Arc Raiders players appeal to Embark not to let PvP trios ruin your reputation for "aggression based" solo matchmaking, but I honestly don't believe it.


Few things make people turn more quickly than jumping from a solo arc raiders materials run, where you may feel vulnerable and isolated, to a three-person raid, where your friends have empowered you and you are much more willing to offer the deal of your life: I will save you all of your stash space and I'll only ask for a few shots from my gun.





Trios is a completely different game. You will meet more aggressive players when you play in groups. Arc Raiders has a new "aggression based" matching system that places PvP psychos together with their brethren, but confines pacifists looters to the peaceful herbivore exhibition. Some Arc Raiders think your matchmaking reputation is better separated between solos and group.





MishRift, a user on the Arc Raiders Reddit main page, wrote "Aggression in Trio should not affect your Solo experience." Other words, you shouldn't be thrown into the shark tank because of your friend's addiction to PvP when you return to your peaceful solo runs.





It's anecdotal evidence - "I observed after playing with my trio of aggressive friends (I am new, so my account is fresh), that my solo matches have become more aggressive" - however, the argument is still interesting because it shows the inevitable result of Embark revealing and making this matchmaking change. Players eager to game Embark, even if they only know a little about a part of the system.





This is made clear in the top reply to post's first comment. It argues for separate aggression reputations. User Traditional-Row7925 advises: "After going on an all-out murder spree in trios just go in naked and surrender 6-7 consecutive times." Then, do a free loadout just to be sure. Next, spam 'no-shoot' until you hear someone reply. Now you're in the friendly pool. "It's not subtle at all."





"Agreed. On solos, I tend to be more passive. Sometimes I will even help out other raiders. En1gmaMontoya agrees that I like the PvP in trios and the sheer volume of it helps me improve.





It's fine the way it is. "Or else you'll get aggressive trios going solo to farm trigger nades, or other equipment so that they can be even more aggressive as trios," says MRjubjub.





This is a classic case of human selfishness. Some people want it all - to drown in PvP loot but not have a mmoset gun pointed at their back when it is inconvenient. Playing in groups? It's obvious. You're dying alone while snatching money from a locked-room? In this essay, I will explain why PvP is bad.





It is true that other players can ruin your reputation, particularly random players on auto-filled teams. You could either turn off auto-fill or tell your friends that you don't like PvP. But the basic annoyance of being in the shark tank because you're chained up to someone who dived in makes sense. You chose to play them despite knowing that trio raids had a higher rate of PvP.





As we understand this system, it appears to be self-correcting. You'll soon experience less PvP (but not none) if you choose to avoid it. It's natural for the game to cater to your preferences in this case. However, I feel it can be a problem and artificial when players try to harm or distort their own experience to fit into a certain group of players. You're no longer playing the game, but trying to play an imagined version. This is a great opportunity to frustrate yourself: 'I avoided PvP as much as possible, Embark. Why am I still being shot at? The raider who is strewn with straw asks. People, it's always a PvP-game.





Reddit user Squidsauce explains it well: "After thinking this over for a moment, I won't be changing my playing style. It is what is. If I think someone is being aggressive, I will shoot. If not, I won't. "I don't give a damn about this auto-balancing script." One thing is for certain: I won't apologize as the PvP Goblin who poisons my friend group's matching.