Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > PvP Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,647
# 81
02-26-2013, 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redricky View Post
I find it amusing and somewhat contradictory that you insist that you dislike and don't want to be forced into PvP, yet voluntarily enter into the most refined form of it here in the meta game, the dreaded Forum PvP.

You've been sent to the respawn a number of times, by the way.
Where was I quoted saying leeeroooy? I don't remember saying that...

I'm happy to get sent to respawn if I lose a point. I'd rather lose a point or two than never have said what's on my mind.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 7,178
# 82
02-26-2013, 03:53 PM
the one good thing about the pvp rep is all the pve'er tears that will be shed, when if they want the passives and gear and whatever they will have to pvp. nothing is more amusing then pve'er HATE of pvp
gateway links-->Norvo Tigan, Telis Latto Ruwon, Sochie Heim, Solana Soleus
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,123
# 83
02-26-2013, 03:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by darramouss1 View Post
I'm sorry, but to me this seems broken. For players to target non-escorts right from the start shows that it's recognised that they're weak. For me to gravitate to killing non-escorts in the span of a few kills means that I recognised that they were weak.
I kill weak escorts with my escorts. In fact, I go after weak players. I go after science and escorts first in most engagements. The former, because I don't want them using debuffs and other drain/disable abilities. The latter, because I don't want them killing me or my team mates first.

If I find that the escorts and science ships are harder to kill than cruisers, I will go after the cruisers.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,015
# 84
02-26-2013, 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by darramouss1 View Post
Where was I quoted saying leeeroooy? I don't remember saying that...

I'm happy to get sent to respawn if I lose a point. I'd rather lose a point or two than never have said what's on my mind.
His last name is Jenkins. He is you.

The guys standing around meticulously planning the raid are the people in this community. They endlessly debate the merits of abilities, levels of attainable resists, spike v. pressure damage, crit coding and how the server handles it, new player education, DoT magnitude and proc rate interactions with passive healing, premades v. pug-mades v. pugging, and hundreds of other minute nerdy balance issues.

You conducted an experiment to confirm your own bias which included a whopping 6 matches (you don't even know what you don't know at this point). Then you screamed your own personal battlecry consisting of your own name, preconceptions, and wild speculation about a rumored system and proceeded to ignore the advice of those who have been over this ground repeatedly.
Ensign
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
# 85
02-26-2013, 04:27 PM
Weren't a lot of you saying fleet gear shouldn't be so good because not everybody can get to a high tier fleet , blah , blah, blah? Rethorical question, don't want an answer.

Besides, all you guys will be here complaining about them being OP or UP anyways.

PvP rep system? My shield-less Miranda will be ready for action!
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 585
# 86
02-26-2013, 04:40 PM
Would it be asking too much to only allow one set of Rep-system passives to be selected as Active at a time?

Say Omega... or Romulan... or PvP... or Jem'Hadar... or Dr. Who... whichever you want, but one at a time instead of everything all together at once? You'd still need to be buy Respec tokens to re-arrange your selections within completed trees, but a system would have several upsides for Cryptic as well as its players.

1. Limits power creep in PvE and PvP in a sensible, coherent fashion, allowing content to remain viably challenging without putting it out of reach of players just starting out.

2. Allows Cryptic to watch and see which Rep trees are most used as active, allowing easier metric-gathering for tuning (if nobody is using the PvP Rep systems, there's a good chance there's something wrong with it).

3. Reduces barriers for players looking to get into endgame PvE and PvP content.

There's other reasons, but I've gotta run. It'd be win-win for everyone if Cryptic would go this route with the rep system.
If you feel Keel'el's effect is well designed, please, for your own safety, be very careful around shallow pools of water.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 284
# 87
02-26-2013, 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redricky View Post
Forum PvP.
Just wait until the forum pvp reputation system comes out. Then you will have some things to complain about.
Nerf Klinks, Buff Rommies
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,647
# 88
02-26-2013, 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redricky View Post
His last name is Jenkins. He is you.

The guys standing around meticulously planning the raid are the people in this community. They endlessly debate the merits of abilities, levels of attainable resists, spike v. pressure damage, crit coding and how the server handles it, new player education, DoT magnitude and proc rate interactions with passive healing, premades v. pug-mades v. pugging, and hundreds of other minute nerdy balance issues.

You conducted an experiment to confirm your own bias which included a whopping 6 matches (you don't even know what you don't know at this point). Then you screamed your own personal battlecry consisting of your own name, preconceptions, and wild speculation about a rumored system and proceeded to ignore the advice of those who have been over this ground repeatedly.
I think you have the wrong person. None of my three names are Jenkins, nor do any of my names start with a J.

In the spirit of a fair go I have been playing PvP all this afternoon. There are trends which are becoming apparent. (These are based on observation, not assumption.)

* PvP is ruled by escorts. Yes, there are one or two non-escorts who I've seen do well. One or two over 6 hours.
* Science powers annoy. That's as bad as it's been for me. They don't really hamper you that much.
* Cruisers just don't hit hard enough. Any dent they make in an escort's shield is rendered useless by a quick turn of their ship. That's in the 5 second window where their alternating Tac Team isn't up.
* Escorts seem to tank and tank and tank. I've seen two ships where I couldn't make a dent in their shields after close to a minute of repeated fire and debuffing. Both were escorts. In both matches I was in the top 4 damage dealers. (I parsed the matches.)

These fly in the face of reason and fly in the face of Trek. Call me old fashioned, but I like my Trek games to be a little more Trek. Science should be more than an annoyance. You should see science and be wary. Cruisers should be harder to kill. Escorts should NOT be able to tank.

These imbalances and striving for elitism renders fan favourites like the Galaxy or the Intrepid mostly useless. They're all JHAS, Mobius, Patrol Escorts, Vestas, Odysseys and Andorian ships.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 284
# 89
02-26-2013, 05:11 PM
BTW, escorts rule in almost all PvE also. DPS is king in PvE
Nerf Klinks, Buff Rommies
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 883
# 90
02-26-2013, 05:37 PM
I somewhat dislike the idea of PvP reputation (increasing the skill gap), but the truth is that if they don't add PvP rep they'll add some other kind of PvE rep that will be a horrible grind.

Maybe some good could come out of it if, for example, Feds had separate FvF and FvK reps (would encourage more FvK) and Klingons had separate KvK and FvK resp (would encourage more KvK)
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 10:45 AM.