PvP Etiquette.

TetsujinOni

calling the mode "Versus" lets them  leave off the truth: It's Players versus the Devlopers, not players versus each other.

Riguez

I normally just look at the three characters I'm going to face and the points worth and that's it... don't check the rest of the roster or the name, I just go for it if I think I can beat them and the points are worth it, then I get to the 10CP reward and stop playing, wake up the next day to -200 points from attacks and couldn't care less since I already have the 10CP which is pretty much all PvP is worth for anyway

tiomono

Daiches said:

tiomono said:

BoyWonder1914 said:

broll said:

BoyWonder1914 said:

That is a made up code of conduct from outside of the game mechanics. And if you do it to the wrong person or alliance you get popped hard by multiple people from many alliances. 

So I agree with brolls view. He is not saying punish people that use line. He is not saying they shouldn't use line. He even understands why it's there. 

It's a game mode that has you attacking other people for your own benefit. So if the game lets you do it do not be mad at people that do it.

If you would be playing for your own benefit, you would hit players when they are shielded, because that way more points enter the shard. And it would be a much easier climb for you. But it would also require a grasp of how pvp points building works. Cooperation is needed to get people to 1200. The more cooperate, the easier it is for the entire shard. Now YOU don't have to participate in cooperation, but know that if people weren't, you wouldn't even be able to get there if you wanted too. That's the sad truth for you. It may be named versus, but it's players versus the system.

So as others have said, versus could use tuning. I don't even go for 900 myself because I find there are too many unwritten rules being enforced by many top alliances. That's the sad truth of versus for me.

People shouldn't need to fight the system. I understand that's why players do that. But don't try to enforce rules of conduct on every player in the game when the game itself allows players to do the actions you may find detrimental to the climb and overall benefit of all.

Do not be mad at players that play the game the way it allows them. The majority of line supporters I see have this notion that players not using it have no understanding of how the game works and they are only hurting themselves. That will always have that flavor of criminals that shake down businesses for protection money in my mind. "You don't play our way, things will be harder for you. It's better for everyone if you just cooperate." 

That being said I do feel it's players vs the system. Just the players should be banding together to help tweak the system for everyone's benefit, instead of clashing with each other. There is no reason to try and force others to play by rules not set up in the game, or punish them if they do not follow those rules (that are not part of the game).

Daiches

tiomono said:

Daiches said:

tiomono said:

BoyWonder1914 said:

broll said:

BoyWonder1914 said:

That is a made up code of conduct from outside of the game mechanics. And if you do it to the wrong person or alliance you get popped hard by multiple people from many alliances. 

So I agree with brolls view. He is not saying punish people that use line. He is not saying they shouldn't use line. He even understands why it's there. 

It's a game mode that has you attacking other people for your own benefit. So if the game lets you do it do not be mad at people that do it.

If you would be playing for your own benefit, you would hit players when they are shielded, because that way more points enter the shard. And it would be a much easier climb for you. But it would also require a grasp of how pvp points building works. Cooperation is needed to get people to 1200. The more cooperate, the easier it is for the entire shard. Now YOU don't have to participate in cooperation, but know that if people weren't, you wouldn't even be able to get there if you wanted too. That's the sad truth for you. It may be named versus, but it's players versus the system.

So as others have said, versus could use tuning. I don't even go for 900 myself because I find there are too many unwritten rules being enforced by many top alliances. That's the sad truth of versus for me.

People shouldn't need to fight the system. I understand that's why players do that. But don't try to enforce rules of conduct on every player in the game when the game itself allows players to do the actions you may find detrimental to the climb and overall benefit of all.

Do not be mad at players that play the game the way it allows them. The majority of line supporters I see have this notion that players not using it have no understanding of how the game works and they are only hurting themselves.

 That will always have that flavor of criminals that shake down businesses for protection money in my mind. "You don't play our way, things will be harder for you. It's better for everyone if you just cooperate." 

That being said I do feel it's players vs the system. Just the players should be banding together to help tweak the system for everyone's benefit, instead of clashing with each other. There is no reason to try and force others to play by rules not set up in the game, or punish them if they do not follow those rules (that are not part of the game).

You're twisting my words to fit your view of how alliances work. I said you can play the way you want, but that you have to understand that it is cooperation between platters that makes it so you can hit target rgets that are actually worth anything instead of climbing on 5 point seals for an entire event. The while point is making it easier for everyone to get progression. And playing with friends. It must be miserable to play the game completely solo. Half the fun is playing with friends (both cooperatively and ehm, otherwise cooperatively).

Justice Jacks

tiomono said:

 There is no reason to try and force others to play by rules not set up in the game, or punish them if they do not follow those rules (that are not part of the game).

Actually, the entirety of Daiches post was the exact reason to try and force others to play in a certain way and punish them when they don't.  We're all in this together at the end of the day, but when you prove you don't believe you're part of that, it's time to get you out of the way so the rest of the shard can benefit.  Once you've established you're on the side of the machines, you don't get an invite to Zion.  Not everyone wants to be a crab, pulling everyone else down into the bucket with them.

jackstar0

I'm for anonymous Versus mode. Let the chips fall where they do and FIGHT.

tiomono

Daiches said:

tiomono said:

Daiches said:

tiomono said:

BoyWonder1914 said:

broll said:

BoyWonder1914 said:

That is a made up code of conduct from outside of the game mechanics. And if you do it to the wrong person or alliance you get popped hard by multiple people from many alliances. 

So I agree with brolls view. He is not saying punish people that use line. He is not saying they shouldn't use line. He even understands why it's there. 

It's a game mode that has you attacking other people for your own benefit. So if the game lets you do it do not be mad at people that do it.

If you would be playing for your own benefit, you would hit players when they are shielded, because that way more points enter the shard. And it would be a much easier climb for you. But it would also require a grasp of how pvp points building works. Cooperation is needed to get people to 1200. The more cooperate, the easier it is for the entire shard. Now YOU don't have to participate in cooperation, but know that if people weren't, you wouldn't even be able to get there if you wanted too. That's the sad truth for you. It may be named versus, but it's players versus the system.

So as others have said, versus could use tuning. I don't even go for 900 myself because I find there are too many unwritten rules being enforced by many top alliances. That's the sad truth of versus for me.

People shouldn't need to fight the system. I understand that's why players do that. But don't try to enforce rules of conduct on every player in the game when the game itself allows players to do the actions you may find detrimental to the climb and overall benefit of all.

Do not be mad at players that play the game the way it allows them. The majority of line supporters I see have this notion that players not using it have no understanding of how the game works and they are only hurting themselves.

 That will always have that flavor of criminals that shake down businesses for protection money in my mind. "You don't play our way, things will be harder for you. It's better for everyone if you just cooperate." 

That being said I do feel it's players vs the system. Just the players should be banding together to help tweak the system for everyone's benefit, instead of clashing with each other. There is no reason to try and force others to play by rules not set up in the game, or punish them if they do not follow those rules (that are not part of the game).

You're twisting my words to fit your view of how alliances work. I said you can play the way you want, but that you have to understand that it is cooperation between platters that makes it so you can hit target rgets that are actually worth anything instead of climbing on 5 point seals for an entire event. The while point is making it easier for everyone to get progression. And playing with friends. It must be miserable to play the game completely solo. Half the fun is playing with friends (both cooperatively and ehm, otherwise cooperatively).

All I am saying is you should not have to rely on a 3rd party to perform well in the game. The game should provide you with the tools to succeed. 

Your telling me unless people go outside the game for coordination nobody would hit top progression. And by people not playing that way they hurt themselves. Yes you say I can play how I want, but I need to know I would get nowhere unless others are using a 3rd party to boost points. I am pretty sure I am not twisting words.

Versus needs to change so you don't have to rely on line to be successful, but line could still allow you to make friends and meet others and have fun. I do not play the game solo and I am not some crab that wants to drag others down with me.

Justice Jacks

tiomono said:

All I am saying is you should not have to rely on a 3rd party to perform well in the game. The game should provide you with the tools to succeed. 

Your telling me unless people go outside the game for coordination nobody would hit top progression. And by people not playing that way they hurt themselves. Yes you say I can play how I want, but I need to know I would get nowhere unless others are using a 3rd party to boost points. I am pretty sure I am not twisting words.

Do you make the same arguments when a 3rd-base coach uses hand signals--which are not a part of the provided baseball equipment and only valuable because they are not commonly known to all-- to tell a player to steal 2nd base?  Am I allowed to work with a pitching coach between games?  I have even better crab-fishing analogies if you'd like me to pull those out.

As to your latter point:

"Versus needs to change so you don't have to rely on line to be successful, but line could still allow you to make friends and meet others and have fun."

You don't HAVE to rely on Line to be successful.  You could, for example, break our your wallet and boost your characters to 550.  If you did that, even without Line, you'd still likely be able to make progression (I had to caveat with "likely," because as Smokey Joe is fond of saying, you may just be terrible at matching 3).  It's like you showed up to a golf tournament with just your putter.  While you realize you could have bought/brought many more clubs in your bag, you chose to stick with the putter and then complain because the game of golf isn't changed in its entirety so you can be competitive with only your putter.

Better to just thank those of us that put in the time, money, and effort to inflate the points in a shard so you even have a chance at progression awards, rather than continue to tilt at this windmill.  Just my 2 cents, of course.

tiomono

Justice Jacks said:

tiomono said:

All I am saying is you should not have to rely on a 3rd party to perform well in the game. The game should provide you with the tools to succeed. 

Your telling me unless people go outside the game for coordination nobody would hit top progression. And by people not playing that way they hurt themselves. Yes you say I can play how I want, but I need to know I would get nowhere unless others are using a 3rd party to boost points. I am pretty sure I am not twisting words.

Do you make the same arguments when a 3rd-base coach uses hand signals--which are not a part of the provided baseball equipment and only valuable because they are not commonly known to all-- to tell a player to steal 2nd base?  Am I allowed to work with a pitching coach between games?  I have even better crab-fishing analogies if you'd like me to pull those out.

As to your latter point:

"Versus needs to change so you don't have to rely on line to be successful, but line could still allow you to make friends and meet others and have fun."

You don't HAVE to rely on Line to be successful.  You could, for example, break our your wallet and boost your characters to 550.  If you did that, even without Line, you'd still likely be able to make progression (I had to caveat with "likely," because as Smokey Joe is fond of saying, you may just be terrible at matching 3).  It's like you showed up to a golf tournament with just your putter.  While you realize you could have bought/brought many more clubs in your bag, you chose to stick with the putter and then complain because the game of golf isn't changed in its entirety so you can be competitive with only your putter.

Better to just thank those of us that put in the time, money, and effort to inflate the points in a shard so you even have a chance at progression awards, rather than continue to tilt at this windmill.  Just my 2 cents, of course.

The 3rd base coach is part of the game and if you are willing to pay me to coach you in matching 3 gems outside the game I'm in.
Ok give me one of your crab fishing analogies.

We are getting off topic. I still say if the game itself does not stop you from multi hitting people (even your own alliance of 20) then it is ok. 

Spudgutter

Daiches said:

You're twisting my words to fit your view of how alliances work. I said you can play the way you want, but that you have to understand that it is cooperation between platters that makes it so you can hit target rgets that are actually worth anything instead of climbing on 5 point seals for an entire event. The while point is making it easier for everyone to get progression. And playing with friends. It must be miserable to play the game completely solo. Half the fun is playing with friends (both cooperatively and ehm, otherwise cooperatively).

First, blanket statements are always a bad idea, so to presume that solo play is miserable, and that half fun comes from the friendships, undermines a lot of what you say.  

Secondly, to presume that no one would get a good score without your coordinating among each other is, sorry to say, pretty arrogant.  You have no way of knowing if that is a true statement, and i have no way to prove it false, so it's best left unsaid.

Just because someone chooses to play different than you doesn't make them any less a cog in the wheel of versus, and to act like you are better just because you play a certain way comes off a lot worse then you probably think.

Spudgutter

Justice Jacks said:

tiomono said:

All I am saying is you should not have to rely on a 3rd party to perform well in the game. The game should provide you with the tools to succeed. 

You don't HAVE to rely on Line to be successful.  You could, for example, break our your wallet and boost your characters to 550.  

Better to just thank those of us that put in the time, money, and effort to inflate the points in a shard so you even have a chance at progression awards, rather than continue to tilt at this windmill.  Just my 2 cents, of course.

Or, you could keep your copper coins to yourself.  Read through some of this thread and others on this very matter.  Plenty of people reach their desired versus goals without coordination, and without the need for whaling.  To suggest that there are only two options is disingenuous at best, and arrogant at worst.  

I'll extend my thanks to the people that created and maintain the game.  Please leave the high horse antics and bragging to your line chats.

BlackIC

All:

What Etiquette? The PvP system will be what it is until D3 decides to change it. Which ultimately means that if people decide or choose to double, triple, quadruple, whatever because the point outcome is significant, they will pursue it. It is up to D3 to listen and act on feedback of their choosing with the goal of encouraging behaviors that will be competitive yet fair to all trying to seek such rewards.

Justice Jacks

Spudgutter said:

Justice Jacks said:

tiomono said:

All I am saying is you should not have to rely on a 3rd party to perform well in the game. The game should provide you with the tools to succeed. 

You don't HAVE to rely on Line to be successful.  You could, for example, break our your wallet and boost your characters to 550.  

Better to just thank those of us that put in the time, money, and effort to inflate the points in a shard so you even have a chance at progression awards, rather than continue to tilt at this windmill.  Just my 2 cents, of course.

Or, you could keep your copper coins to yourself.  Read through some of this thread and others on this very matter.  Plenty of people reach their desired versus goals without coordination, and without the need for whaling.  To suggest that there are only two options is disingenuous at best, and arrogant at worst.  

I'll extend my thanks to the people that created and maintain the game.  Please leave the high horse antics and bragging to your line chats.

Is "for example" to difficult of a concept for you?  If not, your retort to my post is the only thing disingenuous of the material quoted above.  If so, my apologies, so let me clear it up for you:

Me:  I could fly to Cleveland.  Or, for example, I could drive there.
You:  It's disingenuous to suggest there are only two options for you to get to Cleveland.  
Me:  *blank stare*

tiomono

Justice Jacks said:

Spudgutter said:

Justice Jacks said:

tiomono said:

All I am saying is you should not have to rely on a 3rd party to perform well in the game. The game should provide you with the tools to succeed. 

You don't HAVE to rely on Line to be successful.  You could, for example, break our your wallet and boost your characters to 550.  

Better to just thank those of us that put in the time, money, and effort to inflate the points in a shard so you even have a chance at progression awards, rather than continue to tilt at this windmill.  Just my 2 cents, of course.

Or, you could keep your copper coins to yourself.  Read through some of this thread and others on this very matter.  Plenty of people reach their desired versus goals without coordination, and without the need for whaling.  To suggest that there are only two options is disingenuous at best, and arrogant at worst.  

I'll extend my thanks to the people that created and maintain the game.  Please leave the high horse antics and bragging to your line chats.

Is "for example" to difficult of a concept for you?  If not, your retort to my post is the only thing disingenuous of the material quoted above.  If so, my apologies, so let me clear it up for you:

Me:  I could fly to Cleveland.  Or, for example, I could drive there.
You:  It's disingenuous to suggest there are only two options for you to get to Cleveland.  
Me:  *blank stare*

I know it's like me entering clearance level 8 with only my juggernaut and demanding they change the event so I can win. 

The game allows you to hit people as many times as you want. That's the rules. Do not use rulesets that are not part of the game to punish players that do not abide by them.

Justice Jacks

Spudgutter said:

Secondly, to presume that no one would get a good score without your coordinating among each other is, sorry to say, pretty arrogant.  You have no way of knowing if that is a true statement, and i have no way to prove it false, so it's best left unsaid.

If only we had some way of proving this.  Oh wait, we do.  The BCs in each shard are well know.  Several shards are cooperative for the good while 1-2 of the others don't have such a BC and has an alliance in them that hits anything that moves and doesn't work to inflate the shard points.  Care to guess which shards reach the better scores?  Which shards progression is obtainable for a stand alone player without a massive roster?  In fact, I bet you could even guess the shards without knowing a thing about the Line community or that we actually do have tracking data on this stuff.

There's no way to say this part without "sounding arrogant" so I'm just going to say it:  if many or those replying to Daiches on here had any idea of how little they actually new about PVP gameplay, strategy, coordination, underlying mechanics, or the massive amount of player-data that is collected and manipulated to arrive at the recommendations that are typically provided here by both he and other high level players, they'd blush.  While I can agree that you have no way of proving his statement false, to say that "[he] has no way of knowing if that is a true statement" is just plain naive.      

Lucifier

Justice Jacks said:

Justice Jacks said:

Spudgutter said:

Secondly, to presume that no one would get a good score without your coordinating among each other is, sorry to say, pretty arrogant.  You have no way of knowing if that is a true statement, and i have no way to prove it false, so it's best left unsaid.

If only we had some way of proving this.  Oh wait, we do.  The BCs in each shard are well know.  Several shards are cooperative for the good while 1-2 of the others don't have such a BC and has an alliance in them that hits anything that moves and doesn't work to inflate the shard points.  Care to guess which shards reach the better scores?  Which shards progression is obtainable for a stand alone player without a massive roster?  In fact, I bet you could even guess the shards without knowing a thing about the Line community or that we actually do have tracking data on this stuff.

There's no way to say this part without "sounding arrogant" so I'm just going to say it:  if many or those replying to Daiches on here had any idea of how little they actually new about PVP gameplay, strategy, coordination, underlying mechanics, or the massive amount of player-data that is collected and manipulated to arrive at the recommendations that are typically provided here by both he and other high level players, they'd blush.  While I can agree that you have no way of proving his statement false, to say that "[he] has no way of knowing if that is a true statement" is just plain naive.      

collecting data and analyzing it, having line chat group for coordination and other things, it is clever/smart way to achieve many targets (and nothing wrong with it), BUT did d3go design this game to be played this way, or let me put in other way:

when d3go design the game and put these threshold in progression rewards 800, 900, till 1200 points:
how they come up with these numbers, how they decide who should be able to get them and who should not (are you saying, they thought ok the player should join Line chat, attack some players, shield, announce in line chat now they are shielded, other retaliate, then attack other players, then shield, and repeat).
or did they make these threshould point value based for example on, 5* or adv.4* should be able to hit 1200, like mid4* should be able to hit 900, 
or whoever play many hours like 8hrs/day should be able to hit 1200, or whoever win 40 games, should hit 1200, or .........

my point here i do not believe, neither should be the game designed that you can achieve your target by line chat community.
nothing wrong with doing that, and i think there are players can hit these threshold without line, but what is the real % of players that can hit 1200 or 900 without line chat application, and without the line chat method (how many player that before was able to hit 1200 without line, will not be able to do so again now).


BACK TO THE MAIN TOPIC HERE "Etiquette":

I wouldn't call what is happening here is Etiquette, i would call it alliance rules, intra-alliance rules, meta or group of players rules, also sure it is not d3go game rules, I am not saying it is wrong or right to do or not to do that, it is just not considered as an Etiquette.

Justice Jacks

tiomono said:

The game allows you to hit people as many times as you want. That's the rules. Do not use rulesets that are not part of the game to punish players that do not abide by them.

Please show me where, at any point, I took an issue with multiple hits.  You are entirely accurate, "the game allows you to hit people as many times as you want.  That's the rules."  But how you go from there to "do not use rulesets that are not part of the game to punish players that do not abide by them" I simply cannot understand.  That logic gap in those two sentences would be measured in light years.  Now, is there a difference between allowed and wise, absolutely.  I am allowed to each bucketfuls of sugar every day, but that would not be wise.  And all I have said is that it's an unwise move (and also bad for the player base as a whole) to have the shard be a free for all.  

As to your logical fallacy, if player A is able to hit player B as many times as they want, for whatever purpose they want, because those are the rules, then shouldn't player B be able to do the same to player A?  And shouldn't player C, and D, and E also be able to hit player A as many times as they want, for whatever purpose they want, because, again, those are the rules?

tiomono

Justice Jacks said:

tiomono said:

The game allows you to hit people as many times as you want. That's the rules. Do not use rulesets that are not part of the game to punish players that do not abide by them.

Please show me where, at any point, I took an issue with multiple hits.  You are entirely accurate, "the game allows you to hit people as many times as you want.  That's the rules."  But how you go from there to "do not use rulesets that are not part of the game to punish players that do not abide by them" I simply cannot understand.  That logic gap in those two sentences would be measured in light years.  Now, is there a difference between allowed and wise, absolutely.  I am allowed to each bucketfuls of sugar every day, but that would not be wise.  And all I have said is that it's an unwise move (and also bad for the player base as a whole) to have the shard be a free for all.  

As to your logical fallacy, if player A is able to hit player B as many times as they want, for whatever purpose they want, because those are the rules, then shouldn't player B be able to do the same to player A?  And shouldn't player C, and D, and E also be able to hit player A as many times as they want, for whatever purpose they want, because, again, those are the rules?

Ok back to baseball. Someone stole 3rd so you get half the league to run into your game and beat up that player. The game rules allow him to steal 3rd, but you have an out of official rules agreement with other teams to enforce your own set of rules that are not part of the official game. 

Clearer now?

Spudgutter

Justice Jacks said:

Spudgutter said:

Justice Jacks said:

tiomono said:

All I am saying is you should not have to rely on a 3rd party to perform well in the game. The game should provide you with the tools to succeed. 

You don't HAVE to rely on Line to be successful.  You could, for example, break our your wallet and boost your characters to 550.  

Better to just thank those of us that put in the time, money, and effort to inflate the points in a shard so you even have a chance at progression awards, rather than continue to tilt at this windmill.  Just my 2 cents, of course.

Or, you could keep your copper coins to yourself.  Read through some of this thread and others on this very matter.  Plenty of people reach their desired versus goals without coordination, and without the need for whaling.  To suggest that there are only two options is disingenuous at best, and arrogant at worst.  

I'll extend my thanks to the people that created and maintain the game.  Please leave the high horse antics and bragging to your line chats.

Is "for example" to difficult of a concept for you?  If not, your retort to my post is the only thing disingenuous of the material quoted above.  If so, my apologies, so let me clear it up for you:

Me:  I could fly to Cleveland.  Or, for example, I could drive there.
You:  It's disingenuous to suggest there are only two options for you to get to Cleveland.  
Me:  *blank stare*

you clearly imply that by not using line, that you can't do as well.  you immediately point out whaling.  don't act like that wasn't your implication.

Justice Jacks said:

Spudgutter said:

Secondly, to presume that no one would get a good score without your coordinating among each other is, sorry to say, pretty arrogant.  You have no way of knowing if that is a true statement, and i have no way to prove it false, so it's best left unsaid.

If only we had some way of proving this.  Oh wait, we do.  The BCs in each shard are well know.  Several shards are cooperative for the good while 1-2 of the others don't have such a BC and has an alliance in them that hits anything that moves and doesn't work to inflate the shard points.  Care to guess which shards reach the better scores?  Which shards progression is obtainable for a stand alone player without a massive roster?  In fact, I bet you could even guess the shards without knowing a thing about the Line community or that we actually do have tracking data on this stuff.

There's no way to say this part without "sounding arrogant" so I'm just going to say it:  if many or those replying to Daiches on here had any idea of how little they actually new about PVP gameplay, strategy, coordination, underlying mechanics, or the massive amount of player-data that is collected and manipulated to arrive at the recommendations that are typically provided here by both he and other high level players, they'd blush.  While I can agree that you have no way of proving his statement false, to say that "[he] has no way of knowing if that is a true statement" is just plain naive.      

I am unaware of the shards, so you would lose that bet. 

or better put, since there is BC, we have no way of knowing what scores would actually be, do we?  that's my point.

Justice Jacks

tiomono said:

Ok back to baseball. Someone stole 3rd so you get half the league to run into your game and beat up that player. The game rules allow him to steal 3rd, but you have an out of official rules agreement with other teams to enforce your own set of rules that are not part of the official game. 

Clearer now?

Is beating up the player within the rules?  Because whereas I compared apples to apples, you compared apples to horses.  

Let me help you out, someone stole 3rd on me, so I call all the teams in the league and ask them to steal 3rd on the team that did it on me, and those teams go ahead and steal 3rd per my request.  The team that stole on me ends up losing a bunch more bases overall than they stole.  

I wish I could say your analogy was a valiant effort.  I wish I could.