Is there a definitive etiquette for PvP?

245678

Comments

  • ThaRoadWarrior
    ThaRoadWarrior Posts: 9,456 Chairperson of the Boards
    I never read anybody's username when I PVP, and I just play to progression. If your team looks beatable, and is worth points, I hit it. I also never use shields though, I just play at weird times and accept that I'll have to climb a few times if I want 900. So if somebody's getting mad at me, and want's to retaliate, more power to you, I'm sure it's happened. But since I don't care about trying to place, once I hit my progression target I'm out and you're welcome to it.
  • CharlieCroker
    CharlieCroker Posts: 254 Mover and Shaker
    tiomono said:
    CharlieCroker said:
    What Quebbster said.  The only thing I'd add to this is that if you are one of those players that likes to double/triple people, don't complain when the same happens to you. 

    Whilst I may have occasionally deviated from this in the past, I generally try not to double people or take a decent amount of time before doing so.  But if you've hit me/alliance mates multiple times in the past then I'll make sure to repay the favour if I ever get the opportunity.
    So do you keep a spreadsheet of everyone that has ever double hit yourself or an alliance mate? 
    I have a decent memory as far as names go.  And when you play in the same shard for a decent amount of time the same names crop up over and over again.
  • abmoraz
    abmoraz Posts: 712 Critical Contributor
    Also, OP, the best advice I can give you is to never even look at the targets Username.  I can't tell you a single person I've hit, and I don't plan on starting now.  Play the game the way you want.  If it works for you, then go with it.

    tinykitty the rest of them for demanding you play according to their 'unwritten rules'.

    (yes, I would bunt when facing a pitcher who's in the middle of a no-hitter if it meant improving my team's chances of winning)
  • abmoraz
    abmoraz Posts: 712 Critical Contributor
    tiomono said:
    This topic just makes me wish they would remove players names from the nodes so we do not know who we are hitting. 

    It could block you from having members of your own 20 person alliance show up at all for you. That way all you look at is if the team you are about to face is worth the points it gives.

    I feel it would slow down large alliance truces and even out the PvP playing field dramatically. But that' just my opinion.
    I wish I could "like" this 1000 times.  Removing the target's name would be glorious, especially since you aren't actually fighting that player, but rather the computer using that player's characters.

    If we're playing Magic:The Gathering and I give my deck to my 11yr old nephew, are you playing me (cause it's my deck/cards) or him (because he's making the decisions)?
  • shartattack
    shartattack Posts: 370 Mover and Shaker
    Well you should definitely look at the user name.  Hitting people in your own alliance is probably the dumbest thing you could do.
  • ThaRoadWarrior
    ThaRoadWarrior Posts: 9,456 Chairperson of the Boards
    I don't know if it's quite the dumbest thing; i mean if you need those points, somebody has to take one for the team lol
  • abmoraz
    abmoraz Posts: 712 Critical Contributor
    edited May 2018
    shartattack said:
    Well you should definitely look at the user name.  Hitting people in your own alliance is probably the dumbest thing you could do.
    That assumes anyone in my alliance plays PvP.  In the current season, I (who do not play PvP competitively at all) have ~60%  of our total points (4000 out of 7500 total).  12 of our 20 members have no points at all and the rest are mostly in triple digits.  Running into an alliance mate is highly unlikely and even if I do, they aren't going to be worth enough for me to hit them accidentally.

    Well, I'll run into them at the bar on Saturday nights when we all go out drinking (or they are working), but running into them in game is a veritable impossibility.

    Not everyone is in a competitive alliance.  Some of us like to sit around and enjoy the game for what it is.  In fact, buy the numbers, the competitive alliances are in the minority (but they are very vocal in the forums, so it seems like there are more of them)
  • redviper85
    redviper85 Posts: 62 Match Maker
    It's all how you want to play and there are essentially two options:

    1. scratch and claw up to 900 or 100 points, fire blindly and risk making someone mad for hitting them twice or their grill

    2. participate in alliance truces and LINE and walk right up to 1200 hitting 75 point grill teams along the way; shield up 

    I don't know why anyone would choose #1 but its a free country. This season I've had 2 events where I didn't even shield once until hitting 1200 and I've been hit MAYBE 2 times during my climbs, ALL SEASON. 
  • Pinko_McFly
    Pinko_McFly Posts: 282 Mover and Shaker
    Keep in mind that most of these whiners are probably in a chat with snipers that will hit people 4+ times to help the whiners placement, I doubt they are lecturing the sniper on their behavior.
    Definitely watch names though so you can know who has hit you and pay them back, or pay an alliance mate of theirs back.
  • Phumade
    Phumade Posts: 2,501 Chairperson of the Boards
    Jwallyr said:


    Like, what? I thought Versus was where you went to compete with other players?

    (Not knocking you for doing it, but it just seems like a point of clear design failure for the "competitive" portion of the game to be bypassed almost entirely by the players who do the best (read: receive the best rewards), meanwhile those of us that are down in the trenches actually fighting each other are getting bupkis by comparison.)
    I think this is the viewpoint that you missed.

    devs design games rules based on how they want it to run.  Maybe its for technical, aesthetics, business, personal vision objectives.

    Players engage in the game to have fun, pure and simple.  Ultimately player's don't care what the dev's original vision for the game is.  They will adjust and adapt it to fill their fun need.

    At a practical level,  people are social creatures and love to coordinate to produce an outcome.  This is fundamentally human nature.  (you can look all throughout history and see there are infinite more examples of people working together than single lone wolf players.

    Anytime you offer players the opportunity to chat and collaborate,  they will automatically use that opportunity to either min/max the outcome.  Its pretty much hardwired into human nature.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    Phumade said:
    Jwallyr said:


    Like, what? I thought Versus was where you went to compete with other players?

    (Not knocking you for doing it, but it just seems like a point of clear design failure for the "competitive" portion of the game to be bypassed almost entirely by the players who do the best (read: receive the best rewards), meanwhile those of us that are down in the trenches actually fighting each other are getting bupkis by comparison.)
    I think this is the viewpoint that you missed.

    devs design games rules based on how they want it to run.  Maybe its for technical, aesthetics, business, personal vision objectives.

    Players engage in the game to have fun, pure and simple.  Ultimately player's don't care what the dev's original vision for the game is.  They will adjust and adapt it to fill their fun need.

    At a practical level,  people are social creatures and love to coordinate to produce an outcome.  This is fundamentally human nature.  (you can look all throughout history and see there are infinite more examples of people working together than single lone wolf players.

    Anytime you offer players the opportunity to chat and collaborate,  they will automatically use that opportunity to either min/max the outcome.  Its pretty much hardwired into human nature.
    Thus tapping was born and sometime later the devs step in to return the game to their intent.
  • Shintok17
    Shintok17 Posts: 620 Critical Contributor
    I look at rosters not at names. If I can probably beat it then it's getting attacked. Seriously though are those cry babies that messaged you going to gift you a 4* or any other progression reward for following "Their Rules". I bet you they got their rewards at the cost of others, but are telling you what to do. Just do what strategy works for you at your roster level, time of play, and resources available to you. Make your own experience enjoyable. 
  • Dragon_Nexus
    Dragon_Nexus Posts: 3,701 Chairperson of the Boards
    redviper85 said:
    It's all how you want to play and there are essentially two options:

    1. scratch and claw up to 900 or 100 points, fire blindly and risk making someone mad for hitting them twice or their grill

    2. participate in alliance truces and LINE and walk right up to 1200 hitting 75 point grill teams along the way; shield up 

    I don't know why anyone would choose #1 but its a free country. This season I've had 2 events where I didn't even shield once until hitting 1200 and I've been hit MAYBE 2 times during my climbs, ALL SEASON. 
    Option 1 is pretty much how I roll, but I know how to identify a grill. Or at least...the obvious one of a base level 3*, a low 4* and then a 5*. That's one of the few things I know to look out for and I will hit those *once* and then not again. I'm not the guy who looks at the free mints at a restaurant and grabs a fistful on the way out.

    That said, I really, really don't want to make this game more of a job than it currently is by co-ordinating with others in a chat app, choosing the right time to play, asking permission with every person showing up in the list. I mean jeez, I can skip 10-30 people before finding someone worth enough points as it is. I don't want to add "Can I hit this person? No? *Sigh* skip, skip, skip, skip" to the process.

    The guy suggesting usernames be removed though, I want that so badly.

    If PvP didn't have rewards worth going for I'd not bother. I feel that would be easier than try to fulfill the wishes of the omnicient overlords and their mystical unknowable whims that I seem to be breaking just by playing...
  • Rod5
    Rod5 Posts: 587 Critical Contributor
    I try to not to hit multiple times unless it’s early and I’m struggling for targets. If someone hits me multiple times for a lot of points I will make a mental note and return the favour and then some when I see them next.
  • FinnyMPQ
    FinnyMPQ Posts: 51 Match Maker
    This is why we can't have nice things  :D:D
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    edited May 2018
    Phumade said:
    Jwallyr said:


    Like, what? I thought Versus was where you went to compete with other players?

    (Not knocking you for doing it, but it just seems like a point of clear design failure for the "competitive" portion of the game to be bypassed almost entirely by the players who do the best (read: receive the best rewards), meanwhile those of us that are down in the trenches actually fighting each other are getting bupkis by comparison.)
    I think this is the viewpoint that you missed.

    devs design games rules based on how they want it to run.  Maybe its for technical, aesthetics, business, personal vision objectives.

    Players engage in the game to have fun, pure and simple.  Ultimately player's don't care what the dev's original vision for the game is.  They will adjust and adapt it to fill their fun need.

    At a practical level,  people are social creatures and love to coordinate to produce an outcome.  This is fundamentally human nature.  (you can look all throughout history and see there are infinite more examples of people working together than single lone wolf players.

    Anytime you offer players the opportunity to chat and collaborate,  they will automatically use that opportunity to either min/max the outcome.  Its pretty much hardwired into human nature.
    Except when the devs change it (wins based) and instead of adapting and adjusting, they go bananas and revolt and post about it every pvp.  

    Everyone is free to play how they see fit.  And i understand, i am in a small BC myself.  But reaching out to someone?  Thats taking it a little more serious then it needs to be.

    Too many people dont like pvp.  We know this based on the numbers and posts like this.  And yet, those that do well and place well, would have an easier time if more peopleplayed.  But this type of behavior only helps drive people off.  Its kinda ironic.
  • Mustache1
    Mustache1 Posts: 17 Just Dropped In
    abmoraz said:
    If the game allows it, go for it.  If people who use external programs (ex. Line) to game the system complain, remind them that they are the ones using external programs to improve their play and not playing within the confines of MPQ itself.

    If we were meant to co-ordinate and talk to each other in the game, there would be an internal chat built into the game for us to use.

    If we weren't supposed to hit the same people repeatedly, then the game wouldn't give them to us as potential targets when paying our skip tax.

    What the OP is getting yelled at for is the upper echelon getting all huffy because OP doesn't use the same strategy that they do.  Well tough.  Not everyone wants to spend real $$$ to buy HP to shield hop.  Not everyone wants to devote hours of their life to the game.  Some of us just want to hit our progression target and go home.  Sorry if that doesn't fit into their myopic view of how PvP *should* be played. 

    /this would all be moot if they fixed PvP to remove getting hit multiple times in a short timespan.
    //I've been part of several web-based games that use a similar PvP system, and they all managed to make a system to prevent people from getting doubled/tripled up.


    And if man was meant to fly God would
    have seen fit to give us wings. 

Categories