Just to make clear - I haven't been invited to any shard chat. Nor would I join one, sounds like too much coordination for something that shouldn't been coordinated in the first place. Shards shouldn't be set in stone imo, they should be jumbled every month or so to prevent any prolonged coordination.
His threat is basically meaningless and empty since I previously was never able to break top-20 until I finally unlocked the Mill-Falc during it's last run, and it's only 5*. I'm perfectly accustomed to NOT making top rank in fleet battles. Most days I can't even get in top 5 and have only gotten first less than a hand-full of times.
There are a few points that I would like to cover based upon the larger discussion.
1. Shard chats are wonderful. Why not share? After all there are 24 hrs in a day. 24 different payouts. The coordination is quite easy. Def recommend.
2. Jumbling shards would be messy. CG struggles to fix Bronzium drops to account for **** price increase. Also, one’s arena shard is the competition that started the game near the same time. Seems like a fair balance.
3. The “threat” was that you would not take first again if you continued to perform a negative action against them. This can be broken down more.
3A. The implication of “threat” was to perform the action you just performed against them. If you continually hit them, they will not take 1st either. The “threat” is minimal and reciprocal.
3B. The “threat” was to never hit first again. There are thousands of people who never make it to top 10, let alone 1st. Taking 2nd would certainly not be the end of the world. The “threat” is minimal.
3C. The “threat” can turn into a friendship from coming to a cooperative solution to both of your payouts. It seems your opponent is open to such activity, otherwise they would not have reached out to you with such an offer. They won’t hit you if you don’t hit them. Seems fair. Abide or don’t. Face the consequences.
4. Text can be difficult to decipher full intent. There has been discussion about bullying in this thread and it seems as though, in this particular instance, your opponent was giving reasonable warning IMO. Others have taken it differently. I prefer to side on less censorship and benefit of the doubt.
That's a genuine threat, which'll lead to online bullying and potentially a wellbeing/safety issue.
Situations like this should not be ignored by CG as, essentially, they're complicit in allowing intimidation tactics to run rife on their designed platform. That's not rivalry, it's the start of online abuse
That's just so much LOLZ. Threat to what? Getting hit back in a competetive environment?
A threat to your mental health & wellbeing, this is how trolling starts. If it's not addressed it's also a real threat to the longevity & profit of the game - why would you start/continue playing a game when you know the forums can have players 'making sure' you never achieve again?
There's kids on this game man, it's not setting a very good precedent is it? Unless you agree with shard bullying
I don't know how your mental health & well being works, but mine is uneffected by threats to get hit on a pvp mode, it's the very nature of the beast. There's nothing personal about that message, it refers exactly to these game events. Whether it's blunt or inappropriate as considered from the receiving end doesn't matter. The receiver is able to -mute- the sender if they are bothered, but they should be ready for the ingame consequences as well. Either case there's nothing against TOS in that smack talk.
I agree with what you refer as -shard bullying- which has nothing to do with that claim. It's called competetive pvp.
It shouldn't be happening, but it does, which means it's part of the game - I think it's conceivable that someone who doesn't have your mental health and well being could see this as a red flag, so I sympathise with @Chibs and anyone else who receives a message that ends with 'I will make sure you never etc etc again'.
Take it out of context and put it in another situation: If I said to you 'hey good game of table tennis but if you keep beating me I'll make sure you never win a trophy again' hot **** did you just threaten me? That's cool we've got governance and accountability at this table tennis tournament* so this can be dealt with appropriately.
Except it isn't table tennis, it's SWGOH, any threat is not ok. Shard Bullying is not ok. Shard competition is exactly what's needed, but that ^^^ can have no positive outcome whatsoever.
*I have never been to a table tennis tournament
I’m guessing you are not a sports fan. I could be completely off base, but it’s my guess. The mental aspects to competition have included such comments (and worse) to those in your analogy.
This is all perception. You are perceiving a threat. I see an olive branch in the OP screenshot as well. “You can take first, just don’t hit me to do it. If you do, I will hit you back every time so that you don’t win again.” Seems completely fair to me when the game would allow them to stop Chibs from achieving by simply engaging in the game mode. The game also allows Chibs to stop their opponent from achieving through the exact same game mechanics.
Replies
There are a few points that I would like to cover based upon the larger discussion.
1. Shard chats are wonderful. Why not share? After all there are 24 hrs in a day. 24 different payouts. The coordination is quite easy. Def recommend.
2. Jumbling shards would be messy. CG struggles to fix Bronzium drops to account for **** price increase. Also, one’s arena shard is the competition that started the game near the same time. Seems like a fair balance.
3. The “threat” was that you would not take first again if you continued to perform a negative action against them. This can be broken down more.
3A. The implication of “threat” was to perform the action you just performed against them. If you continually hit them, they will not take 1st either. The “threat” is minimal and reciprocal.
3B. The “threat” was to never hit first again. There are thousands of people who never make it to top 10, let alone 1st. Taking 2nd would certainly not be the end of the world. The “threat” is minimal.
3C. The “threat” can turn into a friendship from coming to a cooperative solution to both of your payouts. It seems your opponent is open to such activity, otherwise they would not have reached out to you with such an offer. They won’t hit you if you don’t hit them. Seems fair. Abide or don’t. Face the consequences.
4. Text can be difficult to decipher full intent. There has been discussion about bullying in this thread and it seems as though, in this particular instance, your opponent was giving reasonable warning IMO. Others have taken it differently. I prefer to side on less censorship and benefit of the doubt.
Who is bullying who?
I’m guessing you are not a sports fan. I could be completely off base, but it’s my guess. The mental aspects to competition have included such comments (and worse) to those in your analogy.
This is all perception. You are perceiving a threat. I see an olive branch in the OP screenshot as well. “You can take first, just don’t hit me to do it. If you do, I will hit you back every time so that you don’t win again.” Seems completely fair to me when the game would allow them to stop Chibs from achieving by simply engaging in the game mode. The game also allows Chibs to stop their opponent from achieving through the exact same game mechanics.