Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
07-26-2010, 12:38 PM
This issue will change somewhat in 2.0 with the addition of the +detection component to EPtA.

I agree, though, that a completely vanilla TDM scenario does not lend itself to a necessary resolution of combat - indefinite cloaking being the largest abuse, but long periods of waiting are possible regardless.

Cloaked alpha LOL-pop situations are especially common and frustrating to the average player who does not have a group with an organized anti-cloak strategy (but sometimes even those that do). Reducing that frustration in a way that average players find manageable and interesting would likely do some good for FvK in general by producing more involved matches.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
07-26-2010, 04:00 PM
One of the ideas that is currently being considered is adding a moving king-of-the-hill PvP scenario that scores both objective control and opponent defeats.

This scenario would provide three key benefits over the current pure deathmatch:

1) Cloaking ships would still get their attack advantage, but would not be able to spend an excessive amount of time in cloak as they would be losing out on capture points.

2) It moves the fight around the entire map and creates regrouping opportunities naturally.

3) A team that is behind in kills could not simply avoid combat and grief their opponent, as points are still being awarded from captures.


-snix
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
07-26-2010, 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
One of the ideas that is currently being considered is adding a moving king-of-the-hill PvP scenario that scores both objective control and opponent defeats.

This scenario would provide three key benefits over the current pure deathmatch:

1) Cloaking ships would still get their attack advantage, but would not be able to spend an excessive amount of time in cloak as they would be losing out on capture points.

2) It moves the fight around the entire map and creates regrouping opportunities naturally.

3) A team that is behind in kills could not simply avoid combat and grief their opponent, as points are still being awarded from captures.


-snix
Kind of reminds me of the Team Fortress 2 arena mode. Even if the hill doesn't grant you points that fast, it negates the incentive to hide forever, since that doesn't totally protect your team from being beaten.

I also like the idea of moving the battle around the different set pieces on the map. The docks and comets and starbases are cool, but they're often ignored in deathmatches since they don't do anything.

I've heard an idea that some environment objects should grant stealth bonuses, like some asteroids and nebulae in missions. This would change the dynamic as the hill moves around, as some sections would be more open to ambushes, even by Fed characters. Maybe being in a comet tail would make it so you couldn't capture the hill, just like cloak, but you could wait to attack your enemies instead.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
07-26-2010, 04:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
One of the ideas that is currently being considered is adding a moving king-of-the-hill PvP scenario that scores both objective control and opponent defeats.

This scenario would provide three key benefits over the current pure deathmatch:

1) Cloaking ships would still get their attack advantage, but would not be able to spend an excessive amount of time in cloak as they would be losing out on capture points.

2) It moves the fight around the entire map and creates regrouping opportunities naturally.

3) A team that is behind in kills could not simply avoid combat and grief their opponent, as points are still being awarded from captures.


-snix
Now thats promising...very promising in fact. Can one suggest that the playable areas on these maps be increased considerably from the current Cap & Hold or TDM maps?

Though this may not apply to the current statement on new map types, this is something to chw on when stratigizing models/mechanics for cloak. Cloaks are ambush systems...there is one major thing missing to allow Cloaks to operate as they should. There needs to be an opportunity for the prey to become complacent, lulled into a false sense of security...its the "gotcha" moments.

We need open, non-scripted, non-queued potential for PvP...expanses of RvR/Territory control areas. Considering the lack of KDF numbers...possibly a small percentage of areas where the full time use of shields would be frowned upon(diplomatic reasons comes to mine) due to other PvE/Faction concerns within the space.

A glaring flaw I cant help but to snicker over, is the existance of "Raiders" with nothing to raid...a ship design role, with no role in game to fill. A light/lightening assault vessel forced to operate routinly like a front line Cruiser in PvE and in PvP matches.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
07-26-2010, 10:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
One of the ideas that is currently being considered is adding a moving king-of-the-hill PvP scenario that scores both objective control and opponent defeats.

This scenario would provide three key benefits over the current pure deathmatch:

1) Cloaking ships would still get their attack advantage, but would not be able to spend an excessive amount of time in cloak as they would be losing out on capture points.

2) It moves the fight around the entire map and creates regrouping opportunities naturally.

3) A team that is behind in kills could not simply avoid combat and grief their opponent, as points are still being awarded from captures.


-snix
It doesn't sound like any kind of space combat scenario I've ever heard of. Why would a control objective move, or worse bounce all over the map?

But a variation on that theme might work.

I'm recalling the Fed episode where the player has to set up mines near a transwarp gate to prevent the Romulans from using it, but you have to defend the mines while they are activating. Something similar might make a good PvP scenario.

Let's say that there is a planet with some resource that both sides would like to control. So there are beacons scattered around the planet that represent heavy minefields that can be activated. The first ship to scan/activate the beacon activates a minefield for their side. The minefield can be 'flipped' to the opposing team by shooting your way thru the minefield and get near enough to scan/reprogram the beacon for your side. Of course the mines would also retain their normal destructive properties, so you wouldn't necessarily want to run into an enemy mine. Say you scored 1 point for each mine destroyed, 5 points for each minefield activated, and 10 points for capturing an active minefield for your side. First team to get to 100 points (or whatever) wins the scenario. You could also win on kills, and getting blown up by an enemy mine would count as a kill for the team that controls it.

That kind of a scenario would also help to force ships out of cloak, since you can't shoot mines or activate a beacon unless you decloak. Also, a cloaked ship is unshielded and contact with a live mine would be inadvisable under those conditions...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
07-26-2010, 10:19 PM
Quote:
It doesn't sound like any kind of space combat scenario I've ever heard of. Why would a control objective move, or worse bounce all over the map?
secure objectives in sequence, rather than simultaneously. a chain of bases projecting shields on eachother, for example.

follow/defend a moving objective, such as a ship that both sides are trying to secure via boarding, or maybe a space monster/critter that both sides are trying to tempt to their side.

or just rip Payload off from TF2... each side tries to 'push' their invulnerable Metaphasic Bomb into the enemy base ^_^

the only problem is that tehre's a sizable number of peopel who dont give a **** about objectives and only go for kills. i had about the most miserable pvp experience ive had in STO earlier, a 4v3 on shantytown where the 3 were getting spawn camped (3 enemies were engineers and they were spamming deployables on our side of the map). the four didnt even try to do any hacking. so you know, die over and over and over again and you can't even quit out of the stupid thing. but that's ground pvp for you (aggravating across the board.)

if for example you could win C&H with kills as well as captures there'd be tons of teams that would simply ignore captures, no matter how well they were doing. This was reasonably common with Assault, when people actually played Assault.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
07-27-2010, 05:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snix View Post
One of the ideas that is currently being considered is adding a moving king-of-the-hill PvP scenario that scores both objective control and opponent defeats.

This scenario would provide three key benefits over the current pure deathmatch:

1) Cloaking ships would still get their attack advantage, but would not be able to spend an excessive amount of time in cloak as they would be losing out on capture points.

2) It moves the fight around the entire map and creates regrouping opportunities naturally.

3) A team that is behind in kills could not simply avoid combat and grief their opponent, as points are still being awarded from captures.


-snix
Snix?


Make it so
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
07-27-2010, 07:10 AM
So, does the Capture and Hold map (Cracked Planet?) not matter what is captured? That does nothing for the points when you have a few locations captured?

Or is it just that people remain cloaked for too long? What I've found, on the Klingon side, is you just need someone to lead into combat, become the initial target. With the cloaks, we have weaker shields/hulls, so few people want to take a Fed Alpha... well, I don't mind so much, but I got balls (and Evasive Maneuvers). Really, you just need someone to open up and get the fight started. Once it's going, it's all out war.

Basically, the Fedballs make the Klingons not want to initiate attacks, and the Klingon cloak makes the Feds want to stick together. However, I haven't found the current Capture and Hold map to be a problem.. although, as a BoP pilot, if the fights not started, I'll start it (and then quickly run away and hide).
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:55 PM.