Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 135
Notes: If you want to take part in this ( probably monthly ), reply please with:

fleetname:
@handle:


SPECIAL THANKS TO @gradstudent1, @galilleos, @WestIce

INTRODUCTION

This report is a compilation of player comments about the state of PvP. The players who were asked to provide comments are leaders and representatives of their respective fleets.

Each player will be listed according to @handle and fleet?for example @SAMPLE (110th Fleet).

Except in cases of where stylistic or grammatical problems prevent comprehension, all quotations are original to their authors.

FEEDBACK

@FrancisDrake (The 300) and @pascalb1 (The 300)

What we would like to see in the future:

1. we would like to have a pvp reputation system where at the end every class would have 3 different pvp sets to choose from.

2. Pvp starbase system would be nice with new pvp mission such as defend your base etc.

3. we think it would be a good idea to have a program like punkbuster installed which would help to keep the game clean

1. it is good to have different queues however i think a premade queue or 5 vs 5 pre-teamed or 4 vs 4 pre-teamed queues add to that would be even more awesome

2. Another topic with private queues is their customizable options. If there could be added a little bit more like pay2win console off/on that would be much appreciated.*

In the name of The300 we happy to be part of this.* **

@kedric (S.O.B.)

1) Extends and from what others have said it seems to be the Resist and not the Regen that seems to be the issue when you hit someone with Extends TSS3 or 2 and Tacteam you damn near can?t kill them even if they are at 5 percent hull it just seems the shield resist is to high when it comes to extends . Now if it is not change what they should do is make it that whoever is doing the Extending they should take some damage to their shields as well because they are extending their shields around that ship. i can give a more detail if you want me to talk to you about it.

2) Charged Particle Burst: No one seems to use this skill anymore in PvP because it seems power insulators have killed the skill just about all together were you do very little damage to the shields it seems if you are not spec into power insulators then the damage should be around 4 K give or take and if you are full spec then they should do around 2K give or take that way it is useful still but not overpowered

@Sonatic (Valhalla Movement)/@Betashark, (Valhalla Movement) translated by @pascalb1

What we could try to do better ?

1. Would it be possible maybe to include a point system which gives you points for completing pvp ( not kill points ), so that we would encouarge new players to try out pvp.
Pvp point store where you could buy new items which do not effect pvp though as:
ships, accolades, maps or unlockables for your starbase
2. More maps for pvp or a check point like a starbase where players could meet and group up together for pvp or even launch from there.
3. What I really like from the community are all those pvp tournaments which should be all officiallly announced

things which are bad ?

1. what pvp influence a lot are Doffs which should be even more limited for every ship
2. that there is no an anti cheat program or a ban list
3. the automated team grouping isn't always working best ( 5 sci, 5 tac in one team )

@ilhansk (Inner Circle), translated @pascalb1

Dear Cryptic Team,

The fleet Inner Circle wants to say thank you very much, that you are interested in our ideas and feedback. Pvp has great potential in this game; we are looking forward to the upcoming improvements, ideas and the new stuff.

Ideas for the future:

1. Inner Cirlce members love to pvp against each other in the privat queues. We would love to see more customizable options to have more choices as well as to add more flexibility to the game. For instance that activating/deactivating of consoles, ship types, doffs, ship tiers and so on.
2. More variety for pvp modes would most certainly not be a bad thing. Right now there are only 2 pvp modes. There are plenty of multiplayer games which offer various of different modes. Games like Max Payne 3, Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Crysis 2 etc do have partially very interesting and creative pvp modes. Maybe it would be worth a shot to ?assimilate? that one or the other bit of it.
3. Futher more some of our more dedicated pvp players would love to have more possibilities to change their UI buff icons ( color, size ). That would probably make most pvp players happy.

Feedback on the current state of pvp:

1. We really appreciate the fact that we can choose to play so many different ships or have so many different ways to build our ships. Most of the ships are well designed and their handling various so that everyone will find a perfect fit. Please keep it up!
2. We are really happy that Cryptic decided to balance fun breaking game elements like Subnuc doffs or Tricobalts. If we take a closer look there are only a few aspects left which slightly harm the pvp balance. We do like the fact that Cryptic is now even more involved with the pvp community. ( suggestions, advices ). We really like that.

All the best wishes Inner Circle.

@Soveliss-Sovair (SVK Elite)

3 Things we would like to see in the future:
*
1) More arena and C&H maps, especially C&H. We have done the same C&H map since launch, gets old ya know what I mean?
*
2) Fix the glitches and bugs in Kerrat, for example invisble and shootable probes.
*
3) More fair and balanced ships added, especially to the KDF.
**
2 Feed backs about PvP :
*
1) New Cstore ships are not only costly to buy but overpowered against any other ship that is not cstore related. More balanced ships are needed or actually restructure ship tiers so that they match better against other players, such as T-5 ships are to be for LvL 40-45. Tier 6 ships for LvL 50. If new power ships are to be introduced this should happen to help balance out pvp better.
*
2) As explained earlier, more maps for pvp for obvious reasons.

@mrkollins (Division Hispana)

Things that we would like to see in the future:

- New maps and modes (Territory Control, Free for All, Starbase Attack/Defense)

- Massive PvP, i.e 20 vs 20, etc. Fleets versus Fleets, maybe an
alliance system, that allows fleets to ally with others to fight
against others alliances in special weekly events

- Better rewards

Regarding the actual state of the game:

- More defined classes. Some Escorts can tank like a cruiser,
Engineers are not useful enough, a Science captain can do the same
healing in a premade setting and be more useful than an Engineer. We
need more defined classes, if you're in an escort you should be really
weak, if you're in a cruiser you should be a real tank.

- Ground needs some love. Very few people play it, maybe because
everything happens so fast. A system like SWTOR could be nice, i.e for
PvE you have the normal amount of HP, but for PvP your HP become 10
times greater, this way things are more like space, you have a lot of
HP so you have plenty of time to react and you need focus fire to put
someone down.

@Pug01 (Federation Emergency Services, FES)

Firstly, thank you for allowing Federation Emergency Services to participate in this Community Developer Interaction.* Through discussions with senior members of the fleet and fleet leaders, we have established 5 points that are of great interest to us.* Federation Emergency Services is a very capable Ground PvP Fleet.* We also participate in Space PvP, but in this communication we will be focusing on what applies to us as a Ground PvP Fleet. The members involved in this discussion were : @Pug01, @Guriphu, @BriGuy, @Sh0kar, and @Izzled.* The 5 points are divided into 3 large scope items and 2 specific items.

The explanation of some of the items will be more extensive.* The explanation will attempt to provide enough information so that anyone not familiar with portions of the game will understand the item being discussed.* If any clarification is required, please feel free to contact me. *Thank you.

Large Scope Items
We understand that these items could take extensive time to implement.* Either through policy changes or programming.* But we feel that these Large Scope items will provide significant improvements in the Ground PvP community, and potentially to the whole Star Trek Community.
1.* * * *1) Foundary Maps in PvP:* Allowing the player base to develop Ground PvP maps using the foundary would create endless styles of play.* The terrain participates in Ground PvP in a dramatic way.* An Open field calls for a completely different play style than a rock valley.* As maps gain an increasing number of positive votes the map could cycle into the public Queues.
2.* * * *2) Balanced New Items:* It has become common for new items to be introduced into the game that have very little effect on PvE, but result in Dramatic changes to PvP.* An example is the Compressed Cryo Launcher that has introduced a Pulsewave level damage, for which there is no significant resistance in armor.* For a well configured team the effect can be countered but no Pug-made will be coordinated enough to counter the effects.* This has become a common theme where a new Item has major impact in PvP with no balance.* We don't mind the new items but would like to see a "counter" item or a method that allows for balance.
3.****** 3) Improved Logs: The current combat log files lack some significant information of what occurred during combat.* We would like to see a more comprehensive log file output.* This will allow us to help other players in explaining to them what occurred during combat, by looking at the log files.* Tools such as the Advanced Combat Tracker, allows a "replay" of log files to look at the sequence of attacks.* It will also allow us to detect bugs a lot easier.* A good example is the Equipment Diagnostic damage stacking.* At the moment the log files do not show any abilities that do not affect "hit points" on players.* So this ability is easily hidden from players yet the results are quite obvious but the source is "invisible".* There is also a disconnect as to the player source of the "Shield Damage" that a player takes.
Specific Items
These items are more specific to Ground PvP and might relate in some way to PvE.
4.****** 4) Perfect Cloak and Perception Ineffectiveness: We don't necessarily view the Perfect Cloak as the actual problem.* We in fact look at the weak effect of Perception being the major issue.* Once someone reaches 600 stealth they become completely invisible.* With several techniques and probably with future items this will always be an issue for inexperienced players.* Furthermore, we have found that players with a great computer (high graphics settings) can "detect" perfect cloakers.* But for other players with older systems, their turned down graphics, place them at a major disadvantage.* Several players have traits that provide Perception, yet fully stacked perception on a science character might give them 1 extra meter in which to spot cloakers, but no way to penetrate through the 600 stealth.* The Perception value is therefore not a big force in detecting Cloakers.
5.****** 5) Kit Balance: This can easily become a big game changer.* We are seeing the new Romulan Kits that provide Tactical Officers with an amazing kit, yet the Science and Engineering officers are suffering.* Furthermore the progression from Mk X items (Armor, Guns) to Mk XII has shifted the balance of some kits.* Several things have contributed to this shift and isn't just based on the Mk level of items.* So we are now faced with kits, that used to be great, becoming horrible kits.* More kits are becoming obsolete as the game progresses.* This can result in a VERY steep learning curve for new players and even existing players.* [Possible Solution: Either an open kit system is needed where players can mix and match their kit skills.* This could be very lucrative for Cryptic, since each ability could cost significant dilithium, as well as the blank kits.* Most players would want 3 or more different versions of their base kit.* This would allow those obscure abilities to make an appearance in a new kit.* Releasing a new kit ability could generate a whole new set of kits that would have to be created again from scratch.* Or updating an existing ability with improved values would generate new game styles by combining those abilities into kits.]

Thank you for taking time to look over these items.

@joker1374 (Confederazione Stellare Italiana, CSI)

Hi Eryon,

we've responded to the 5 points that you told us. We're pleased our opinions will be collected together with all other fleets' feedback.

So, the 3 things that the fleet would like to see implemented in the future in pvp are:

1-The introduction of a reputation system based on pvp, with scores and achievements, exclusive kits and specific equipments for pvp, adding new maps. The system could enable new pvpers to enter in the map against and/or with same level players of both factions to not discourage new pvp player and to generally stimulate players to gain experience in the whole pvp, ground and space.

2-The introduction of significant rewards at the end of each pvp. Right now every pvp match gives us a small amount of energy credits and expertise, which is not at all attractive to any player. It would be nice to add a small amount of Romulan Marks at the end of each pvp with some items, giving priority to quality for the winning team.

3-A new pvp mode between fleets to conquer enemy territories, dilthium mines, colonies, bases, like command&conquer.

The 2 things that the fleet hates about pvp are:

1-The respawn point in pvp maps is usually too far away from the group, for the simple reason that the time needed to reach the team gives to the opponents the possibility to beat the other. This is also affected by the imbalance that usually public queues create in the team: team of all tactical, all sci, all eng ecc...

2-The actual imbalance and mismanagement between team and abilities. Many times the skills are changed, touched and modified so much that the players, to keep up, they continually need to respec. There is need for a better planning when the developers going to change the active and passive abilities of careers. Bugged skills, exploits and workarounds make the roles no longer significant as it once was: as the scramble doesn't work, dem not as it should too, the tanker not tanking anymore, the healers don't hold up or fail to compensate the damage with their healing abilties, ecc...
This is due to the team management system made up of pugs as in step #1 (the speech, of course, is not related to premade queued teams).

We are curious to read the feedback from other fleets when they'll be posted on the forum.

Best regards,
CSI - Confederazione Stellare Italiana

@bigdogg76 (Federation Defence Corp, FDC)

1. Please change the super cloak. this is when a player with Covert and is fully skilled into the Stealth Module and uses the Gamma Quadrant Tribble. This is very overpowered and basically is the same issue as the stealth stack issue that was fixed earlier. Perhaps denying the stealth bonus to players with covert, or to the tribble altogether.

*
2. Please reduce the effectivness of the Cryo-wave. It is overpowered, and unlike most advantages it is literally pay to win. That or somehow increase a players ability to choose a resist to Cold Damage. The only way to do so now is to use the cryo tribble.
*
3. Create an easier to obtain but less powerful ground set for those who dont have STF gear...it was easier to get it before season 7 and it leaves many people multiple toons at a disadvantage
*
4. Create a way out of the Stasis Pistol. Its a guarenteed win for an engineer with mines and a bomb or a tac with a pulsewave.
Nova Aurora Polaris
- Nova Aurora Polaris -
@pascalb1

Last edited by pascalb1; 12-31-2012 at 04:15 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,416
# 2
12-31-2012, 06:17 PM
im actually very aprehensive about a pvp reputation system. since the fleet shields and rep issue from the current reputation fiasco.

those are "pve" reps but have such a huge impact on pvp, what could the possibly put in a pvp track that wont be just as effecting?

they painted themselves into a corner on this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mancom View Post
Frankly, I think the only sound advice that one can give new players at this time is to stay away from PVP in STO.
Science pvp at its best-http://www.youtube.com/user/matteo716
Do you even Science Bro?
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 87
# 3
12-31-2012, 06:21 PM
Please include our fleet in future discussions

Hammer Squadron
@wdocduck
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,671
# 4
12-31-2012, 06:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maicake716 View Post
im actually very aprehensive about a pvp reputation system. since the fleet shields and rep issue from the current reputation fiasco.

those are "pve" reps but have such a huge impact on pvp, what could the possibly put in a pvp track that wont be just as effecting?

they painted themselves into a corner on this one.
agreed, the passives have the potential to be the most game changing thing they have introduced yet, even more so then doffs, and they are being made and introduced by non pvpers that really cant know how to balance things unless they are pvp veterans themselves. they continue to damage pvp with every addition due of this.

the placate remains way over powered ed, we don't need more of that. it proboly makes it twice as hard to kill someone if they have it, effective pvp damage being so timing based, and with it constently disrupting your timing and swapping your target, its nearly game breaking. i'd go so far as to say its worse then even runabouts.

the only good thing about pvp rep i can think of is that i would have no trouble grinding pvp marks
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 585
# 5
12-31-2012, 10:38 PM
As far as the PvP rep system goes, why not design it around passives that improve the rewards for PvP'ing? I mean, make it so get more EC, or more drops when you kill pets, additional PvP missions for that can reward useful additional items or dilithium, things of that nature. Please, please, please, do not turn it into a "complete this rep system to be even more powerful in PvP."
Ensign
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 12
# 6
12-31-2012, 10:59 PM
Alternate Universe Coalition
@tanizen

Regarding PVP rep system. I'd be careful with this. If made the same way as Omega and Romulan I think it would be a bad idea for many reasons. A separate system should be created and used and should not be confused with PVE and general gameplay.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,669
# 7
01-01-2013, 02:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tanizen1 View Post
Alternate Universe Coalition
@tanizen

Regarding PVP rep system. I'd be careful with this. If made the same way as Omega and Romulan I think it would be a bad idea for many reasons. A separate system should be created and used and should not be confused with PVE and general gameplay.
2 things to remember:

1. COST. Not for the player side, but on the company/development side-the more code you can re-use the better. Best still if it's using a common engine and all the devs need to do, is insert scripts and link it to a database.

2. Cost/Benefit (risk/reward): any new PvP content (or KDF content, for that matter) has to pass this at the company level-aka it has to be at worst revenue neutral for Cryptic to approve, with a good possibility of generating profit in some form.

What this means for you: if you don't want a cookie-cutter copy of the Rom/Omega rep systems, you need to come up with a strong business-case scenario from the COMPANY's perspective as to why it should, as you suggest, be an entirely new (presumably developed from scratch) system, entirely different from the Omega/Romulan/Fleet rep models.

Good luck with that, the main hurdles are:

Man-Hours vs. Opportunity costs: people do not code for free, new code must go through (before it hits BETA, much less full release) a cycle where it is written, debugged, tested, portions re-written, rules-checked, internal testing/QA, assembled into a shard for Tribble, and then released for testing under less-controlled environments.

The more new code that has to be written, the more likely new bugs are to arise when it's mated to the shard for tribble testing...and that's before you get your first balance pass.

In contrast, the more "Used parts" you can make use OF, the faster it's going to move through each stage-the more use/reuse a piece of code has, the fewer unplanned surprises it's going to carry, and the easier it is to get through the initial approval process that even gets the work begun in the first place.

Because it uses fewer man-hours to do it that way, leaving less opportunity costs for the company.

what kind of Opportunity costs?

Lockboxes are very,very, profitable. New items generate revenue, non-revenue generating content is both more difficult, and more labor intensive, while being less profitable, the less difficult the non-revenue generating content is for the Development team, the more likely it is to get approval and to be actually worked upon rather than put off.
"when you're out of Birds of Prey, you're out of ships."

Last edited by patrickngo; 01-01-2013 at 03:09 AM.
Ensign
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 12
# 8
01-01-2013, 10:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickngo View Post
2 things to remember:

1. COST. Not for the player side, but on the company/development side-the more code you can re-use the better. Best still if it's using a common engine and all the devs need to do, is insert scripts and link it to a database.

2. Cost/Benefit (risk/reward): any new PvP content (or KDF content, for that matter) has to pass this at the company level-aka it has to be at worst revenue neutral for Cryptic to approve, with a good possibility of generating profit in some form.

What this means for you: if you don't want a cookie-cutter copy of the Rom/Omega rep systems, you need to come up with a strong business-case scenario from the COMPANY's perspective as to why it should, as you suggest, be an entirely new (presumably developed from scratch) system, entirely different from the Omega/Romulan/Fleet rep models.

Good luck with that, the main hurdles are:

Man-Hours vs. Opportunity costs: people do not code for free, new code must go through (before it hits BETA, much less full release) a cycle where it is written, debugged, tested, portions re-written, rules-checked, internal testing/QA, assembled into a shard for Tribble, and then released for testing under less-controlled environments.

The more new code that has to be written, the more likely new bugs are to arise when it's mated to the shard for tribble testing...and that's before you get your first balance pass.

In contrast, the more "Used parts" you can make use OF, the faster it's going to move through each stage-the more use/reuse a piece of code has, the fewer unplanned surprises it's going to carry, and the easier it is to get through the initial approval process that even gets the work begun in the first place.

Because it uses fewer man-hours to do it that way, leaving less opportunity costs for the company.

what kind of Opportunity costs?

Lockboxes are very,very, profitable. New items generate revenue, non-revenue generating content is both more difficult, and more labor intensive, while being less profitable, the less difficult the non-revenue generating content is for the Development team, the more likely it is to get approval and to be actually worked upon rather than put off.

Good points - but to re-state my point regarding using the reputation system a little more fully considering it was just an add-on comment.

1. First let's identify the goal or objective that Cryptic wants to achieve regarding a PVP Reputation system:

A. Make money - this is a given no matter what anyone thinks about them.
B. Increase or maintain user play time - this goes back to making money. There are no free rides here no matter what users think.
C. Appeal to the PVP user community. Yes, make money. It's all about ARPU folks.

2. Let's examine the suggestion regarding the PVP Reputation system. What are it's characteristics?

A. It's completed code and reusable.
B. Easy to expand and is presumably configurable (assume that some code clean up is needed over time)
C. It makes money for the Game
D. It is a time sink, but limited ???? (once you hit T5 you, IDK, stop???)
E. It will excite players, even non PVP players to get the new items and bonuses.

3. My point originally was they should be careful about implementing something designed for PVE users for PVP users. My problem with a flat reuse code approach is that the goals between PVE and PVP are not the same. You don't sell woman's shoes to men because it's not what they want or need.

- You don't want loads of PVE people to do PVP stuff and water down the competition (think of people who AFK to get the dilitium dailies or run up and get themselves killed with shuttles)
- You don't want a system that ends. "Oh I finished PVP Rep, got the stuff and I'm done". For PVE players PWE plan is to release millions more Rep mission lines (that is the design, it never ends). But for PVP it needs to be 1 currency, 1 thing because the community is not large enough to support a 2013 PVP rep line and a 2014 PVP rep line. (unless you design it as solo-able which kind of defeats the purpose of Player vs. Player)
- Regarding your cost and investment comment reply. Yes I said they need to make a new system up, however I did not say I did not understand ROI and opportunity costs. What I was merely saying is it would be wise to analyze the situation (be careful) and not make a cheap decision and try to pull a fast one on a small but vocal player community.

PWE can go ahead and reuse code. It's up to them, I don't know how they coded it. I'm not even advocating they need to add a system for PVP as I don't have the analysis, fact and figures to make a decision like that. All i'm saying is know what the end goal is and design with the end at means. If operating margin is the end goal, by all means cut and paste away.

BTW - i totally agree with your business comments. I work in a similar environment but different industry. Anyway, not going to reply back again, hopefully people don't over analyze one statement into a big deal.

Thanks,
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 33
# 9
01-03-2013, 08:41 AM
If i may add an idea that hasnt been proposed so far:
My personal most enjoyable pvp moments in game was the ones playing at lower tier/levels.
Lt Commander,Commander level.Scarce Bridge officer skills,consoles,gear...It was a PvP Arena where wits,manouvering skills and tactics was truly the core of the battle.
It would be great for a player of whatever level ,to just take the low tier ship,equip it with level appropriate only gear and be part of the pvp action.
For us vets to relive what realy pvp is all about!
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,416
# 10
01-03-2013, 08:50 AM
there is no way that having something like punkbuster would be a good thing. there doesnt seem to be any way to "cheat" in this game that isnt able to be done in game engine itself due to bugs/unforseen combos.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mancom View Post
Frankly, I think the only sound advice that one can give new players at this time is to stay away from PVP in STO.
Science pvp at its best-http://www.youtube.com/user/matteo716
Do you even Science Bro?
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 05:37 AM.