Would PvP be better with no meta?

Sekilicious

entrailbucket said:

Sekilicious said:

entrailbucket said:

  I don't know that was what happened with May.

I kept the only fact in your thread. The rest was assuming incompetence because they do not operate the way you think they should. Bishop was nerfed after a year or two so they were obviously fine with his interaction with the 5* meta, except for maybe his interaction with BRB on top. Worthy was nerfed quicker so they maybe they were not. 

Sorry, but those were not assumptions.  I'd suggest seeking out some of the folks who work on the game and talking to them, as I and others have many, many times.

Yeah, you didn’t talk to anyone about May, or Bishop, or Worthy. You said numerous times that they don’t talk to anyone and haven’t for years. So this remains conjecture; assumptions of incompetence while ignoring the flaws in your own recommendations. But, I look forward to the threads complaining about the game you keep telling people that this will be when they adopt all the changes you recommended. 

entrailbucket

Sekilicious said:

entrailbucket said:

Sekilicious said:

entrailbucket said:

  I don't know that was what happened with May.

I kept the only fact in your thread. The rest was assuming incompetence because they do not operate the way you think they should. Bishop was nerfed after a year or two so they were obviously fine with his interaction with the 5* meta, except for maybe his interaction with BRB on top. Worthy was nerfed quicker so they maybe they were not. 

Sorry, but those were not assumptions.  I'd suggest seeking out some of the folks who work on the game and talking to them, as I and others have many, many times.

Yeah, you didn’t talk to anyone about May, or Bishop, or Worthy. You said numerous times that they don’t talk to anyone and haven’t for years. So this remains conjecture; assumptions of incompetence while ignoring the flaws in your own recommendations. But, I look forward to the threads complaining about the game you keep telling people that this will be when they adopt all the changes you recommended. 

Several of them chat regularly in the Discord room now, and have for a few years.  Many of them used to chat with us on Line as well.  They're quite candid in those places.

I said numerous times that they don't communicate on the forum or in other public places anymore.  That's a problem, because players like me with access to those private places get insider information.  It would be cool, and more fair, if everybody had access to it.

You're assuming that because you're completely uninformed, everyone else must be.

Sekilicious

entrailbucket said:

Sekilicious said:

entrailbucket said:

Sekilicious said:

entrailbucket said:

  I don't know that was what happened with May.

I kept the only fact in your thread. The rest was assuming incompetence because they do not operate the way you think they should. Bishop was nerfed after a year or two so they were obviously fine with his interaction with the 5* meta, except for maybe his interaction with BRB on top. Worthy was nerfed quicker so they maybe they were not. 

Sorry, but those were not assumptions.  I'd suggest seeking out some of the folks who work on the game and talking to them, as I and others have many, many times.

Yeah, you didn’t talk to anyone about May, or Bishop, or Worthy. You said numerous times that they don’t talk to anyone and haven’t for years. So this remains conjecture; assumptions of incompetence while ignoring the flaws in your own recommendations. But, I look forward to the threads complaining about the game you keep telling people that this will be when they adopt all the changes you recommended. 

Several of them chat regularly in the Discord room now, and have for a few years.  Many of them used to chat with us on Line as well.  They're quite candid in those places.

I said numerous times that they don't communicate on the forum or in other public places anymore.  That's a problem, because players like me with access to those private places get insider information.  It would be cool, and more fair, if everybody had access to it.

You're assuming that because you're completely uninformed, everyone else must be.

No no, I’m saying you haven’t talked to them about May, or Bishop or Worthy. But frankly, maybe they used to talk on Discord but they don’t now. But since you want to be a tinykitty about it, you keep waxing poetic about how the game used to be and is different now. That likely means that the way the means the game as it used to be sucks. But keep your head up your tinykitty and telling people you smell roses. There are enough people here to continue telling you that your opinion is worthless regardless of the number of times you exaggerate and outright lie.

entrailbucket

Just...put me on ignore?  Getting this angry about someone else having an opinion on a videogame is not healthy.

entrailbucket

bbigler said:

I think it’s childish and immature to enjoy knocking people down. Instead of being jealous of their success, one could congratulate them and put their own ego aside. A mature person thinks of everyone’s needs, not just their own. I believe this is true in MPQ as well as real life.

Regarding PVP climbing, you can only gain points by making others lose points. Nevertheless, I believe we can still fight in a civil way. It shouldn’t be personal, just the business of gaining points. Repeatedly hitting someone or having your battle alliance target someone is immature, IMO, unless they’re being a jerk and you’re trying to change their behavior. Unfortunately, some people only respond to a show of force. 

I meant to say something about this.  The game makes it basically impossible for a player like me to repeatedly target a player like you.  You're invisible to me 99% of the time. 

At some point I might be able to repeatedly attack you for like 5 points per hit, but if that ever happens, you should know that the other player is not trying to hurt you, deny you anything, or stop you from anything.  I'm probably just trying to get the last 20 points or 5 wins to progression, and the game won't show me anybody else.

As for those players we did/occasionally still do target, these are very long-term players with very advanced rosters, and generally years of back-and-forth conflict in game, personal beefs, alliance wars, and other assorted nonsense. 

No one bothers or ever bothered "suppressing" randoms or unknown players, because it's really hard to find them and there's no reason to do it.

bbigler

@entrailbucket I agree with your post. I would say most of the time people fight “nice” in PVP.  Not always, but most of the time.  Do we have a PVP guide somewhere on the forum that not only spells out how it works and advice, but lists the unofficial etiquette as well? 

entrailbucket

I've been meaning to write something up about the mechanics of it forever, but most of that's just useless trivia for 99% of you guys.

As far as etiquette: there is a fairly complex set of norms for people who play at a high level, because there just aren't very many of us, we only see each other, and everybody has years of history with everybody else.  I have heard of cases where someone made a really big roster jump and accidentally did some things they shouldn't have, but that's very rare. 

Another player posted this on the last page, but high level MPQ PvP is *extraordinarily deep*, full of complex tactics, psychology, feints, teamwork, skill, and timing.  It's probably the most fun video game I've ever played, and all that stuff happens before and after matches, not during them.

Lower level PvP is...not that.  And that's ok!  But it's more of a random melee where everybody attacks everybody and nobody pays much attention to it.  I'd say there's no need to worry about etiquette until either you're coordinating and taking high placement, *or* you reach a point where you recognize most of the player names you hit and those who hit you.

Maybe someone else knows some lower-level rules I'm not aware of?  I don't know how they'd be enforced though.

bbigler

Here’s a PVP etiquette question: let’s say I hit someone for 45 points (they have a much stronger team) and then they immediately hit me back for 15 points because it’s easy.  I’m thinking they’re being dumb for attacking me since I can gain more points than I lose. So, I attack back for 45 points again. They attack me back again for 15 points and the cycle continues on and on until they eventually stop, sometimes going up to 10 rounds of it. 

This retaliation cycle has happened a few times with different opponents, but eventually they stop attacking me because they’re losing more points than they’re gaining.  I assume it’s galling to them to give up to a weaker team. So, is this bad etiquette or should they be smart enough not to attack me back again and again? If they’re just grinding out 75 wins, then I understand, but how many people do that instead of going for 1200 points? 

HoundofShadow

If I'm going for points, I won't touch you with a ten-foot pole. 1200 points within 20 wins is my goal. However, I might do that if I'm visiting slice 2 or 5 and feel like wasting hp.

TheEyeDoctorsWife

bbigler said:

Here’s a PVP etiquette question: let’s say I hit someone for 45 points (they have a much stronger team) and then they immediately hit me back for 15 points because it’s easy.  I’m thinking they’re being dumb for attacking me since I can gain more points than I lose. So, I attack back for 45 points again. They attack me back again for 15 points and the cycle continues on and on until they eventually stop, sometimes going up to 10 rounds of it. 

This retaliation cycle has happened a few times with different opponents, but eventually they stop attacking me because they’re losing more points than they’re gaining.  I assume it’s galling to them to give up to a weaker team. So, is this bad etiquette or should they be smart enough not to attack me back again and again? If they’re just grinding out 75 wins, then I understand, but how many people do that instead of going for 1200 points? 

Just happened to me today too , person kept attacking me for 12-15, I’d retaliate for 45-52.  Actually made for a very quick climb, I should be thanking them . I just don’t understand the logic to it. 

entrailbucket

That's more of a tactics question.  I'm not sure why anyone would do what you're describing -- most likely they just don't know any better. 

I really enjoy retal wars because they're the best test of skill, but I'm trying to get 2 or 3 (or more) hits to your 1.  Going 1-for-1 at uneven scores just helps the player with lower points. 

Going 1-for-1 at *similar* scores can be good strategy if you're trying to distract the other player while someone else is doing something, or if you just need to stall their climb for some reason.


What the other person *should* have done is dump several hundred points, so he'd become the player with lower points and he could reverse the situation on you.  People are terrified of dumping points these days, but it's still the best way to accomplish lots of things.

entrailbucket

I missed the etiquette part.  That player has no clue what they're doing, so you could choose to take pity on them and end the war unilaterally, I guess. 

I'd have done what you did and I'm pretty sure everyone else would do the same and not feel bad about it.

entrailbucket

HoundofShadow said:

If I'm going for points, I won't touch you with a ten-foot pole. 1200 points within 20 wins is my goal. However, I might do that if I'm visiting slice 2 or 5 and feel like wasting hp.

Forgot to mention: if you exclusively play very high-point matches, that actually makes *you* a sniper. 

Playing a match that takes 60-75 points away from another player is an extremely aggressive act, and generally means that you have a particular animosity toward them.  If you don't, there'd be no need to drag someone else down like that.

PS I wish this thread would just die but I can't stop answering things in it

TheEyeDoctorsWife

entrailbucket said:

That's more of a tactics question.  I'm not sure why anyone would do what you're describing -- most likely they just don't know any better. 

I really enjoy retal wars because they're the best test of skill, but I'm trying to get 2 or 3 (or more) hits to your 1.  Going 1-for-1 at uneven scores just helps the player with lower points. 

Going 1-for-1 at *similar* scores can be good strategy if you're trying to distract the other player while someone else is doing something, or if you just need to stall their climb for some reason.


What the other person *should* have done is dump several hundred points, so he'd become the player with lower points and he could reverse the situation on you.  People are terrified of dumping points these days, but it's still the best way to accomplish lots of things.

Once I was up a net of +400 points I just shielded. They’re getting one retal that doesn’t affect me nor does little for them unless they now move on to other targets. Their use of Shang made the retal quick and easy . 

HoundofShadow

That's something new to me. So, do I have to skip all those 75 points and aim for 38 points and fewer instead? That will take me at least 40 wins to reach 1200. An extra 20 wins is about 35-45mins of my life. 

entrailbucket

Oh, you don't HAVE to do anything!  You should feel free to continue being an aggressive sniper who drags other players down.  If you like that playstyle it's a perfectly valid way to play -- the game needs snipers. 

I just wanted to let you know that's what you were doing.  I'm a jerk, and I wouldn't do that stuff to players unless I had a good reason to.

If someone I didn't know attacked me for 75 points, I would assume they're doing it because they had an issue with me, or because they wanted to start a war.

HoundofShadow

I find the definition of sniper too loose. Currently, based on what I infer from your reply, snipers mean any player who hits another player who are worth 60-75 points.

What happens if we add in some context? Some players coordinate in battle chat and climb off each other to score high points to get top placements. By rubbing  each other's backs, it nets them 60-75 points per fight instead of <38 points if they were to play "normally" . 

Since they are hitting each other for ~60-75 points, wouldn't they be called snipers as well?

entrailbucket

No, because the person they're attacking is shielded. Attacking a friendly player while that player is unshielded would result in banning (after one or more incidents, depending on their rules).  They coordinate their shields specifically so the person being attacked doesn't lose any points.

Snipers are players who take large amounts of points away from other players by attacking them when they're unshielded.

HoundofShadow

Hmm.. If I don't want to be branded as a sniper, I need to hit player who nets me high point after they are shielded. Failing to do makes me a sniper.

What if the player doesn't shield and MMR keeps giving me players with high points? I should quit pvp? 

If that's the case, i should be well-known in BC as a sniper because i target only players with high points.

Who came up with this term and additional rules? Surely, it can't be the developers.

entrailbucket

You may indeed be well-known as a sniper.  I'm not in those rooms in the other slices so I don't know how they would handle such things these days.  It would also depend on who exactly you're sniping.  Not every player is in a room.

These unofficial, unsanctioned "rules" and terminology were created by the community over the course of many years.  If you choose to play in a way that is "friendly" you'd need to join Line. I don't know if an invitation is required or if those rooms are open to anyone.  That's changed over the years.


I would say that you should continue doing exactly what you're doing, if that's what you find fun!  The game mode is labeled "Versus" for a reason.  Attacking human players is required if you choose to play at all.

On the other hand, I am an antisocial jerk.  I've got no problem at all with attacking someone the way you do, but only when they are my enemy and I feel it's deserved.