Is out of game collusion ruining PVP?

revskip

No

Spudgutter said:

JHawkInc said:

It's a bit of a loaded question.

PVP is horrible, but you're talking about a symptom, not the disease itself.

If PVP were built so that out-of-game coordination were not only not possible but not necessary, it wouldn't matter what people do out of game. But that would require a massive overhaul, not just a simple switch.

There isnt much that i can add to the loaded question, because this hits the nail on the head.  

As for the rest of the thread...

No offense to anyone, it may just be my perception, but does everyone that play high level pvp honestly think the game would be dead without them? It is mentioned several times as if it were fact.   

I have no numbers to back it up, but everytime pvp threads pop up, there are plenty of people that just play to 575 and shield. There are a ton of people that just do pve.  There are plenty, i assume, like myself that do max progression in pve and still do quite a bit of pvp

It would be dead as it currently exists.  The top 5 and top 10 of nearly every single event I've played are populated by players who use outside coordination and check rooms.  Those are the scores which provide massive points when they are unshielded.  Without those points the rest of the people in the top 25-50 (most of whom also coordinate in check rooms) would have a much harder time hitting progression.  Which in turn would mean that those people who play to 575 would have fewer points available and instead of the bloodbath for points being at the 800-900 level it would be at 500 or so.  That would also mean far less use of shields which I assume D3 would definitely not love since it would eat into their bottom Line (pardon the pun).

FokaiHI

No

i have regularly hit 900/ event and 10000/ season for the last several seasons without a 3rd party chat. My own alliance hits me and they hardly do PvP. The strength of your roster determines a lot of where you finish. With a solid 4* roster and good timing, 900 is easy. I recently champed my first 5* and found that my roster is not that strong in that tier. I win most of my matches, but now my timing is different. I have been able to hit 900, but when I float I fall to 400 or so points whereas it would be 600 in 4* land. 

fight4thedream

Maybe

The problem with your question is that people are operating with different interpretations of what "PvP" is or should be and since the OP failed to define their terms people are simply going to argue from their game experience rather than from a defined term.

...with that said defining "PvP" will be a difficult task as the actual game mode itself has evolved over the years. From my understanding, the first iteration of PvP was just that. No alliances, slices or shields. It was basically "king of the mountain" where luck and timing ruled the day. If PvP had remained that way I doubt people would be debating whether multiple attacks is a form of "cyber bullying". 

But alas! Such a game mode was deemed not so much fun as such contests were all about who was on at the end of the tournament to fight the good fight and if you happen to be sleeping or otherwise preoccupied tough luck.

So shields were introduced, originally to allow players to save their "best" score so they had a chance at ranked awards even if they couldn't play at the end. Then along came alliances and since there was no actual alliance game mode it basically got grafted onto the existent PvP structure, forever changing the competitive paradigm of PVP. 

Top players quickly banded together to make top alliances (and this was back in the day where alliance slots had to be paid for) and now it was no longer "every player for themselves" but "for the glory of the alliance". 

That is, if you played PVP competitively. If not, you could continue to play it as you did before oblivious to the ever evolving top tier meta. People figured out how to utilize shields to generate points and then LINE was adopted as a more efficient means of communication for coordinating shield hops.

And as is the case with the rise of most civilizations, a code of rules had to be adopted in order for the community to function, grow stronger and thrive. And again, this is happening unbeknownst to most of player community..

As scores continued to rise to the heavens, time slices were implemented much to the joy of those not in a favorable time zone but it fractured MPQ land into 5 kingdoms. I unfortunately don't know how each slice was divided by the great alliances of the time but suffice to say such a system discouraged direct competition between the elites and instead promoted the baking wars.

And once again, the vast majority of the player base continued on without a clue to what was going except that they did notice people scoring 4 or 5 times higher than max progression which can be a big turn off to try to play PvP competitively. 

Which is why the devs implemented restrictions on shields, nerfed cupcake baking and what not to try and keep scores presentable to more casual players. Or so we think.  So I guess if you want to consider what the developers consider to be "ruining" the PvP experience, excessive point generation seems to be our main suspect.

The interesting thing to note about those that have said "no" to your question is that they emphasize the social aspect of using LINE and for them, PvP is more of a "player vs developer" kind of thing. Their main concern is working together to achieve the most points possible as a group. And considering the current structure of PvP, you can't really blame them. To a great extent they have been successful at adapting to whatever changes the devs make to PVP and to some degree the player base theoretically benefits from their efforts (at least I know I do). 

For those that have a more "traditional" understanding of PvP such collaboration is seen less favorably and understandably so. 

The presumably easy solution would just be to change the name of the game mode from "PvP" to "AvA" (alliance vs alliance) or "PvD" (players vs the developers). However, it's not that simple. AvA is not nearly as inviting as PvP for a new player. A new player would join a casual alliance only to see that alliance gets no where and feel the game mode is too difficult. PvD wouldn't fly either because it wouldn't really be clear what the objective would be.

So we are stuck with a mutated PvP that no longer is truly PvP but can't be called anything else because it would be confusing and affect people's perception of their ability to successfully play such events. As for the excessive point generation problem, I think CLs are supposed to help alleviate that concern for newer players. Smooth move, yes, but probably still in need of some tweaking.

With all that said, I for one, would welcome a drastic overhaul of PvP as long as a true alliance game mode was also made to continue to strengthen the social bonds of the player base and increase overall enjoyment. I particularly enjoy the ranked duel system of Yugi-Oh duel links where your progress is solely based on your ability to defeat more and more difficult opponents. Win a certain amount of matches, you advanced to the next tier. Lose a certain amount of matches and you fall. No shields or incoming attacks or need for weekly character buffs. Such a system does not favor speed, so you have a bit more variety in the top tier. Alas, I don't think such a system could be implemented for MPQ.

Anyway, I have rambled on too much.

tl;dr: The OP question fails to define their terms so people will be coming at the topic from different directions.(not necessarily a bad thing) PvP has been an ever evolving structure, that some argue, would greatly benefit from a drastic overhaul while others want to be able to maintain their social ties and the benefits of collaboration built around the current structure. Fight just wants to have fun in whatever form it comes. Peace!

Spudgutter

Maybe

revskip said:

Spudgutter said:

JHawkInc said:

It's a bit of a loaded question.

PVP is horrible, but you're talking about a symptom, not the disease itself.

If PVP were built so that out-of-game coordination were not only not possible but not necessary, it wouldn't matter what people do out of game. But that would require a massive overhaul, not just a simple switch.

There isnt much that i can add to the loaded question, because this hits the nail on the head.  

As for the rest of the thread...

No offense to anyone, it may just be my perception, but does everyone that play high level pvp honestly think the game would be dead without them? It is mentioned several times as if it were fact.   

I have no numbers to back it up, but everytime pvp threads pop up, there are plenty of people that just play to 575 and shield. There are a ton of people that just do pve.  There are plenty, i assume, like myself that do max progression in pve and still do quite a bit of pvp

It would be dead as it currently exists.  The top 5 and top 10 of nearly every single event I've played are populated by players who use outside coordination and check rooms.  Those are the scores which provide massive points when they are unshielded.  Without those points the rest of the people in the top 25-50 (most of whom also coordinate in check rooms) would have a much harder time hitting progression.  Which in turn would mean that those people who play to 575 would have fewer points available and instead of the bloodbath for points being at the 800-900 level it would be at 500 or so.  That would also mean far less use of shields which I assume D3 would definitely not love since it would eat into their bottom Line (pardon the pun).

Please don't take this the wrong way, but i find it weird that you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt in your mind, that the game would be dead.  I played this game for close to 900 days while barely ever touching pvp.  Now that i have a good roster, i have hit 10k in every season for the past 7 or 8 seasons while still hitting top 50-100 in pve.  I dont think i am unique, so i have to guess there are plenty of people that still just play pve, so i have to strongly disagree that it would be dead.

Your first line is exactly what i am talking about "as it currently exists."  Just to play devils advocate, isn't it possible that had outside communication not been adopted, and therefore pvp gone down a less profitable path, you don't think they would have made some sort of change to it?

broll

Yes

Jarvind said:

Also: what in the what is a "hoarding room?" Do you guys just swap pictures of your big token numbers?

idk but that sounds hot...

MissChinch

No

Beer40 said:

Daiches said:

Lol.. "out of game collusion" as you so negatively call it, is the main reason 1200 progression scores are even available to be reached. If you are looking to play friendly with groups of 200 people (some find that number daunting, some don't want to play friendly at all, etc.. each plays as he wants), you are welcome to join check rooms. You will have an easier time and you may make some friends. 
Being able to play together with friends is what has kept this game going for so long after all.

Your choice to interpret it negatively I suppose. I actually think you might be right about the part I put in bold. The rest of what I'm going to type is directed towards everyone, not you specifically.

That's a part of the reason I asked the question to begin with. We've seen various accusations and admittance of people not being able to get past 800-900 because they're crushed once they get to/near that point total. 

So my thought on the "natural order of things" is that very, very few people were probably intended to get to 1,200. With outside collusion/collaboration more people are able to reach that goal. However, more people that should be able to get to 800-900 aren't able to because they aren't a part of this outside community. However, maybe they are replaced in some instances by people that shouldn't be able to get to 800-900 because those people are part of the community? Who knows about that, really. It's possible. And that could be why PVP doesn't get changed, because the bottom numbers look right.

So my thought is that if you remove the outside collusion/collaboration less people will get to 1,200 but many more will get to 800-900 because there won't be groups larger than actual alliance size that can stop them. So in a way, badsaj is also correct in their interpretation of the question. Its all a part of the question.

I have a handful of 4*s, don't cooperate with anyone in PvP, and don't play PvP for lengthy periods of time.  In slice 1 I've hit 900+ now all season, I only shield if I want to keep the points for the end of the event.

No line groups are necessary, neither is a crazy roster...  Personally I play super casual PvP for the first day or so, hit someone wait for the health to recharge if necessary, hit again...  one battle and then do something else.  

With 8-10 hours left I go from the score I've climbed to in the past day (between 300-500) to 900.  For this I play quickly back to back and skip to find teams worth 40+ points that I can defeat.  I keep an eye on my health packs, I'm fine to use them in this climb, but I don't want to run out, I'll pick teams accordingly.

Getting the progression cover with a roster that's got a handful of 4* champs is far more quickly done in PvP than PvE.  No alliances are necessary, no LINE or check rooms...  For my purposes I hope more people do the LINE coordination trading points thing, it inflates their scores past where they would normally get, so when I am making my climb I'll see fights with higher point values than their roster would normally have, hit them and climb to 900.

I completely understand that 900 can be hard to get, but I don't follow how that could be attributed to coordination and check rooms in LINE.  I can absolutely see how having a line check room could potentially help a weak roster get to 900, but I don't see how it could hinder a roster not in the check room... 

The notion that either out of game coordination or a very strong roster is necessary to hit 900 is just not correct with the current state of the game.  Personally I saw an instant improvement in points moving to the first slice, instead of picking one that ended late in the evening (EST). 

FWIW: 575 was doable with 3*s and no champ 4*s, 900 has been doable with a few 4* champs... understanding what teams your team composition can take, what teams they can dominate without taking much damage, and what teams look weak but will destroy you is EXTREMELY useful, and quite necessary, it opens up some 50+ point fights and allows you to skip the 30 point traps.

Stax the Foyer

Wait, is the current "Everyone Gets To Pass Around Other People's High-End Accounts and Apparently That's OK Now" policy included in under the umbrella of out of game collusion?

Starfury

Maybe

The rockett said:

As @Daiches said, without LINE and the friendships that a lot of us have developed from it manly because of PVP, this game would be dead. I would think over 50% of the people if not more would not be playing. Also, I don't like the idea of hiding names. That means you could be hitting teamates that you work with in your alliance to get placement for the alliance.  There are a few things I think that are broken with PVP (MMR, gap of rewards from 900-1200, etc) but this is not one of them. 

It's doubtful even 10% of players use Line.

As to the question, it's a **** system that's easily exploitable. Line's just a tool that makes it easier to exploit.

Things like bracket sniping don't exist because of it but are made easier.

ZeroKarma

No

Spudgutter said:

Please don't take this the wrong way, but i find it weird that you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt in your mind, that the game would be dead.  I played this game for close to 900 days while barely ever touching pvp.  Now that i have a good roster, i have hit 10k in every season for the past 7 or 8 seasons while still hitting top 50-100 in pve.  I dont think i am unique, so i have to guess there are plenty of people that still just play pve, so i have to strongly disagree that it would be dead.

Your first line is exactly what i am talking about "as it currently exists."  Just to play devils advocate, isn't it possible that had outside communication not been adopted, and therefore pvp gone down a less profitable path, you don't think they would have made some sort of change to it?

Spudgutter, my assumption of the game dying is that the revenue sources for this game would be cut significantly. During that 900 days without touching PvP were you a major buyer of IAP? Are most that go to 575 and quit major spenders on HP for shields and health packs? No one really knows how much money going into the game comes from large buy clubs vs. casual purchasers, but I would guess that a loss of either would cut the life of the game short due to the decline in revenues. 

I took a quick poll of my slice (from a LINE chat room) and of the 28 people who have voted so far, 17 would quit and 7 would spend less. (The other 4 are FTP)  At least some of those people under the quit category are spending hundreds of dollars every month on this game, and they are still here because of the community. 

The evolution of the LINE community may not have particularly helped the concept of PVP, but it is a significant factor in keeping the lights on. 

Jarvind

Yes

Honestly, unless you've actually seen the developer's books or been explicitly told by one of them what their main driver of revenue is, any speculation as to how any changes would impact the game financially are pointless.

My suspicion is that the bulk of revenue actually comes from tons of smaller purchases. It's been repeated a billion times over but the forum and LINE communities make up a tiny fraction of the total number of people playing. And it makes more fiscal sense to specifically aim for lots of people making small purchases than a few people dropping truckloads, because in the latter scenario a sudden exodus (for whatever reason) leaves you incredibly vulnerable.

All of that said, I might be wrong. I've never seen the books, so this is based on nothing more than a hunch.

MissChinch

No

Jarvind said:

Honestly, unless you've actually seen the developer's books or been explicitly told by one of them what their main driver of revenue is, any speculation as to how any changes would impact the game financially are pointless.

My suspicion is that the bulk of revenue actually comes from tons of smaller purchases. It's been repeated a billion times over but the forum and LINE communities make up a tiny fraction of the total number of people playing. And it makes more fiscal sense to specifically aim for lots of people making small purchases than a few people dropping truckloads, because in the latter scenario a sudden exodus (for whatever reason) leaves you incredibly vulnerable.

All of that said, I might be wrong. I've never seen the books, so this is based on nothing more than a hunch.

I share that speculation, I'd bet on the small purchases by droves of people greatly outdistancing the massive amount spent by relatively few whales.

Rhycar

No

MissChinch said:

Beer40 said:

Daiches said:

Lol.. "out of game collusion" as you so negatively call it, is the main reason 1200 progression scores are even available to be reached. If you are looking to play friendly with groups of 200 people (some find that number daunting, some don't want to play friendly at all, etc.. each plays as he wants), you are welcome to join check rooms. You will have an easier time and you may make some friends. 
Being able to play together with friends is what has kept this game going for so long after all.

Your choice to interpret it negatively I suppose. I actually think you might be right about the part I put in bold. The rest of what I'm going to type is directed towards everyone, not you specifically.

That's a part of the reason I asked the question to begin with. We've seen various accusations and admittance of people not being able to get past 800-900 because they're crushed once they get to/near that point total. 

So my thought on the "natural order of things" is that very, very few people were probably intended to get to 1,200. With outside collusion/collaboration more people are able to reach that goal. However, more people that should be able to get to 800-900 aren't able to because they aren't a part of this outside community. However, maybe they are replaced in some instances by people that shouldn't be able to get to 800-900 because those people are part of the community? Who knows about that, really. It's possible. And that could be why PVP doesn't get changed, because the bottom numbers look right.

So my thought is that if you remove the outside collusion/collaboration less people will get to 1,200 but many more will get to 800-900 because there won't be groups larger than actual alliance size that can stop them. So in a way, badsaj is also correct in their interpretation of the question. Its all a part of the question.

I have a handful of 4*s, don't cooperate with anyone in PvP, and don't play PvP for lengthy periods of time.  In slice 1 I've hit 900+ now all season, I only shield if I want to keep the points for the end of the event.

No line groups are necessary, neither is a crazy roster...  Personally I play super casual PvP for the first day or so, hit someone wait for the health to recharge if necessary, hit again...  one battle and then do something else.  

With 8-10 hours left I go from the score I've climbed to in the past day (between 300-500) to 900.  For this I play quickly back to back and skip to find teams worth 40+ points that I can defeat.  I keep an eye on my health packs, I'm fine to use them in this climb, but I don't want to run out, I'll pick teams accordingly.

Getting the progression cover with a roster that's got a handful of 4* champs is far more quickly done in PvP than PvE.  No alliances are necessary, no LINE or check rooms...  For my purposes I hope more people do the LINE coordination trading points thing, it inflates their scores past where they would normally get, so when I am making my climb I'll see fights with higher point values than their roster would normally have, hit them and climb to 900.

I completely understand that 900 can be hard to get, but I don't follow how that could be attributed to coordination and check rooms in LINE.  I can absolutely see how having a line check room could potentially help a weak roster get to 900, but I don't see how it could hinder a roster not in the check room... 

The notion that either out of game coordination or a very strong roster is necessary to hit 900 is just not correct with the current state of the game.  Personally I saw an instant improvement in points moving to the first slice, instead of picking one that ended late in the evening (EST). 

FWIW: 575 was doable with 3*s and no champ 4*s, 900 has been doable with a few 4* champs... understanding what teams your team composition can take, what teams they can dominate without taking much damage, and what teams look weak but will destroy you is EXTREMELY useful, and quite necessary, it opens up some 50+ point fights and allows you to skip the 30 point traps.

I don't mean any offense by this, I really don't. But I fail to see how you could be so clueless as to think you could do this without coordination. You might not be coordinating, but the high scores you queue up are. Please understand, without coordination on their part, you aren't hitting a single opponent worth more than 39 points after you get past 800. You'd be slaughtered at 600 or lower. The reason you can make it to 900 is because lot of us put in the effort to drive scores, making your queues all worth way more than they would be otherwise.

Vhailorx

beer40, you joined this forum on April 6, and it therefore seems likely that you haven't seen the earlier versions of this debate.  But I assure you that there have been MANY cycles of this exact same discussion on these forums, most notably in October 2016 when demi killed cupcakes/baking. 

at that time there were many people making exactly the same arguments you have presented here about out-of-game coordination ruining PVP.  Apparently concerned by those complaints, demi killed baking.  The net result was noticeably lower progression scores in PVP (so much so that demi had to nudge down the progression rewards in PVP because the vast majority of players could not get close to the 4* cover at 1k), and lower overall participation in PVP.  And it didn't even stop out of game coordination; it just restricted the utility of out-of-game coordination to those with 5* or very high-end 4* rosters. 

Bottom line: even if we accept for the sake of argument that coordination is a problem, it's a symptom of structural issues with PVP, not the disease.  attacking out of game coordination won't make a difference without much bigger changes to PVP.  And it's not as if Line is an exclusive or hard to enter club.  If you have a roster good enough to even think about 900 or 1.2k in PVP (i.e. 20+ 4* champs or better) and know how to find the forums, then you already have all tools needed to get on Line and join the system. 

Further argument on this issue is pointless.  We have all said this all before. 

animaniactoo

Maybe

From a PD standpoint, I guarantee you that is the reason for the VIP - small, regular amount, accessible by many more people.

5000u X $10/mth. Reliable 50K

100u x $500/mth. Unreliable 50k, fewer users need to have money woes or be done with the game this month to have a major effect.

However, that is not to say that the unreliable 50K is not worth trying to preserve. Losing it "on purpose" without a road to replacement is an issue. Even if it's only 10% of the overall player base, it's a significant enough source of income that it should not be given up easily.

BoyWonder1914

No

I don't really get the frustration from people that aren't in LINE groups, at the LINE groups. First of all, if you've EVER hit someone's grill (current game adaptation of cupcakes), and I mean EVER, which is most people commenting on this thread, then you've got some LINE group somewhere to thank for that. People don't grill easy teams for themselves, they do it to help other people along. Sure, it may be specifically meant for the people in said group, but everyone who's able to q it benefits PERIOD. More points in any particular slice means that there will be more points available to you as you climb, so again, I don't really get it. Top 5 in PVP, or hell, even full progression in PVP has long been a territory dominated by the 5* Tier. LINE groups allow people that aren't quite there yet to still climb on relatively beatable teams. 

As was pointed out before, once you score past a certain range of points, it becomes very difficult to find matches worth more than 20-30 points. And all the while you're sitting here unshielded going through low-point match after low-point match, all kinds of people are q'ing you up for large amounts of points and pummeling you. So if you don't have a nice, beatable high point target lined up when you drop that shield, you're losing all those points and then some. Say you are shielded and just looking for q's, you can also go through hundreds of Iso-8 just looking for a worthwhile match. With the lack of rewards between 900-1200, that's a LOT of shield hopping, and a LOT of 20-30 point matches to hit if you don't have a good one lined up. Whether your goal is 575, 900, or 1200, the fact of the matter is that you need a LOT of people with point totals way higher than yours if you don't want to climb on a bunch of low-point matches. Other people using outside coordination to get the points YOU need should be the last of your concerns. Do you absolutely need to be in one of these groups to hit said scores? Of course not. But your road to get there would be a lot more difficult if these groups didn't exist at all. 

animaniactoo

Maybe

Vhailorx said:

beer40, you joined this forum on April 6, and it therefore seems likely that you haven't seen the earlier versions of this debate.  But I assure you that there have been MANY cycles of this exact same discussion on these forums, most notably in October 2016 when demi killed cupcakes/baking. 

at that time there were many people making exactly the same arguments you have presented here about out-of-game coordination ruining PVP.  Apparently concerned by those complaints, demi killed baking.  (snip) 

bwahahahahaha. And here I thought having my "strongest" team to be the one which would be used when the AI is running my team was a benefit to me who might have used a weaker team to hit someone because my best team was all bruised up and stuff.

Spudgutter

Maybe

Vhailorx said:

The net result was noticeably lower progression scores in PVP (so much so that demi had to nudge down the progression rewards in PVP because the vast majority of players could not get close to the 4* cover at 1k), and lower overall participation in PVP.  

Further argument on this issue is pointless.  We have all said this all before. 

Don't these two statements cancel each other out?  The fact that they made an adjustment based on new conditions implies that if the meta were to be adjusted, they would adjust the game with it, right?

FokaiHI

No

I just reached 836 in my slice for High Stakes. I shielded because the targets are not worth much points or are rosters that I know I don't want to play. Rosters that cause me to use health packs. In the last 10 min I have been hit about 6 times. All by 6 different players from different alliances. By the time I play again, I will have been triple tapped by a bunch of people. I'm shielded. Have at it.

Stax the Foyer

Spudgutter said:

Vhailorx said:

The net result was noticeably lower progression scores in PVP (so much so that demi had to nudge down the progression rewards in PVP because the vast majority of players could not get close to the 4* cover at 1k), and lower overall participation in PVP.  

Further argument on this issue is pointless.  We have all said this all before. 

Don't these two statements cancel each other out?  The fact that they made an adjustment based on new conditions implies that if the meta were to be adjusted, they would adjust the game with it, right?

All adjustments are not created equal.  A change like this would only be unconcerning if their follow-up adjustment brought things back to the same state that things were in prior to the change.  (It did not)

Anecdotally (which is all the information that we have), folks who used to be able to hit maximum progression couldn't anymore.  The change to progression thresholds made it less painful, but it didn't put it back where it was.

For those of us who view PvP as really being Players v. Developers(-and-also-some-other-Players), that's not appealing.

Luckily, it's almost impossible to eliminate the benefits of out-of-game communication.  As long as you can only queue unshielded targets, out of game communication will always have value.

Bowgentle

Hit up any of us on LINE.
Many of us have our tags in our sigs.
SSOLU isn't impenetrable.
Enjoy the comeraderery.
Or join one of the sniper rooms.
I, and A TON of high level pvp players would have quit years ago without LINE.