I just find it funny that people feel the need to defend pausing as a strategy. Probably the same people that think the Paul-Tyson fight was a display of skill.
If all my opponents did the pause trick, I would win 99% of my fights and be in Celestial rank. The only players against players who pause are the ones who can't beat them. Like @DNA3000 has proven, with anything involving time in a competitive nature, manipulating time is part of the startegy. In MCOC case, pausing isn't a winning solution for the vast majority of the time so why cry over a strategy that doesn't maximize winning unless it's against a less player. Seems like this is a great example of "Skill Issue".
Nope. It’s really just an issue where I personally think it’s a slimey and disrespectful thing to do others.
My personal win rate against pausers is 99% or better. It’s just not the purpose of the pause button. It’s a QoL feature thats to allow for players to deal with real life, it’s not a tool for point conservation. Players that do that are exploiting it.
Where it impacts me directly is wasting a resource I personally care about, being time. It’s like being in line behind somebody who’s reading the menu and trying to decide what they want on a menu that has 2 choices for 2 minutes. That person should have never gotten line if they weren’t prepared to make a choice. It’s rude to the people behind them.
If you have the time to play this game and discuss it online, an extra minute here and there due to a pause probably isn't the major inconvenience you're making it out to be. The real issue might be your need to be in control and dictate other people's behavior.
Did I say major inconvenience? Even my metaphor implies it’s a minor inconvenience. I’m not dictating behavior either just waiving the shame finger at those that deserve it.
Just because something is possible, it doesn’t make it right. Using a QoL feature as “strategy” is abusing its intended use. Not sure how that’s a take that bothers you.
Not one argument I’ve read even presents as the right thing to do either. It’s either characterized as a a problem that lacks a practical solution, which I accept, or it’s minimized as an issue with low priority, which I also accept. Neither of those points absolve it from being a loser strategy that lacks integrity. It should be a forfeit since the fight was never attempted or was essentially quit out of mid fight but it is what is. And that’s what would happen in every other game mode btw.
What I find funny is the people defending this because they are either (a) pausers who lack either skill or consideration or (b) feel the need to defend getting easy wins from pausers in a mode that’s supposed to push competition.
You would still get the easy win from pausers if they didn't pause. They would either forfeit or fight to the death and end up with a lower score than if they had paused. By the way, I was playing BG again today and am running into a much higher % of pausers in Vibranium than usual. I think the hazard node might have something to do with it.
Seems to me that all the pausers I face are Paragon and Valiant with really stacked decks. And, according to other threads on the forum, they are camping in VT to farming points for the alliance and solo events. Considering their decks, my guess is that while could easily beat most of us TB and lower, they could easily be heading into GT but they probably aren't skilled enough to score Ws. So, they stay in VT and when they are about to progress to the next level they pause and forfeit enough to stay where they are.
One way to "fix" this might be to change the scoring so that wins and losses are worth more in GT. Right now, the scoring is the same whether or not you are in VT or GT - 2050 and 4700 for a W or 435 and 770 for an L. Give the players in GT maybe 2500 and 6000 for a W and 600 and 900 for an L and these people would have incentive to move up.
I just find it funny that people feel the need to defend pausing as a strategy. Probably the same people that think the Paul-Tyson fight was a display of skill.
If all my opponents did the pause trick, I would win 99% of my fights and be in Celestial rank. The only players against players who pause are the ones who can't beat them. Like @DNA3000 has proven, with anything involving time in a competitive nature, manipulating time is part of the startegy. In MCOC case, pausing isn't a winning solution for the vast majority of the time so why cry over a strategy that doesn't maximize winning unless it's against a less player. Seems like this is a great example of "Skill Issue".
Nope. It’s really just an issue where I personally think it’s a slimey and disrespectful thing to do others.
My personal win rate against pausers is 99% or better. It’s just not the purpose of the pause button. It’s a QoL feature thats to allow for players to deal with real life, it’s not a tool for point conservation. Players that do that are exploiting it.
Where it impacts me directly is wasting a resource I personally care about, being time. It’s like being in line behind somebody who’s reading the menu and trying to decide what they want on a menu that has 2 choices for 2 minutes. That person should have never gotten line if they weren’t prepared to make a choice. It’s rude to the people behind them.
If you have the time to play this game and discuss it online, an extra minute here and there due to a pause probably isn't the major inconvenience you're making it out to be. The real issue might be your need to be in control and dictate other people's behavior.
Did I say major inconvenience? Even my metaphor implies it’s a minor inconvenience. I’m not dictating behavior either just waiving the shame finger at those that deserve it.
Just because something is possible, it doesn’t make it right. Using a QoL feature as “strategy” is abusing its intended use. Not sure how that’s a take that bothers you.
Not one argument I’ve read even presents as the right thing to do either. It’s either characterized as a a problem that lacks a practical solution, which I accept, or it’s minimized as an issue with low priority, which I also accept. Neither of those points absolve it from being a loser strategy that lacks integrity. It should be a forfeit since the fight was never attempted or was essentially quit out of mid fight but it is what is. And that’s what would happen in every other game mode btw.
What I find funny is the people defending this because they are either (a) pausers who lack either skill or consideration or (b) feel the need to defend getting easy wins from pausers in a mode that’s supposed to push competition.
You would still get the easy win from pausers if they didn't pause. They would either forfeit or fight to the death and end up with a lower score than if they had paused. By the way, I was playing BG again today and am running into a much higher % of pausers in Vibranium than usual. I think the hazard node might have something to do with it.
Seems to me that all the pausers I face are Paragon and Valiant with really stacked decks. And, according to other threads on the forum, they are camping in VT to farming points for the alliance and solo events. Considering their decks, my guess is that while could easily beat most of us TB and lower, they could easily be heading into GT but they probably aren't skilled enough to score Ws. So, they stay in VT and when they are about to progress to the next level they pause and forfeit enough to stay where they are.
One way to "fix" this might be to change the scoring so that wins and losses are worth more in GT. Right now, the scoring is the same whether or not you are in VT or GT - 2050 and 4700 for a W or 435 and 770 for an L. Give the players in GT maybe 2500 and 6000 for a W and 600 and 900 for an L and these people would have incentive to move up.
I don't think anyone is pausing to intentionally lose. If they were skilled and farming for milestone points without wanting to go into GC, they would fight and win using Elder, and then just forfeit using energy. The time-wasting pausing strategy would make no sense for their purposes. Also, stacked decks by themselves don't mean they're skilled or good at BG. Don't be afraid of stacked decks. I would say at least half the time, they're not that good at either matchmaking or fighting. Half the people I've faced with a sig 200 R3 Deathless Thanos have been pretty bad actually. Remember, there are no revives or unit offers in BG.
I don't think anyone is pausing to intentionally lose. If they were skilled and farming for milestone points without wanting to go into GC, they would fight and win using Elder, and then just forfeit using energy.
Or just put the phone down and get killed quickly. I run into those guys far more often than I run into pausers. Pausing is an attempt to bank 15k points and hope for the best. There is no dedicated deterministic strategy that involves pausing, because it isn't guaranteed to win, and it isn't guaranteed to lose, and it slows down both sides excessively.
It is a dumb strategy really, but then again I still run into Valiants that have 2* champs in decks that have clearly been reshuffled for differing metas (it isn't frozen from a year ago or more), as if that does anything. So.
I just find it funny that people feel the need to defend pausing as a strategy. Probably the same people that think the Paul-Tyson fight was a display of skill.
If all my opponents did the pause trick, I would win 99% of my fights and be in Celestial rank. The only players against players who pause are the ones who can't beat them. Like @DNA3000 has proven, with anything involving time in a competitive nature, manipulating time is part of the startegy. In MCOC case, pausing isn't a winning solution for the vast majority of the time so why cry over a strategy that doesn't maximize winning unless it's against a less player. Seems like this is a great example of "Skill Issue".
Nope. It’s really just an issue where I personally think it’s a slimey and disrespectful thing to do others.
My personal win rate against pausers is 99% or better. It’s just not the purpose of the pause button. It’s a QoL feature thats to allow for players to deal with real life, it’s not a tool for point conservation. Players that do that are exploiting it.
Where it impacts me directly is wasting a resource I personally care about, being time. It’s like being in line behind somebody who’s reading the menu and trying to decide what they want on a menu that has 2 choices for 2 minutes. That person should have never gotten line if they weren’t prepared to make a choice. It’s rude to the people behind them.
If you have the time to play this game and discuss it online, an extra minute here and there due to a pause probably isn't the major inconvenience you're making it out to be. The real issue might be your need to be in control and dictate other people's behavior.
Did I say major inconvenience? Even my metaphor implies it’s a minor inconvenience. I’m not dictating behavior either just waiving the shame finger at those that deserve it.
Just because something is possible, it doesn’t make it right. Using a QoL feature as “strategy” is abusing its intended use. Not sure how that’s a take that bothers you.
Not one argument I’ve read even presents as the right thing to do either. It’s either characterized as a a problem that lacks a practical solution, which I accept, or it’s minimized as an issue with low priority, which I also accept. Neither of those points absolve it from being a loser strategy that lacks integrity. It should be a forfeit since the fight was never attempted or was essentially quit out of mid fight but it is what is. And that’s what would happen in every other game mode btw.
What I find funny is the people defending this because they are either (a) pausers who lack either skill or consideration or (b) feel the need to defend getting easy wins from pausers in a mode that’s supposed to push competition.
You would still get the easy win from pausers if they didn't pause. They would either forfeit or fight to the death and end up with a lower score than if they had paused. By the way, I was playing BG again today and am running into a much higher % of pausers in Vibranium than usual. I think the hazard node might have something to do with it.
Seems to me that all the pausers I face are Paragon and Valiant with really stacked decks. And, according to other threads on the forum, they are camping in VT to farming points for the alliance and solo events. Considering their decks, my guess is that while could easily beat most of us TB and lower, they could easily be heading into GT but they probably aren't skilled enough to score Ws. So, they stay in VT and when they are about to progress to the next level they pause and forfeit enough to stay where they are.
One way to "fix" this might be to change the scoring so that wins and losses are worth more in GT. Right now, the scoring is the same whether or not you are in VT or GT - 2050 and 4700 for a W or 435 and 770 for an L. Give the players in GT maybe 2500 and 6000 for a W and 600 and 900 for an L and these people would have incentive to move up.
I don't think anyone is pausing to intentionally lose. If they were skilled and farming for milestone points without wanting to go into GC, they would fight and win using Elder, and then just forfeit using energy. The time-wasting pausing strategy would make no sense for their purposes.
Just imagine a tennis player or a chess player saying I need a toilet break for a whole match and then coming back winning 🥳
Some variation of that does in fact sometimes happen in Chess. In rapid and blitz tournaments players will sometimes get ahead on the score and decide to just stall the clock out so their opponent cannot make moves, and thus cannot win any more games until the match time expires.
This is considered a legal and legitimate match tactic among most competitors, even if some spectators have a poor opinion of it.
Comments
One way to "fix" this might be to change the scoring so that wins and losses are worth more in GT. Right now, the scoring is the same whether or not you are in VT or GT - 2050 and 4700 for a W or 435 and 770 for an L. Give the players in GT maybe 2500 and 6000 for a W and 600 and 900 for an L and these people would have incentive to move up.
Also, stacked decks by themselves don't mean they're skilled or good at BG. Don't be afraid of stacked decks. I would say at least half the time, they're not that good at either matchmaking or fighting. Half the people I've faced with a sig 200 R3 Deathless Thanos have been pretty bad actually. Remember, there are no revives or unit offers in BG.
It is a dumb strategy really, but then again I still run into Valiants that have 2* champs in decks that have clearly been reshuffled for differing metas (it isn't frozen from a year ago or more), as if that does anything. So.
This is considered a legal and legitimate match tactic among most competitors, even if some spectators have a poor opinion of it.