right around and say they smash anyone that doesn't tow the company line. Classic bully tactic.

I said it elsewhere in this thread, there is a difference between being a jerk on accident, and being a jerk on purpose. I don't know Judy from Adam, or anybody else for that matter, so I won't speak to another person's motivation. But I can have the opinion that two wrongs don't make a right. If you want to play that way, fine, but from where I sit, it just looks like sanctimonious nonsense.

I guess it boils down to the fact that I don't play high level PVP, so I can only comment on what it looks like from the outside looking in.

Pylgrim

jobob wrote:

Pylgrim wrote:

If it wasn't obvious from my post "deal publicly" was meant in a social way, here in the forums, as opposed to personally, revengefully in a way that affected directly another person's game.

No, it wasn't obvious at all. What's obvious is that you have your mind made up, regardless of what the facts may or may not be. I don't see how a Line room that anyone could join- and that JJ is not in only because he chooses not to be- isn't public, and I certainly don't see how it isn't social.

You are making up the argument that I have anything against Line or OOG communication. I don't. I'm a Line user and I'm in a BC. The one thing I am speaking against is hitting a person 13 times. That's literally the opposite to social, i.e. anti-social.

so we know not to hit you in order to avoid an overblown and unfair retaliation.

You know what I think is overblown and unfair? Comparing hitting someone who has hit you repeatedly to "**** mobs," "protection rackets," and "mobsters."

Is the difference between "reporting a crime" and "rallying a **** mob".

You know who seems (to me any way) to be trying to rally a **** mob in this thread? Hint: it's not Spiderkev...

Dude, the guy literally told me to my face that if I didn't like it I should move away. If that's not how gangsters speak in your city, I don't know what do they say instead. I'm not trying to rally any mob. I don't want anybody going out of their way to hit Spiderkev either, and I'd be equally critical of anyone who did.

Also, in case you also missed Spiderkev's own admission, he was not an enforcer called upon by JJ's victims or anything of the sort. He had a personal beef with him/her and exacted a personal, overblown vendetta.

So wait... is hitting someone multiple times "a personal, overblown vendetta," or could you classify it as just part of

being a naturally competitive game

I mean, realistically, its naturally competitive when it suits your point, but we should all be friends when it doesn't.

As I wrote that, I was really hoping people would have enough common sense not to having me spelling it out, but in hindsight I should have known that it was low-hanging fruit for a cheap counterargument. When I speak of a "competitive game", I mean a pool of people on an equal field battling it out with eachother in randomised fights with the purpose of finding the best (at something). Going out of your way, skipping other contenders in order to find the same person over and over again is not competition, is harassment.

the tried and true way of the mobster that puts the onus of conflict resolution on the victims (past or potential) rather than on the perpetrators

Oh, kind of like how you are doing with JJ's victims? I'm looking over Line, and I see: "tapped by Judy a few times", "hit by judy", "-131 to xxxx and Judy", "Hit by Judge Judy again", "Judy and xxxx again", "Judy just bounced", "hit by xxxx x3 and Judy x 2", "doubled by Judge Judy", "duobletapped by Judge Judy", "-75 to Judge Judy"... and I'm just looking back over the last several days (btw, only one of those was from SpiderKev).

Going by JJ's description of their playstyle, those hits were not purposefully targeting a person or an alliance. I can see how that is inconvenient to some people and I wouldn't bat an eye if all the players affected retaliated at once, causing JJ to lose several hundreds of points in a minute. That's how the game works. But having a single person go out of their way to harass someone? Especially when he was not acting as some sort of "enforcer" but, by his own admission, exacting a personal revenge over having been hit a few times over the course of several days, I see no way of justifying that kind of behaviour. I cannot do anything to stop it, the game definitely allows it, but I believe that you are still a jerk if you do that and I'm going to call it as I see it. Unfortunately, standing up against anti-social behaviour is one thing that the cartoon, spandex-clad heroes featured in this game taught me when I was an impressionable little tyke.

Gotcha. "Get out of my way or get stomped"

By stomped you mean "hit in the game, per the rules." Probably better than your method of "Get out of my way or I will try to crucify you publicly in a method of communication outside of the game, even though I shun methods of communication outside of the game."


I just feel like you are all over the place on this issue, and are inconsistent in the way you apply your logic. It makes it difficult for me to see your perspective.

If you nitpick apart every single sentence, yeah it's hard to see the thread of my thoughts. Hopefully now you can see that if any, I'm being coherent in my approach. You might not like it and you can call me out on it if from your own perspective it seems that I'm wrong, but please don't be so disingenuous as to try to disarm my argument looking for logical fallacies where there are none.

The Bob The

Wanted to get this in before the thread is locked ...

Thorin radd

Knock Knock....
WHO'S THERE

Well
WELL WHO?


WELCOME TO S5

Ding

SpiderKev wrote:

False - it's even easier now for Rhycar to do what he does. Before he would have to hit someone's A team for 75pts while they hit 2 CC teams for 150. Because these folks were not into team play and never had the cajones to put up a low team for their allies after hitting weak team after weak team there was never a chance to even it up.

Now he can hit someone for 2x (or 13x) for -150 while they hit someone for 75. The more Rhycars in a shard the less likely people will visit that shard. S2 has great end times but no one visits it because everyone knows it's a dry point shard with a low population base avec les requiens comme Shamsali circling the beaches.

It's kinda funny; looking at the alliance leaderboards it seems the ones who were exploiting the scoreboard are the ones who weren't actually putting in the weak teams.

Ding wrote:

Rhycar wrote:

Speaking as someone who has been on the receiving end and giving end of these hits, it's all part of the game. It adds to the challenge and fun of it all. I enforce for s4 now, and my goal is to get snipers and moochers to leave the shard next event or play friendly and contribute (and there are hundreds who play friendly and shield check). Like Jamie said, play however you find it fun. Just understand that your fun might not be seen the same way, and you might find your climb more challenging. Especially in the last few hours of an event.

I think you're fighting a losing battle on that one. It's far more fun to play without a Cattle Chat and with the removal of cupcakes the rewards have greatly diminished. I'm surprised that #check rooms still exist.

But I totally agree with play how you find fun. If getting hit is an issue for you, then PvP isn't for you

I'm not having any trouble whatsoever being able to dish out hits at the rate Rhycar is able to. The people that he was enforcing against weren't likely to be hitting cupcakes like Rhycar's teammates are, I know I only catch 1 every few events. Now the difference is that the people that Rhycar is enforcing for have to be either unshielded for a longer period of time since they're forced to hit at least semi-legitimate teams, or have less battles on their hops.

S2 has the worst ending time for me. Regardless whether Shams is in Villains, Olympus, Clochards, I avoid 2 because of the times. I also usually avoid 5 for the same reason. 3 & 4 work out to be my favorite times, and usually your group adds to the excitement.

Also funny is that my alliance has increased 20 spots in the standings, without any effort on our part. We haven't changed our style nor amount of energy expended, so it's really the artificially high scoring alliances that suffered. Rhycar can do what he wants, but it won't stop or even demotivate people from going to S4. Truth is the only way to way that will ever happen is if you actually dry out your shard like S2 and to a lesser degree S5, or if shard 4 starts ending at an even later time.

And calling it having cajones to bake cupcakes...really?


SHAME

Ding

Welcome Death wrote:

A couple things. First, many are pretty ardent about having names removed from the game. Understand, its because of coordination that points are built up. Any hits on a live target > 1k are a zero net sum, no points are added to the shard. If the hit bounces off a shield, all of those points are added to the pool, allowing people to climb. They already removed cc which drastically cut scoring. If they remove names, etc, scoring will take another big hit. For those that hit progression without coordinating, good for you. But understand that you are able to because of people coordinating and building up points. To my understanding, this type of teamwork is as old as shields are. Without it, scores would be even harder to get, regardless of roster (unless you have level 550 5*, maybe. I for one am not interested in making progression even harder to achieve.

If they removed names scoring indeed would go down. I believe that D3 would lower the progressions to take into account the lower scoring.

WelcomeDeath

Ding wrote:

Welcome Death wrote:

A couple things. First, many are pretty ardent about having names removed from the game. Understand, its because of coordination that points are built up. Any hits on a live target > 1k are a zero net sum, no points are added to the shard. If the hit bounces off a shield, all of those points are added to the pool, allowing people to climb. They already removed cc which drastically cut scoring. If they remove names, etc, scoring will take another big hit. For those that hit progression without coordinating, good for you. But understand that you are able to because of people coordinating and building up points. To my understanding, this type of teamwork is as old as shields are. Without it, scores would be even harder to get, regardless of roster (unless you have level 550 5*, maybe. I for one am not interested in making progression even harder to achieve.

If they removed names scoring indeed would go down. I believe that D3 would lower the progressions to take into account the lower scoring.

Holy **** Ding and I agreed on something!

SpiderKev

Congrats on moving up from #2040 to #2020!

Ding wrote:

SpiderKev wrote:

False - it's even easier now for Rhycar to do what he does. Before he would have to hit someone's A team for 75pts while they hit 2 CC teams for 150. Because these folks were not into team play and never had the cajones to put up a low team for their allies after hitting weak team after weak team there was never a chance to even it up.

Now he can hit someone for 2x (or 13x) for -150 while they hit someone for 75. The more Rhycars in a shard the less likely people will visit that shard. S2 has great end times but no one visits it because everyone knows it's a dry point shard with a low population base avec les requiens comme Shamsali circling the beaches.

It's kinda funny; looking at the alliance leaderboards it seems the ones who were exploiting the scoreboard are the ones who weren't actually putting in the weak teams.

Ding wrote:

Rhycar wrote:

Speaking as someone who has been on the receiving end and giving end of these hits, it's all part of the game. It adds to the challenge and fun of it all. I enforce for s4 now, and my goal is to get snipers and moochers to leave the shard next event or play friendly and contribute (and there are hundreds who play friendly and shield check). Like Jamie said, play however you find it fun. Just understand that your fun might not be seen the same way, and you might find your climb more challenging. Especially in the last few hours of an event.

I think you're fighting a losing battle on that one. It's far more fun to play without a Cattle Chat and with the removal of cupcakes the rewards have greatly diminished. I'm surprised that #check rooms still exist.

But I totally agree with play how you find fun. If getting hit is an issue for you, then PvP isn't for you

I'm not having any trouble whatsoever being able to dish out hits at the rate Rhycar is able to. The people that he was enforcing against weren't likely to be hitting cupcakes like Rhycar's teammates are, I know I only catch 1 every few events. Now the difference is that the people that Rhycar is enforcing for have to be either unshielded for a longer period of time since they're forced to hit at least semi-legitimate teams, or have less battles on their hops.

S2 has the worst ending time for me. Regardless whether Shams is in Villains, Olympus, Clochards, I avoid 2 because of the times. I also usually avoid 5 for the same reason. 3 & 4 work out to be my favorite times, and usually your group adds to the excitement.

Also funny is that my alliance has increased 20 spots in the standings, without any effort on our part. We haven't changed our style nor amount of energy expended, so it's really the artificially high scoring alliances that suffered. Rhycar can do what he wants, but it won't stop or even demotivate people from going to S4. Truth is the only way to way that will ever happen is if you actually dry out your shard like S2 and to a lesser degree S5, or if shard 4 starts ending at an even later time.

And calling it having cajones to bake cupcakes...really?


SHAME

Alsmir

jobob wrote:

I guess my feeling is that it's a massively multiplayer online game, and you are playing the PVP part of it... And if you have 2+ champed 5* you are playing at a very high level. So I am baffled that so many people find it shocking that at the highest levels there is a strong social element to the game, there are people who coordinate and work together, there are inter- and intra-alliance politics, there is cooperation and there is "war". I guess I just came into the game expecting that, even when I was totally new to the game. But maybe that's because I'm used to playing online games.

Personally, I'm baffled that not only people call this game a MMO but also get really serious about PvP in it. In fact, I find it astounding, that versus mode is consider PvP, even though you actually play against AI.

Fightmastermpq

Spudgutter wrote:

jobob wrote:

Spudgutter wrote:

The mean girls reference, I am assuming, is about the enforcers being a clique, and keeping out people that aren't considered "cool."

No, that's not it. Mean girls don't play nice and try to include as many people as possible in the "cool" group. They don't usually stand up for people who have less than they do, either, do they? I'm pretty sure he was putting JJ in the "Mean Girls" group, which I get but I don't think it's fair. Regardless, it's a bad comparison, I think we can all agree..

Maybe I am showing my age a little, but maybe "Heather's" is the more appropriate movie to reference. If you aren't playing the way those at the top want you to play, you get bullied into another slice. Like I said, we don't see eye to eye on this topic, and I maintain that everyone is allowed to play however they want. It just bugs me with what I perceive to be a slight cognitive dissonance. Everytime someone mentions they are just looking out for everybody, they turn right around and say they smash anyone that doesn't tow the company line. Classic bully tactic.

I said it elsewhere in this thread, there is a difference between being a jerk on accident, and being a jerk on purpose. I don't know Judy from Adam, or anybody else for that matter, so I won't speak to another person's motivation. But I can have the opinion that two wrongs don't make a right. If you want to play that way, fine, but from where I sit, it just looks like sanctimonious nonsense.

I guess it boils down to the fact that I don't play high level PVP, so I can only comment on what it looks like from the outside looking in.

It's in everyone's best interest to play nice. But some people (like OP) don't play nice. So what do you do? Well, the first step is to try and talk some sense into them, and this is usually the first thing you see in LINE chats when someone gets hit by a new face: "anyone know if [sniper] is on LINE?", "what alliance is [sniper] in?", "anyone have a contact from [sniper's alliance]?" And people reach out. More often than not this actually solves the "problem", or to put it more accurately - it corrects the unwanted behavior. If contact can't be made, or the player is uncooperative (not unreasonable given the competitive nature of the game), other tactics are employed to try and correct behavior.

Is it reasonable to hit someone 13 times after they hit you once? Not really. But most people getting hit by the same person over and over take note, and they don't attack that person again. OP probably isn't afraid of Skev, and probably thinks he is a jerk....on purpose. But I promise you that Skev is far less likely to get doubled by OP from here on out.

The goal is to get people to not want to attack you . You can either be a nice guy and so others reciprocate, or you can be a total jerk that is completely unreasonable. Personally I do both. Being a nice guy doesn't always work, but most people prefer not to get hit 13 times while they are trying to hit progression, and if that is what it takes to get them to avoid hitting you then so be it.