Is out of game collusion ruining PVP?

Alsmir

Yes

Rhycar said:

Beer40 said:

Call my cynical, but I find it hard to believe that this game would shut down if it shut down people's ability to coordinate between alliances. Maybe a few would quit. Maybe even a few spenders. But I'm fairly sure that spenders have quit for other reasons and I'm fairly sure they've found new spenders to replace them.

This is where you're 100% wrong. This game withers and dies without the social aspect. Without it, it's another match-3 with a great license. Only in this case, it would be a match-3 from a tone-deaf developer that can't seem to understand its player base. This game flat out would not exist, at least not close to its current form, without a third-party social platform.

Do you have any other personal opinions that you would present as undeniable facts?

acescracked

Why do the uninformed forum goers constantly get upset about things that keep MPQ going for them? You guys like the game but then try and ruin it.

Alliances were the single best improvement to the game. Why? Social interaction and connections keep people playing. Such that they removed the HP cost to create 20 ppl alliances (yes, had to spend like 2500 hp to create an alliance).

From alliances competition was born. Which enhanced social interactions which keeps ppl playing longer and spending money to compete & win.

From this competition, line app usage was born to create more social interaction which drove more competition and as an aside spending.

BC's used to be "battle chats" where an alliance would coordinate hits on competing alliances. When PvP time slices got introduced BC's morphed into coordination rooms since points became more scarce.

What my point is that you "yes" voters have no idea that without Line & alliance scoring battles & PvP coordination, alot of people would have stopped supporting this game financially.

If you want to just play solo do so, but why hate on those that don't?

***Removed insult - Ducky

acescracked

Oh & btw, there line coordination for PVE, is that ok?

There is far better game strategy, character discussion & more fun in line app than on this forum, is that ok?

SpringSoldier

Maybe

I want the PVP system to the be changed so that outside the game communication is something players only do for fun or tips, like this forum, not something that needs to be done to make the rewards achievable. Some love chatting, some hate it, some (like me) like it only occasionally, some make friends easier than others, but this shouldn't affect anybody's ability to win at a mobile match-3 game.

There are plenty of issues with PVP- the MMR, low rewards, no intercepts, differences between time zones, SCL unrelated to the rooster etc, so I don't think the players are "ruining" anything, but I don't like PVP and I blame the devs for that.

Also, the developers should try to control game-related communication via forum or official chat-rooms to limit bullying practices and catch cheaters. Basically, I'm not opposed to in-game communication as long as it's official and it's something everyone who joins MPQ knows.

Nick441234

Yes

Everyone should fight everyone. Sod this "I know you so I wont hit you" nonsense. Just fight everyone. 

Alsmir

Yes

acescracked said:

Why do the uninformed forum goers constantly get upset about things that keep MPQ going for them? You guys like the game but then try and ruin it.

Alliances were the single best improvement to the game. Why? Social interaction and connections keep people playing. Such that they removed the HP cost to create 20 ppl alliances (yes, had to spend like 2500 hp to create an alliance).

From alliances competition was born. Which enhanced social interactions which keeps ppl playing longer and spending money to compete & win.

From this competition, line app usage was born to create more social interaction which drove more competition and as an aside spending.

BC's used to be "battle chats" where an alliance would coordinate hits on competing alliances. When PvP time slices got introduced BC's morphed into coordination rooms since points became more scarce.

What my point is that you "yes" voters have no idea that without Line & alliance scoring battles & PvP coordination, alot of people would have stopped supporting this game financially.

If you want to just play solo do so, but why hate on those that don't?

"Uninformed", "ruin", "hate".
Using your own words: you sure hate people who have differnt opinion than yours.

Secondly, you're not even trying to understand the other side. Nobody is trying to ruin anything, nobody is hating you personally (but you're on a good way to change that), it's all about that extra edge that LINE gives and whether it's fair or not, since it's an out of game app.

SpiderKev

I play both ways and can compete for top 10 placement in the toughest brackets. Sometimes without Line sometimes with. Without is great when I'm busy and just want to match power orbs and be done with the game but it gets really boring playing every event this way. I'll mix in a Line event now and then to keep it fresh. It really is more fun with Line and I'd play this way if I had to chose between the two.

As mentioned PVE collaborators are much worse - sharing brackets flips for easy placement and getting rewards that others play days for and swapping highscoring members and creating super alliances of individuals who pass real teams and move them out of the top 100 because they stick together should be fixed.

There are a number of realistic features which could be implemented to fix these PVE issues rather than these waste of bandwidth "what if" pipe dreams for PVP.

Spudgutter

Maybe

SpiderKev said:

I play both ways and can compete for top 10 placement in the toughest brackets. Sometimes without Line sometimes with. Without is great when I'm busy and just want to match power orbs and be done with the game but it gets really boring playing every event this way. I'll mix in a Line event now and then to keep it fresh. It really is more fun with Line and I'd play this way if I had to chose between the two.

As mentioned PVE collaborators are much worse - sharing brackets flips for easy placement and getting rewards that others play days for and swapping highscoring members and creating super alliances of individuals who pass real teams and move them out of the top 100 because they stick together should be fixed.

There are a number of realistic features which could be implemented to fix these PVE issues rather than these waste of bandwidth "what if" pipe dreams for PVP.

I can respect that opinion way more than some of the others, well put.  Personally, i don't get bored.  I would rather just play the game without having to check every person first to avoid friendly fire.  I find that part boring, i can't imagine switching between the game and the line app back and forth looking for particular names.

As an avid pve fan, i didnt even think about that aspect, but you are right, outside communication impacts that as well.  I will, however, argue against comparing bracket sniping to pvp coordination. Mainly, because the first can happen by accident. My 14 yr old is about 100 days in, he just joins pve's randomly when he has time on his summer break.  No way does he accidentally get 900 in pvp in cl6 with no champed 3*.

But i agree that pve coordination can be just as bad.  I have been in a couple of alliances that have imploded after a new release event because of mercs being added into alliances at the last minute, bumping out people that play every pve event, every week.  Just like with pvp, i dont know what the solution is, by i can identify that there is something "unfair" there.

What realistic measures do you think could be taken to fix pve?  How hard would it be on the pvp side to leave shielded people open for attack by everyone or remove names from the display(2 random suggestions from this thread that i have to imagine aren't difficult to implement)?

entrailbucket

Yes

nick_chicane said:

Everyone should fight everyone. Sod this "I know you so I wont hit you" nonsense. Just fight everyone. 

I agree with this 100%. Coordination is just a way for low/non-spenders to get the best rewards and feel like they're good at the game (and no, your $10 a month to buy shields so you can hop off cupcakes to 5000 points per event is not "spending"). If we could somehow remove coordination, we could make sure that the best rewards only go to the biggest rosters/best players, which is the way things should be.

MissChinch

No

Spudgutter said:

SpiderKev said:

I play both ways and can compete for top 10 placement in the toughest brackets. Sometimes without Line sometimes with. Without is great when I'm busy and just want to match power orbs and be done with the game but it gets really boring playing every event this way. I'll mix in a Line event now and then to keep it fresh. It really is more fun with Line and I'd play this way if I had to chose between the two.

As mentioned PVE collaborators are much worse - sharing brackets flips for easy placement and getting rewards that others play days for and swapping highscoring members and creating super alliances of individuals who pass real teams and move them out of the top 100 because they stick together should be fixed.

There are a number of realistic features which could be implemented to fix these PVE issues rather than these waste of bandwidth "what if" pipe dreams for PVP.

I can respect that opinion way more than some of the others, well put.  Personally, i don't get bored.  I would rather just play the game without having to check every person first to avoid friendly fire.  I find that part boring, i can't imagine switching between the game and the line app back and forth looking for particular names.

As an avid pve fan, i didnt even think about that aspect, but you are right, outside communication impacts that as well.  I will, however, argue against comparing bracket sniping to pvp coordination. Mainly, because the first can happen by accident. My 14 yr old is about 100 days in, he just joins pve's randomly when he has time on his summer break.  No way does he accidentally get 900 in pvp in cl6 with no champed 3*.

But i agree that pve coordination can be just as bad.  I have been in a couple of alliances that have imploded after a new release event because of mercs being added into alliances at the last minute, bumping out people that play every pve event, every week.  Just like with pvp, i dont know what the solution is, by i can identify that there is something "unfair" there.

What realistic measures do you think could be taken to fix pve?  How hard would it be on the pvp side to leave shielded people open for attack by everyone or remove names from the display(2 random suggestions from this thread that i have to imagine aren't difficult to implement)?

For PvE I'd consider:

 - splitting a current bracket when space is required, move all even ranked members out of the bracket and into the new one, now both the old and new brackets will be half full, fill them both up with new joins.

 - Lock the alliance to the event at the beginning of said event, just like they do for alliance events.

For PvP I don't have any ideas that I think will fix it in its current state, some ideas that do both harm and good:

- open targets up across all slices (point creep will be the same for everyone within a specific slice, but later slices will have more points in total than earlier ones)

- close targets to a single SCL (mmr can pick across all slices but only within same SCL

- add an appropriately scaled up seed team for every 100 points that a player progresses 

The suggestions for PvP aren't great, I think the whole system needs re-designed.

revskip

No

entrailbucket said:

nick_chicane said:

Everyone should fight everyone. Sod this "I know you so I wont hit you" nonsense. Just fight everyone. 

I agree with this 100%. Coordination is just a way for low/non-spenders to get the best rewards and feel like they're good at the game (and no, your $10 a month to buy shields so you can hop off cupcakes to 5000 points per event is not "spending"). If we could somehow remove coordination, we could make sure that the best rewards only go to the biggest rosters/best players, which is the way things should be.

Most of the people in check rooms are also the people spending big.  I'm sure there are some outliers to that but guess what, buyers clubs are also coordinated using the same app that people using check rooms use.  Most of the people who spend the very most on the game are at least loosely associated through Line.  

The end result of making the cupcake change was that lower rosters were now much less likely to get progression rewards.  So by removing a bit of the outside of game exploits they created the problem that is now being complained about, namely lower level rosters being "bullied".  

Without completely redesigning the PVP system I don't think there is a set of changes that could be made to remove outside communication.  Considering that a complete rehaul of PVP would likely be a massive amount of work for the dev team I'd rather not see one.  I'd rather they work on new features than remove both the Line communities engagement with the game and their enjoyment for a problem that is generally very overblown.  

Are there a handful of jerks who grief?  Sure, I've actually seen a couple of their names in this very thread.  Nothing that the game does will fully remove that element from this game or any other.  But the vast majority of people who communicate on Line are really cool people who are all working towards the same goals everyone playing has, getting rewards and improving their rosters.  I'd like the people who feel like they are bullied to check out the Line community before just throwing around accusations that are mostly off-base.  

Stax the Foyer

entrailbucket said:

nick_chicane said:

Everyone should fight everyone. Sod this "I know you so I wont hit you" nonsense. Just fight everyone. 

I agree with this 100%. Coordination is just a way for low/non-spenders to get the best rewards and feel like they're good at the game (and no, your $10 a month to buy shields so you can hop off cupcakes to 5000 points per event is not "spending"). If we could somehow remove coordination, we could make sure that the best rewards only go to the biggest rosters/best players, which is the way things should be.

You say biggest rosters/best players like there's a difference between the two.  

There's a threshold level of competence, after which success is just a matter of roster and time invested / schedule flexibility.  

Stax the Foyer

Also, the best fix for PVE mercing is to give the T100 cover to alliances who finish with a cumulative score over a certain threshold (e.g., 20 x max progression).  Then everyone controls their own destiny.  Let the ranking be for ISO or whatever. 

entrailbucket

Yes

revskip said:

Most of the people in check rooms are also the people spending big.  I'm sure there are some outliers to that but guess what, buyers clubs are also coordinated using the same app that people using check rooms use.  Most of the people who spend the very most on the game are at least loosely associated through Line. 

Unfortunately you've committed a common logical error here: the fact that all the big spenders are in check rooms does not imply that all people in check rooms are big spenders.  Until you can prove that the vast majority of people on LINE are high spenders (you can't), I'm afraid my point remains valid; that check rooms and coordination are a way to cheat the developers out of money by winning rewards without paying for them.  This also eliminates anyone else's incentive to spend on the game.  If all you need to score 5000 points is a couple 4*, $10 worth of hero points, a check room, and the willingness to stare at a check room for hours on end, why bother spending to improve your roster?

The end result of making the cupcake change was that lower rosters were now much less likely to get progression rewards.  So by removing a bit of the outside of game exploits they created the problem that is now being complained about, namely lower level rosters being "bullied".  

Without completely redesigning the PVP system I don't think there is a set of changes that could be made to remove outside communication.  Considering that a complete rehaul of PVP would likely be a massive amount of work for the dev team I'd rather not see one.  I'd rather they work on new features than remove both the Line communities engagement with the game and their enjoyment for a problem that is generally very overblown.  

There are actually a couple of very simple fixes that could drastically reduce coordination in PvP.  My favorite fix is "no skipping while you're shielded," which would complicate things for coordinators pretty fabulously. 

Also, there's currently a 1-for-1 point gain/loss ratio at some score level (I think it's 1000?  They changed it a few times.)  Another good fix would be to make it 1-to-2 or more once you reach some higher score level (I gain 75 points for hitting you, but you lose 150).

The devs could implement the idea of "chip damage" or "block damage" from fighting games.  Hits while you're shielded would deduct 5 or 10 points each from your score.

And the best fix is to simply increase the placement rewards to the point where no one is interested in helping anyone else beat them for placement, possibly removing progression rewards as well.

Combining any of these with a significant increase in shield cooldown timers would work pretty well to stop some of the current excesses. 

Are there a handful of jerks who grief?  Sure, I've actually seen a couple of their names in this very thread.  Nothing that the game does will fully remove that element from this game or any other.  But the vast majority of people who communicate on Line are really cool people who are all working towards the same goals everyone playing has, getting rewards and improving their rosters.  I'd like the people who feel like they are bullied to check out the Line community before just throwing around accusations that are mostly off-base.  

I think the major problem here is that this is a game that's explicitly about competition in every single mode, and the "jerks" are the people who are actually trying to compete!  Normally at this point I would direct people to the Wikipedia page for "player vs. player," but it's pretty much what it says on the tin.  If you would prefer not to compete, good for you, but in a competitive game, anti-competitive strategies like win-trading should not be the ideal way to succeed.

Maceo511

entrailbucket said:

revskip said:

Most of the people in check rooms are also the people spending big.  I'm sure there are some outliers to that but guess what, buyers clubs are also coordinated using the same app that people using check rooms use.  Most of the people who spend the very most on the game are at least loosely associated through Line. 

Unfortunately you've committed a common logical error here: the fact that all the big spenders are in check rooms does not imply that all people in check rooms are big spenders.  Until you can prove that the vast majority of people on LINE are high spenders (you can't), I'm afraid my point remains valid; that check rooms and coordination are a way to cheat the developers out of money by winning rewards without paying for them.  This also eliminates anyone else's incentive to spend on the game.  If all you need to score 5000 points is a couple 4*, $10 worth of hero points, a check room, and the willingness to stare at a check room for hours on end, why bother spending to improve your roster?

The end result of making the cupcake change was that lower rosters were now much less likely to get progression rewards.  So by removing a bit of the outside of game exploits they created the problem that is now being complained about, namely lower level rosters being "bullied".  

Without completely redesigning the PVP system I don't think there is a set of changes that could be made to remove outside communication.  Considering that a complete rehaul of PVP would likely be a massive amount of work for the dev team I'd rather not see one.  I'd rather they work on new features than remove both the Line communities engagement with the game and their enjoyment for a problem that is generally very overblown.  

There are actually a couple of very simple fixes that could drastically reduce coordination in PvP.  My favorite fix is "no skipping while you're shielded," which would complicate things for coordinators pretty fabulously. 

Also, there's currently a 1-for-1 point gain/loss ratio at some score level (I think it's 1000?  They changed it a few times.)  Another good fix would be to make it 1-to-2 or more once you reach some higher score level (I gain 75 points for hitting you, but you lose 150).

The devs could implement the idea of "chip damage" or "block damage" from fighting games.  Hits while you're shielded would deduct 5 or 10 points each from your score.

And the best fix is to simply increase the placement rewards to the point where no one is interested in helping anyone else beat them for placement, possibly removing progression rewards as well.

Combining any of these with a significant increase in shield cooldown timers would work pretty well to stop some of the current excesses. 

Are there a handful of jerks who grief?  Sure, I've actually seen a couple of their names in this very thread.  Nothing that the game does will fully remove that element from this game or any other.  But the vast majority of people who communicate on Line are really cool people who are all working towards the same goals everyone playing has, getting rewards and improving their rosters.  I'd like the people who feel like they are bullied to check out the Line community before just throwing around accusations that are mostly off-base.  

I think the major problem here is that this is a game that's explicitly about competition in every single mode, and the "jerks" are the people who are actually trying to compete!  Normally at this point I would direct people to the Wikipedia page for "player vs. player," but it's pretty much what it says on the tin.  If you would prefer not to compete, good for you, but in a competitive game, anti-competitive strategies like win-trading should not be the ideal way to succeed.

What do think about the idea of raising the skip tax as well?  

Spudgutter

Maybe

revskip said:

entrailbucket said:

nick_chicane said:

Everyone should fight everyone. Sod this "I know you so I wont hit you" nonsense. Just fight everyone. 

I agree with this 100%. Coordination is just a way for low/non-spenders to get the best rewards and feel like they're good at the game (and no, your $10 a month to buy shields so you can hop off cupcakes to 5000 points per event is not "spending"). If we could somehow remove coordination, we could make sure that the best rewards only go to the biggest rosters/best players, which is the way things should be.

So by removing a bit of the outside of game exploits they created the problem that is now being complained about, namely lower level rosters being "bullied".  
I'd like the people who feel like they are bullied to check out the Line community before just throwing around accusations that are mostly off-base.  

Not sure if you are purposefully trying to confuse two different issues, or if it's an accident.

As far as i know, people are not complaining about just getting hit when they get to a certain threshold. You show me that person, and i will agree with you to tell them that it happens in pvp and to deal with it.  

What we are talking about are people who, by their own decision(either by being a forum visitor and being aware, or not a forumite ignorant of line and shield check rooms), would rather play the game as designed, and not mess around with other apps and communities.  

On occasion, these people run afoul of so called jerks, and then get targeted for retribution by that person and everyone else that thinks it's fun or cool to be an anonymous jerk.

Vhailorx

Spudgutter said:

revskip said:

entrailbucket said:

nick_chicane said:

Everyone should fight everyone. Sod this "I know you so I wont hit you" nonsense. Just fight everyone. 

I agree with this 100%. Coordination is just a way for low/non-spenders to get the best rewards and feel like they're good at the game (and no, your $10 a month to buy shields so you can hop off cupcakes to 5000 points per event is not "spending"). If we could somehow remove coordination, we could make sure that the best rewards only go to the biggest rosters/best players, which is the way things should be.

So by removing a bit of the outside of game exploits they created the problem that is now being complained about, namely lower level rosters being "bullied".  
I'd like the people who feel like they are bullied to check out the Line community before just throwing around accusations that are mostly off-base.  

Not sure if you are purposefully trying to confuse two different issues, or if it's an accident.

As far as i know, people are not complaining about just getting hit when they get to a certain threshold. You show me that person, and i will agree with you to tell them that it happens in pvp and to deal with it.  

What we are talking about are people who, by their own decision(either by being a forum visitor and being aware, or not a forumite ignorant of line and shield check rooms), would rather play the game as designed, and not mess around with other apps and communities.  

On occasion, these people run afoul of so called jerks, and then get targeted for retribution by that person and everyone else that thinks it's fun or cool to be an anonymous jerk.

This is really a strawman argument gutter.  The number of players who DON'T participate in Line/coordination, but DO get targeted for extreme retribution (by which i assume you mean multiple players all targeting a single individual as many times as possible out of malice or spite, since single retaliation nodes are surely part of the "game as designed" by any definition) is minimal.  It's just not that big a part of the scene.  Most people coordinating are doing it to make the experience more enjoyable, and they follow the etiquette as much as possible.  A small portion of people enjoy sniping (i.e. targeting other, known players while they are shield hopping). And there are occasional feuds/wars between some heavy hitters.  But those activities are basically all intramural, and they only affect your average player insofar as they raise or depress overall scores in each slice. 

Note that when you win a match and discover that you have lost a couple hundred points in the process it is NOT because you have been targeted.  That just means that you climbed to a score which your roster could not sustain.  That happens whenever your defensive team becomes significantly weaker than the average defensive team with the same score, rendering you a very tempting target and inevitably drawing tons of hits.  This has nothing to do with coordination, and maybe that is some of the confusion that leads to these endless arguments. 

jamesh

Yes

Maceo511 said:

What do think about the idea of raising the skip tax as well?  

This would only make sense if they were absolutely sure that the game was presenting appropriate match ups to players.  When I added my first 4* champ to a roster of unlevelled 5*'s and 3* champs, the game started presenting me with many opponents I didn't have much chance of beating (with one or two boosted 4* champs against my single unboosted 4*), so I was skipping a lot more.

Raising the skip penalty will simply disadvantage players transitioning between tiers more than they already are.

Landale

Yes

jamesh said:

Maceo511 said:

What do think about the idea of raising the skip tax as well?  

This would only make sense if they were absolutely sure that the game was presenting appropriate match ups to players.  When I added my first 4* champ to a roster of unlevelled 5*'s and 3* champs, the game started presenting me with many opponents I didn't have much chance of beating (with one or two boosted 4* champs against my single unboosted 4*), so I was skipping a lot more.

Raising the skip penalty will simply disadvantage players transitioning between tiers more than they already are.

Apparently there are those that seem to think the only response to PvP's problems are to "git gud skrub".  Frankly, I don't see the problem with people getting progression rewards a little easier.  Placement should only be achieved by people that have the rosters and work at it.  Progression should be hard, but not damn near impossible.

lokiagentofhotness

Spudgutter said:

revskip said:

entrailbucket said:

nick_chicane said:

Everyone should fight everyone. Sod this "I know you so I wont hit you" nonsense. Just fight everyone. 

I agree with this 100%. Coordination is just a way for low/non-spenders to get the best rewards and feel like they're good at the game (and no, your $10 a month to buy shields so you can hop off cupcakes to 5000 points per event is not "spending"). If we could somehow remove coordination, we could make sure that the best rewards only go to the biggest rosters/best players, which is the way things should be.

So by removing a bit of the outside of game exploits they created the problem that is now being complained about, namely lower level rosters being "bullied".  
I'd like the people who feel like they are bullied to check out the Line community before just throwing around accusations that are mostly off-base.  

Not sure if you are purposefully trying to confuse two different issues, or if it's an accident.

As far as i know, people are not complaining about just getting hit when they get to a certain threshold. You show me that person, and i will agree with you to tell them that it happens in pvp and to deal with it.  

What we are talking about are people who, by their own decision(either by being a forum visitor and being aware, or not a forumite ignorant of line and shield check rooms), would rather play the game as designed, and not mess around with other apps and communities.  

On occasion, these people run afoul of so called jerks, and then get targeted for retribution by that person and everyone else that thinks it's fun or cool to be an anonymous jerk.

I'm sorry but basically what those people are saying is they want to hit others and take their points but don't want to get hit in return because it's "bullying". These folks need to put on their big girl pants and suck it up, because if they want to play how they want to play (as ~designed, as they claim) they don't also get to dictate how others play. FYI, I don't need a line app to remember your username and hit you repeatedly. I mean seriously if you take my points why would I want to suck it up and have you also get a higher placement than me. If I'm playing the game "as-designed" I'm going to do whatever it takes to win and to ensure you don't, whether it's to get top 5 placement or to make sure you don't get maximum progression so that you will be stiffer competition in future. That's "competition" and "as-designed" because hey, it's player versus player right? If hitting someone repeatedly until they give up and lose hope is how to accomplish victory, then folks are gonna keep doing it. It's not bullying, it's game-play.