I don't think i am the only one here that PvP needs more purpose and consequences than what it has now.
Seriously, except for the die hard PvP'ers players are not really motivated, they just see PvP as a way to get emblems and stuff.
This results in lots of noobs everywhere that do not participate, they just sit there and wait for things to be over or dont even bother putting in a team effort.
I think Cryptic needs to seriously take a good look at how PvP works, and for starters truly reward those that win.
And i have a few simple suggestions.
Daily missions: Change them so you have to actually "win" 3 PvP matches, not just be there.
PvP Rewards: Right now your rewarded pretty nicely wether you win or loose, this needs to change.
I suggest that those that win get the full reward, but those that loose get nothing except 50% of the skill point reward and nothing else.
These are two very simple suggestions, and i think they could help a great deal "forcing" people to play better and actually try to put in a team effort.
And a final and perhaps a bit controversial suggestion, is PvP Only Injuries.
Basicly they work like the regular injuries in PvE, but their effect is only in PvP.
Thus people that get constantly blown up in PvP don't suffer for it in PvE content.
Yes, losing a game should have a penalty in terms of rewards. The daily PvP mission should only include "3x win" instead of "3x play".
The generel rewards like Merits, Credits, Skillpoints should also be decreased for the losing team.
Otherwise there are too many "who cares anyways" players. They get their Emblems, they get their rewards - so why they should even bother with it? They spend their time idling on the PvP maps, watching TV, having some lunch, read some magazines or what else. If you have a couple of those guys on your team and you are an interested PvP player - it just gets frustrating. Every player of those "I don't give a ****- give me my Emblems!" type significantly weakens your own team - especially when fighting against a team which consists of interested PvP'ers only.
Cryptic, please do something here. It would be one of the first steps to show some love for PvP interested people.
I posted this in another thread about Cap and Hold but that was before I read this one and I feel it applies here.
Originally Posted by SteveHale
I still don't think it should be winner take all. I'd rather see the dailies be universal. Instead of requiring you to complete a specific task they should be offered as they are now but with the option of completing them in PVP, PVE, or Fleet Actions. That way, PVEers could stick with their comfort area and just run expanses/clusters 9 times, while PVPers could do the type of missions they want. The point being, people who get to play the game that they want to play are less likely to just show up for the credit and leave.
You can do it with winner take all but consider how long a match can take when both sides are playing each other as hard as they can? I'm not saying that the challenge wouldn't be nice, but Cap and Hold could take hours to complete a single daily.
I'm totally for a boost to the awards for winning and a diminishing reward for losing but not a winner takes all scenario. I don't think that "making it hurt" is going to do much to help anyway.
The only way to solve this problem is to make PvP "hurt" in one way or another.
Originally Posted by baos
I'll second that, there is a HUGE PROBLEM with the people who wreck the game for everyone else.
Which in effect is cryptic's fault first and fore most for not being able to provide meaningful PVP. Wana know what is worse? When a long time player with a good sportsmanship just turns the other way and says "I'm just here for the emblems/marks"
IMO changing anything in PvP atm would be suicide. Imagine if what is proposed that daily would complete only when one wins. Oh my god. That would be a total train wreck for some ppl. It would take the fun away. FvK is sparse on players as it is, at times.
I would suggest a 1win or 2win scenario for the pvp dailies as three doesn't not ake into account the difference in numbers of FvK or the effect that premades will have versus a pug team.
I do agree that pvp should have consequences, but am not sure what form these should take or if ALexRaptors idea is viable for the common STO player.
While this is good in theory, when similar efforts have been tried in other PvE centric games (which STO is), it invariably has resulted in much fewer people playing PvP. In some cases, to the point where devs see the low PvP numbers as an excuse to ignore all forms of PvP development, including balance. It would definitely make it harder to get in to PvP maps within a decent amount of time.
I would like there to be consequences for PvP, but I doubt a reasonable solution can be reached without some form of Sector PvP. This would have to include territory controls, resource ownership, and all the other things that come with such a thing. Since STO is very far from having a framework (client or server) that support this kind of game play, I am highly dubious that it would ever occur. If it does occur, I do not think it will be for a very long time.