Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 1 PvP Suggestion
04-16-2011, 11:41 PM
I'm sure something like this has been mentioned before but I think serious consideration should be had. The largest problems with PvP:

1) Rank separation causes low numbers per rank (the chance to ACTUALLY PvP is low and has long waits)

2) Impossible to balance against PvE

Fix:

Each player selects from preset crafts from each tier to play as before the game begins. These 'classes' can be balanced easily in comparison to a player made ship which was designed with PvE in mind. This is also economical since nothing has to be tested against PvP before implementation into PvE proper.

Need proof this works? Examine DCUO Legends PvP. You can play it at any level and you don't need to worry about getting stomped by someone with more time or money than you. It's completely skill-based with no benefits to a player beyond their knowledge of the character. STO PvP would benefit greatly from this setup; it requires less resources (balancing is much easier without a bunch of unknowns) and can serve as a great framework to build upon. The traditional 'take your own' ship PvP would, obviously, still exist but I guarantee it would be far less popular.

Also, Star Trek never had fifteen Sovereign battleships fighting one another on screen so a six on six preset matches with three T2, two T3 and a T4 ship per side would be pretty awesome. All that is required is that damage across the ships be the normalized. The T4 has more weapons and a bigger hull but as long as per phaser the damage is the same as the T2 it is perfectly fine since there are 3 to match it.

Is it a perfect fix? No. But I guarantee PvP would be much more popular among players with an option like this. The proof is DCUO. It's nearly impossible to get into a normal PvP match but hit up Legends and you probably won't wait more than a few minutes on a long day. Any player could play it, no one would have a leg up on other players. Seems like a no brainer. Too bad good ideas are never popular.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
04-17-2011, 07:43 AM
Even if the damage from weapons were normalized, a T5 would wipe the floor with a T2/T3 due to having twice as many weapons, Captain buffs, and way more BO abilities.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
04-18-2011, 06:07 AM
PvP per level is just as unbalanced as a T4 versus a T2 in many respects: the difference between a 11 and a 19 is substantial. You have more powers, you have better equipment, etc... Each time you rank up, its a lot like starting over. All your gear is now substandard and needs to be replaced.

If you assume a 1 on 1 you'd be correct: a T4 is more powerful (also note I didn't mention T5's and above, there wouldn't be much of a reason unless the match was a 8 v 8 or higher). In a 6 on 6 with only one T4 per team there's no issue. If all six chose to gang up on the T4 it'd get swatted no different than the current PvP. The change comes from maybe the T4 is just a tank to generate aggro and soak up damage while its team picks off the weenies. In this scenario team A ganging up isn't going to be as viable. You can't look at this one-dimensionally and assume input A equals output B.

Let's look at it this way, assume craft A beats craft B, and B stomps C, and C naturally whomps A. A team of all A versus B looks like a sure win. But what if both teams are all A's, or each team has one of each. I don't expect it to ACTUALLY be built like Rock-Paper-Scissors but it illustrates an important point. Each team doesn't know what ships the other has selected, and if the BUILDS are diverse and balanced to tolerance, its a completely more viable system than the one currently in place.

I know, its easy to say it won't work. But the proof is there, DUCO took that chance and it became the most popular option for these reasons. Look at the FPS genre, the trait systems in Call of Duty games has ****ed the experience up because a new player is at a huuuuuge disadvantage. The class methods, or the 'clean-slate' approach games like Homefront, Counter-Strike, Firearms and Halo use have been popular because it doesn't reward players to be better SIMPLY because they've invested more time. Instead, all players are 'even' in theory and skill and tactics (with a bit of luck) will determine.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
04-18-2011, 06:23 AM
The problem is that there are very few players at the lower levels PvPing

Even at VA its still relatively few players, but theres still 20 times as many PvPers online at any given time.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
04-18-2011, 06:28 AM
I can see that, which is why a PvP option that allows people to jump in regardless of rank is poignant. Waiting 4 hours for a single match sucks. If there are only 20 people on who want to PvP, they could all have a chance to play against each other.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
04-18-2011, 11:16 AM
Hmmm... it sounds like you're suggesting something like Team Fortress, every player gets to choose a particular class (ship in this case) and go at it... Not a bad idea, and certainly interesting. I would certainly enojy trying it out. The problems would be balancing the ships, and the fact that people wouldn't be able to play their own ship that they've put so much into. I would love to see this as a PvP option, but not replace the system entirely.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
04-19-2011, 11:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felderburg View Post
Hmmm... it sounds like you're suggesting something like Team Fortress, every player gets to choose a particular class (ship in this case) and go at it... Not a bad idea, and certainly interesting. I would certainly enojy trying it out. The problems would be balancing the ships, and the fact that people wouldn't be able to play their own ship that they've put so much into. I would love to see this as a PvP option, but not replace the system entirely.
I agree with this statement as I would have said the same thing my self.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
04-19-2011, 11:51 AM
hmm call me thick but i dont see how this would be anybetter.

But here is an idea HOWS ABOUT CRYPTIC GET THERE FINGERS OUT THERE AZZES & FIX WHATS WRONG WITH PVP!!.

Step 1 should be to fix broken powers.... current ones that have caused outcry in PVP BFAW Scramble sensors.

Step 2 Get rid of fleet support & photonic fleet & even though iv never found a problem with the KDF carriers just to keep the fed only crybabies quiet get rid of there pets make the carriers in to other viable ship class.

Step 3 either nerf cross heals or increase DPS.

Step 4 cryptic need to stop taking fed only players by the hand stop going balls out to keep them happy & stop crushing whats left of the PVP in this game.

Step 5 STO needs less RP & more PVP in the form of open territory control & all this needs done b4 they release the romulan faction.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
04-24-2011, 01:51 AM
Fixing 'traditional' PvP isn't as easy as 'move this, add that, remove this' to get it right. All the ships, equipment and players are PvE oriented. There's no surprise PvP issues would exist. This is largely why I'd suggest a alternate system instead of trying to decide what is imbalanced. There is two ways to look at it: balance all the in-game content for PvE and PvP or put in a version that can be balanced more easily.

It's easy to criticize PvP, but it has been an auxiliary from day one. Klingons were a PvP game mode originally and now Cryptic is trying to make it an alt to Fed PvE. It comes down as STO is PvE oriented; its a nearly impossible task to balance that with PvP. It's not outside the realms of reason but a daunting task I'm sure. To use DCUO as an example once more; that is a game ORIENTED towards open-world PvP and there are still constant balance addresses. It is a game that was built from day one to be PvP-driven; if there are PvP issues there, how do you think STO looks behind the scenes? You know of course, you've been playing.

A class-system, popular in many online games, might just be right to revitalize the PvP game and help with the balancing issues. It wouldn't replace the current PvP, it would simply offer an alternative. I suspect more people would be interested in this sort of environment than the current offering but of course, that position comes from my experiences with other games that used such systems. Right now PvP isn't the focus of development, but hopefully come the next season they'll start putting some thought into it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
04-24-2011, 02:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyomoto View Post
Fixing 'traditional' PvP isn't as easy as 'move this, add that, remove this' to get it right. All the ships, equipment and players are PvE oriented. There's no surprise PvP issues would exist. This is largely why I'd suggest a alternate system instead of trying to decide what is imbalanced. There is two ways to look at it: balance all the in-game content for PvE and PvP or put in a version that can be balanced more easily.

It's easy to criticize PvP, but it has been an auxiliary from day one. Klingons were a PvP game mode originally and now Cryptic is trying to make it an alt to Fed PvE. It comes down as STO is PvE oriented; its a nearly impossible task to balance that with PvP. It's not outside the realms of reason but a daunting task I'm sure. To use DCUO as an example once more; that is a game ORIENTED towards open-world PvP and there are still constant balance addresses. It is a game that was built from day one to be PvP-driven; if there are PvP issues there, how do you think STO looks behind the scenes? You know of course, you've been playing.

A class-system, popular in many online games, might just be right to revitalize the PvP game and help with the balancing issues. It wouldn't replace the current PvP, it would simply offer an alternative. I suspect more people would be interested in this sort of environment than the current offering but of course, that position comes from my experiences with other games that used such systems. Right now PvP isn't the focus of development, but hopefully come the next season they'll start putting some thought into it.

If anything, all new skillsand items should be tested out in PvP first and then added to the game after a through review. A NPC ship will not tell you how unfair that new skill/item is. Nor will it actually have the AI to use it's skills/items properly. Allow us to test new skills in PvP first and we can tell you if its lack luster, good or a game changer and needs a nerf swing. Then when its ready to go give it to PvE. This way there will never be a debate or thread about needing a nerf to a skill/item. PvP will already be satisfied with the item and then PvE will get the chance to play with it. Then PvE players only will not get mad at the PvP community when we ask for a nerf swing since its to powerful or not.

Perfect example was the cloaking tractor beam mines. 5 was down right to many in a pvp match. If every ship had 1 then each side could have 25 of these out at a time. 1 or 2 was not enough to stop you with counters. But when 6 of these guys tractor you, every skill you have PH Evasive Manuvers APO engine battery ramming speed (not sure if I can think of another one) did absolutely nothing. I managed a measly 5 impulse when 6 of them had my escort ship whose normal impulse was over 26.
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 09:09 PM.