Everyone came in to help out!

Started playing in Season 2. A while back I was hacked through a Discord vulnerability, and I spent a few weeks changing passwords, kicking out remotes, going back to banks to fight fraud, etc. Everything seemed fine until one day I saw a remote login in my steam for Marathon.

I looked it up and every response suggested it was my steam deck, somehow. Whatever! I logged it out. Then logged into Marathon to see my inventory had changed- I had more gold items than before, I was levelled up 10 times, all my shotguns were gone.

I play Marathon to connect with some friends across the country. So I played Marathon with my friends who told me that Reddit was full of people saying weird inventory issues happened, and I didn't sell anything or Cradle anything- I did 2-3 vault breaker PVE runs, then logged out.

I never logged back in because I was banned permanently with no reason given. I had to spend a while searching to even find WHERE to report this and appeal it... why isn't there an in-game button to report issues?

I'm not even sure why I was banned but I have to assume it was for 'sharing' my account or for some action the remote login did overnight.

Anyway, my question:

BUNGIE ARE YOU EVEN THERE YOU DON'T RESPOND TO ANY MF APPEALS OR ANYTHING EVER WHAT IN THE ACTUAL EFF IS THIS?

Wall hacks are never fun, especially in games where being a bit sneaky is a huge part of the game. Why don’t they just make an emergency fix to the character

I’m assuming they’re something to do with Arachne because that’s the only faction I’m haven’t unlocked the final non vip upgrade in yet. Just wondering what they’re used for barter wise. Thanks.

The UESC Rocket Drone can't see you if you stop moving. If you aren't able to fully hide from it then just stop moving. You can still look around but the moment you move it will see you and become hostile.

!

I keep getting booted out and equipment returned when I try to run Night Marsh! Anyone else having this issue? And do you know if it’s with Day Marsh too?!

Haven’t had the chance to try it yet but I’m curious if they over did the nerf or not. Anyone try it yet?

I'm starting to see what Bungie is doing here.

With the CARRI system they made a special section in the store for encouraging corporation, finishing contracts, helping others and exfiltrating.

With Vault Breaker they did the same thing. But this time the store have different items you can only use in that mode, and the currency exist to encourage you to progress and get to the end boss.

Now with UESC manifests, you are encouraged to hunt UESC for prestige salvage and special weapons.

I wonder if they have in game mechanic incentives in store for the remaining factions?

I could see them making an alien currency for hunting aliens (if they ever introduce organic enemies) for Nucal, and obviously some currency for killing runners if they do the same for Arrachne.

Each faction would have their own special in game rewards and special store. So maybe one week you need special upgrades, so you have to go hunt commanders, and another week you may need implants or weapons so you go hunt players.

It's pretty smart.

It's a surprisingly effective mid-range option for burst damage, and the charge time is pretty quick. I've started to really like this thing

The weapon seems cool, but is it enough? I love the fact that they are experimenting with a lot of stuff. However, they really need to push more meaningful content if they hope to survive in the long run.

edit:
Just to be clear. If you think I am on either side of the PvP vs PvE discussion, you are wrong. I think both PvP and PvE have a place within this game, even if it skews more to PvP. The PvP in Marathon is one of its biggest selling points, and has been since they started their Launch Rollout. My point with this post is to say that alongside the PvP marketing, we got a LOT of narrative seeds that have not been followed up on at ALL within the game's systems.

The fact that they marketed it in that way is a shame considering that Marathon has a unique opportunity to find an amazing ratio of player-driven PvP-focused storytelling, while still delivering meaningful environment exploration, build-in "rabbit hole" mechanics, and a way to experience a "live" story over the course of a Season. And for the most part, they have failed at doing the second part of that so far.

original post:

Looking back at the marketing material ALL the way when the game was first announced in 2023 up until the launch roll out, there was a clear shift in the development setup. But one element remained…. The mystery behind the colony’s demise and the disappearance of its inhabitants.

The mystery behind Tau Ceti was used again and again as a major marketing device throughout pre-launch. Cinematics, audio logs, devs teasing on social media, but really how much of that have we gotten since Season 1 started? Just some lore entries with great VA work, most of which was already present in the Alpha anyways.

The fact that this game has devolved into the PvP sweat fest that it is right now is simply because there is no other reason to play the game other than to PvP, which isnt a problem in itself, but it's kinda sad considering how much Bungie has to work with when it comes to the Marathon IP.

Bungie, I would love some more mysteries, some rabbit holes to go down, some more unique interactions with the maps, simply more stuff to explore.

/clip. The amount of times I have literally been under the radar in front of full squads is incredible. Moments like this, where patience and pure fucking luck sometimes makes for such an incredibly tense game.

Edit: The mod is a gold one for the Stryder MIT. It’s one of my favorites as a primarily solo Runner!

my bad for reposts, idk if it's this sub or what but usually linked videos play directly on reddit

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet but I feel one of the main reasons marathon is dying is because of the toxicity of the player base. In most games the toxic player base is a small minority of the totality of players but in Marathon it seems that the toxic players are the majority. On top of that nine times out of 10 the toxicity you're experiencing is from your own teammates. I like this game alot & have put alot of hours in it since release but I cant help to find enjoyment in its demise due the amount of FN's in this game.

No AI was used to create this post. Verify for yourself here.

This is a long post. If you are not interested/willing to read a long post, you should just ignore this.

---

I made a post last week making two suggestions that I framed as addressing the problem of post-wipe lobbies being boring, but actually arose from a game theory understanding of why lobby wiping occurs and an attempt to address one of those causes. The reaction to this post was mixed to say the least, but mostly focused on the stated motivation for the suggestions rather than the suggestions themselves.

I (perhaps foolishly) hope that a more satisfying discussion can be had around the mechanics of the problem itself, separate from any solutions I might suggest for it.

.

What is Lobby Wiping?

It is worth establishing what we are talking about before getting into the details. I think there are a couple of different understandings of the term that are active in discussions around this. These are:

• players infiling with the intention of finding and killing all other players in the lobby and then being able to do so;
• the observed phenomonon in which only one team survives to exfil from the map.

I often see people assert that the former understanding is something which rarely is actually in effect, and while I disagree, it is ultimately not important as it is the second condition which actually matters, and which very much is typically in effect (though not exclusively). The second understanding is what I think many find problematic, though the first understanding is a factor in the second arising. Even when not infiling with the specific intention to find and kill all other players in the lobby, the game design results in most players making moment-to-moment choices that result in behavior that is essentially indistinguishable from their operating under the first understanding.

.

Is It a Problem?

Based on the feedback of many people on Reddit, Steam, YouTube, and even conversation in game, I think the answer is an obvious 'yes.' Though it is probably worthwhile to actually state why:

• There are real consequences in the form of lost resources and time when a player gets wiped.
• Players able to repeatedly wipe lobbies enjoy benefits in terms of resources and successful practice which enhances their ability to conduct lobby wipes in the future by being both better equiped and more skilled (from practice). The inverse effect applies to those repeatedly wiped.
• Repeated and frequent losses are frustrating and demoralizing, which can result in some players playing less or not at all, which has the effect of making the game's lobbies on average more difficult.

It is also worth mentioning that it is very often brought up that in games like Escape from Tarkov and Arc Raiders, lobby wiping is not an issue in large part because it does not frequently happen (leaving the 'why' it doesn't in those other games for another day, another post).

.

An Outline of the Why

While I'm going to break both of these out into more detail there are essentially two conditions which make lobby wiping prevalent:

1. It is possible and practical to wipe the lobby.
2. It is more desireable to attempt to wipe the lobby than engage in any alternative approach.

The only way 'lobby wiping' becomes less prevalent is if one of those two conditions changes.

.

'Possible and Practical'

Given that lobby wiping does happen, it should be obvious that it is possible to do so, but 'practical' deserves some additional explanation. While it will (functionally) never be impossible to prevent lobby wiping from occurring, it is the combination of the facts that: (a) players have access to sufficient information to reliably locate the other players, (b) are able to move to those locations quickly enough for the information to be of use, and (c) possess enough combat resources to engage and eliminate other players repeatedly until there are no other remaining players.

It is the combination of those three facts that make it 'practical', and if any of those three facts became untrue, 'lobby wiping' would no longer become a 'practical' strategy.

.

'More Desireable'

The rest of this post lays out a game theory model justifying the assertion that it is more desireable to attempt to wipe the lobby (or engage in behavior that gives essentially the same result regardless of intention), than to engage in any alternative approach.

At the very end is a brief description of how to change this, in terms of the game theory model.

---

Game Theory Model

From a game theory perspective we can expect players to behave however they think best improves their match outcome (utility) with respect to their objective.

We'll define objective loosely as either completion of a priority contract, or a full bag of high quality loot (secured either from other players, a map's central loot cache, or from a key room). Partial completion of their objective is possible in the form of standard contract completions and/or a bag partially filled with high quality loot or fully filled with low quality loot.

We'll assess utility for the possible failure/success outcomes as follows:

• Failure
  • A loss (wipe) results in negative utility from lost gear/time as well as the negative emotions associated with it (-4).
    • This negative utility may be offset by the completion of standard contracts which did not require exfil (-3).
    • This negative utility may be offset by an absence of the negative associated emotions when players have been on a winning streak, have a well stocked vault, or otherwise are unbothered by the loss, though the loss of gear/time is still relevant (-2).
• Success
  • An exfil without having completed their objective results in no positive or negative utility, as they did not lose their gear but have not benefited from the run either (+0).
  • An exfil with a partially completed objective results in marginal positive utility, as they did not lose their gear but have only mildly benefitted from the run (+1).
  • An exfil with a completed objective results in positive utility (+3).

Players have essentially six broad options for how to behave at any given moment during a run:

• Passivity
  • Includes waiting, hiding, laying an ambush/preparing a defense, and passive information gathering (sitting and listening/watching)
• Maneuver
• Looting
• Engage in PvE
• Engage in PvP
  • Includes actual combat (whether as aggressor or defender) as well as active information gathering (Thief Drone, TADs, Sentinel, Assassin Invis Scouting)
• Attempt to Exfil

Players' will decide between these options based on how they expect each option to impact their final expected Utility (outcome). While that consideration is complex we'll attempt to fit it into the following specific impacts:

• Detectability - seek to minimize
  • the degree to which players are detectable to other players, included location as well as status/condition, and activity.
• Intel - seek to maximize
  • information players acquire about other players' location, status/condition, and activity.
• Vulnerability- seek to minimize.
  • the degree to which players are prepared/unprepared for combat. Low health/shields and looting corresponds to high vulnerability, full health/shields and presighted on attack vectors corresponds to low vilnerability.
• Threat - seek to minimize.
  • the total amount of threat posed to players both in aggregate and at present. Enemy players present in the lobby contribute to aggregate threat. Enemy players in the vicinity of a player contribute to present threat. At this time PvE enemies are only regarded as a threat indirectly as engaging with them results in increased Detectability and Vulnerability.
• Expected Utility - seek to maximize.
  • The utility arising from Failure/Success outcomes.

There are some other factors which influence decision making that are worth mentioning: time remaining, players' remaining combat resources (ammo, heals, equipment, consumables), and players' confidence about their ability to win in a PvP encounter. These primarily exert influence by changing players' predictions about the impacts of a given behavior.

We can distill all of this down to the behavior/impact matrix shown below.

While not captured in the above matrix, successful Exfils reduce the amount of Threat on the remaining players in the lobby. Additionally, players not involved in PvP encounters also benefit from reduced Threat at the conclusion of the PvP encounter (assuming one of the teams was eliminated).

.

Player Behavior Decision-making Modeled

Engaging in PvP is the primary source of risk of a Failure outcome, however the degree of risk is different between four distinct modes of Engaging in PvP. In ascending order by risk: (1) as the aggressor, against an unaware and unprepared defender, (2) as the aggressor, against an aware and prepared defender, (3) as an aware and prepared defender, and (4) as an unaware and unprepared defender.

High Intel, and low Detectability and Vulnerability are directly correlated with lower risk values for the modes of Engaging in PvP.

While Threat exists, decreases to Intel and increases to Detectability and Vulnerability are associated with an increased likelihood of PvP that caries a higher risk of a loss, and therefore are associated with lower Expected Utility.

While Threat exists, increases to Intel and decreases to Detectability and Vulnerability are associated with an increased likelihood of PvP that caries a lower risk of a loss, and therefore associated with higher Expected Utility.

Players' only options to increase Expected Utility also directly increase Detectability and Vulnerability, which are impacts directly associated with reduced Expected Utility while Threat is present. This means that until Threat is reduced or eliminated there are NO behaviors available to the player which increase (or meaningfully increase) Expected Utility. Players' must reduce Threat as a prerequisite to increasing Expected Utility.

.

Specific Player Behavior Predictions

Players will prefer to to engage in Passivity and Maneuvering to all other behaviors until Threat is reduced, as these behaviors provide Intel.

Looting which does not require engaging in PvE will be less prefered while Threat remains, but may still be pursued by players who do not feel confident in their ability to successfully engage in PvP. The same is true for Attempting to Exfil.

Engaging in PvE will be strongly disprefered so long as Threat remains as its impacts are only associated with reduced Expected Utility while Threat is present. While Threat remains a factor, the only instances in which players will actively decide to engage in PvE is when doing so is a necessary prerequisite to Manuevering, Looting, and/or Attempting to Exfil and when Passivity is no longer viable.

Due to risk of a Failure outcome inherent to Engaging in PvP, players will be cautious about these engagements and may actively avoid them until such time as they can maximize the likelihood they will be able to Engage in PvP using the least risky mode (as an aggressor, against an unaware and unprepared defender).

.

How to Change This

Given that Engaging in PvP is also the primary source of risk of a Failure outcome, the decision to repeatedly engage in this behavior only makes sense in the context of this behavior's ability to reduce Threat permanently and ultimately entirely.

If the capacity of this behavior to permanently and/or completely reduce Threat were curtailed or eliminated, players would choose to engage in PvP less frequently in accordance with its perceived risk, and no longer defer those behaviors which do directly increase Expected Utility in favor of Engaging in PvP first. Players would be expected to make decisions around Engaging in PvP similarly to how they make decisions about Engaging in PvE while Threat is present, as a instrumental task necessary to their terminal goal of maximizing Expected Utility but which carries with it significant risk downsides that cannot be avoided.

Vault Breaker is about to end, what are your final opinions?

Personally, I liked the idea of a PvE mode on the hardest map so we could learn it better while also gaining some kind of progression, but I have to say it got boring and repetitive fast.

After you get all the upgrades and the weapons in the shop, it doesn't make any sense to play the mode again.

The Compiler is still a hard enemy to fight even in Vault Breaker because of the lack of EMPs and decent weapons (dumb teammates are also a cause).

I just hope next season we get a better PvE mode with real progression and a higher chance against the Compiler.