Maybe it's just me but I get the sense that some of the biggest F2P games are PvP focused? Isn't Cryptic missing a trick here?
Pvpers do in fact individually spend more for the simple fact that they try to get the newest fancy stuff to compete with. And lets not include the respec tokens where everytime cryptic screws something up or changes something we need to respec.
Its sad, Subbers/LTS'ers should get unlimited respec like almost any other decent MMO.
Last edited by darkfader1988; 02-14-2013 at 09:53 AM.
don tknow about what game you are talking but in game I see people using steamrunners ,mvam,aquarius ...and occasionally a bug as escorts.
For sci ships the vesta is the most often seen.This is because you will always see more fleet./cstore ships than rare ships like bug or lockbox ships....its math.
I must say that you have a poor sense of observation
It's a tough question for Cryptic, what do you sell to PvPers that they will both want (performance increases) but not be angered by (too much power in those performance increases)?
You can sell 'different'. Like when the Excelsior Retrofit was introduced: it wasn't overall 'better' than the existing Assault and Star Cruisers, but it offered a different console setup.
The Galaxy-R's separation and The Galaxy-X with it's phaser lancer, dual cannons and cloak could also be 'different', though they suffer from abysmal turn-rate when both ships would seem to favor more mobile builds. Having 3 engineering ensigns sucks too, but BOff powers really need to be redesigned; the only tree which is really healthy at the ensign level is science.
PVP on the otherhand is INSANELY cheap to implement, and get the same results.
I'm very skeptical of this and my skepticism boils down partly to economies of scale.
Scenario A: You have 300 devs, having 40%-60% of your budget on PvP is cost effective and more cost effective per dev than further PvE development.
Scenario B: If you have 25 devs or 50, you're up against a wall because you need a minimum number of artists/producers/technicians. This forces you into a part of the cost curve where PvE is a more cost effective use of labor.
If you under-staff PvE, you get the same results, only slower. If you under-staff PvP, you get an unsustainable product. A real PvP focus might require things like biweekly buff/nerf patches, for example. Which might involve a workflow 50 people can't do.
And if say you need a minimum of 15 people doing non-systems, non-content tasks, you have less devs for PvE or PvP. And, like I say, understaffed PvE probably has less obstacles (ie. people may quit and come back when content eventually gets released) than understaffed PvP (people don't come back when imbalances persist).
Pvp is a rich mans game therefore it has to e them who spend the most
Be it through grinding or spending rl money you can't pvp without spending it in large wods
Don't somebody come in and say "it's down to skill not money"
I'm all for practice makes perfect but when you've got yourself a 150k mirror escort you roll into a match and someone on the other end has the latest in lockbox mastery and trickery no matter how good you are your doomed!
So IMO its pvp folks who have to spend the most
----=====This is my opinion you don't have to listen and no one else has to read them these "OPINIONS" are based on my exploits and my learning other people will have their opinions and that's fine just don't knock my way of doing things thanks=====----