When you're surrounded by friends, it's much easier to make a deal with other players. I'll give you my entire stash worth of space in exchange for buy arc raiders blueprints.

 Trios are a totally different experience. You'll meet more aggressive people in groups. Arc Raiders users are now aware of the "aggression-based matchmaking" system which places PvP psychos in the same group as their brethren while corralling pacifists into a tranquil herbivore display. They believe that your matchmaking rating should be different for solos and groups.

 MishRift wrote a hot post on Arc Raiders Reddit that "Aggression in Trio shouldn't affect your solo" experience. Your friend's PvP obsession shouldn't put you in a shark tank once you go back to your normal peaceful solo runs.

 Evidence is only anecdotal – "I noticed that after playing with aggressive trio friends, my solo matches were way more aggressive than before" – but this argument is fascinating, if for no other reason than to demonstrate the inevitable consequences of Embark revealing the matchmaking changes: players who are eager to manipulate the system even if they know only a small part of it.

 This is clear from the top response to the top comment of the post, which advocates for separate reputations in terms of aggression. The user Traditional Row7925 suggests that after a murderous rampage, you should go into solos naked and surrender 6 times in a line. "Do a test loadout first to ensure it works, then start spamming the phrase 'no shot'. You'll get responses." You're now back in the friendliest pool. It's not at all subtle."

 "Agreed. Solos I play a lot more passively and sometimes even save my fellow arc raiders coins. En1gmaMontoya concurs that in trios I love the PvP, and the sheer quantity of it makes me better.

 "It is good as it is." "Mrjubjub adds that if you don't, then aggressive trios will go to solos in order to free up trigger nades and other equipment for even more aggression in trios."

 Many of these things are based on human selfishness. Some people just want to get their cake and have it too - they'll drown in PvP treasures, but will never be shot at when it's not convenient. Do you like to play in threes? It's on the surface. Do you want to die alone, while smuggling out of a locked room and escaping with your pockets full? This essay will show you why PvP can be bad for the game.

 I can acknowledge that random players or players who are in auto-filled groups could ruin your reputation. It's easy to just turn off auto-fill, or tell friends that PvP is not your thing, but it's a bit annoying to be stuck in the shark-tank because of someone else. It's still not true that you chose to play with the group despite being aware of this fact.

 This matchmaking system seems to self-correct. Don't engage in PvP and you will soon see less of it. In this application it is a normal part of the gameplay to have preferences. I believe it can feel artificial and become a problem when people try to ruin their own experiences in order to be hidden among a particular group of players. Then, you are not playing the actual game but rather trying to create a fictional version. It's a perfect opportunity to frustrate your own self-sabotage. 'I avoided PvP, Embark. Is that why I'm still getting shot at?" Raiders are pelting themselves with straw. You guys, this is always and forever going to be a game of PvP.

 Reddit's squidsauce, a logical user, puts it like this: "After pondering this for a few minutes, I am not going to change my playing style. It is as it is. If I feel someone is aggressive, then I'll shoot. If I don't, then I wont. "I'm not interested in this auto-balancing Script." As the PvP goblin that is poisoning my group's matchmaking system, I won't apologize.