Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 895
# 11
06-28-2013, 03:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhmari View Post
Actually I dont even play like this i use hotkeys, I was watching tv, and occasionally looking for 1 shots, But beside the point.


Even if that was not the case This thread is now about how i pvp, Stick to the thread topics.
How you pvp is relevant to the topic you have created and the subforum that you happen to be posting in. It'd be like if I went into a pro football training camp, told the coach he was doing it all wrong and suggested he switch to some ludicrous system that I had devised. Then when asked for my credentials I proceed to show him a peewee league football game that I coached where I ran quarterback sneaks every down. Then I tell him that that's not how I normally coach though and that I have a pro football team that I've actually won the Super Bowl with.

I'm sure he'd take all of my suggestions about changing his coaching style very seriously...

...and you were looking for 1-shots by flying in at full-impulse, overshooting your target, and hitting him with 3 turrets at 10 weapons power as you fly past him? I'm afraid you'll be looking for quite some time.
----
@DevolvedOne

Last edited by skurf; 06-28-2013 at 03:50 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,297
# 12
06-28-2013, 07:54 PM
Your open world content is decent enough, with one caveat.

Everything in the game has already been balanced around a death meaning little. I play a game with no respawns (MWO) and this mechanic can lead to major frustration. Such a mechanic also leads to over-cautiousness on the part of players.

Furthermore, such a thing will likely lead to even more elitism on the part of those with more ability. As it is, even with ability to respawn, PvE teams are not happy with a less capable person on their team. With the lack of respawns, teams will be even more handicapped with a less capable person on their team. Also, no-respawns will lead to a scenario where a single mistake by a single player can lead to that player's death and, due to match now being 4v5, will also probably lead to the loss of the team.

As for your combat revisions, I do not like them at all. From a practical resource allocation standpoint, they make little sense as Cryptic would have to destroy nearly every mechanic they've already worked on, and do a lot more work coming up with new functions for every BoFF ability and rebalance it all. The amount of work that would have to go into this is tremendous, and would definitely be better used for other things. What you're proposing is an entirely different game.

Your revisions taken on their own are not particularly effective either. What you have created would destroy a major part of the differences between ships, as all of them would have access to the same level of abilities. The only difference would be in the number of a particular type of ability that ship would have.

Also, what you are doing is amplifying the effect of consoles and increasing P2W factor. As it is, many consoles give what is effectively a free BoFF ability, e.g. Vent Theta, Team Fortress, etc. In our current state, at the very least, we have the free space to retain counters that we can hold in reserve. In your suggested mechanic, this would be far less doable. Also, having an additional Boff ability would become a proportionately larger advantage. This would dramatically increase the proportionate benefit of mounting universal consoles, increasing the benefit gained from paying real money and thus increasing P2W factors, which no one would want.

Also, increasing gear differential is not a good thing. As it is, new players can be at least competent in PvP, as the most important part of a build is the Boff abilities, and not gear quality. Instead of knowing the best abilities to slot, the player now also needs to know what gear to mount. This places another layer of the game behind a wall of veteran's knowledge, which will not be good for narrowing the gap between newbie and pro. Furthermore, the newbies would have to take the time to slowly grind out equipment, and possibly even pay for equipment if gear was made more important. This would not bode well for making PvP more easily participated in.

Also, with 1 skill per officer, it is true that you weaken offense. However, you should also note that you are weakening defense by a similar amount. Hence, very little, if anything, would change with regards to general survivability.

The changes you suggest would not do very much to make players more intelligent about use of their skills. The problem is not intelligence. It is knowledge. Players do not have the necessary knowledge to pick good builds because the game does not give it to them. Your suggested changes would not make a difference in this matter. Players would still pick lousy abilities with lousy synergy because they do not know that something better exists.


The answer to narrowing the gap is not to dumb down the system and throw out everything we have. It is to increase knowledge among those who do not know. Newbies being beaten by pros is a part of every PvP game ever made. However, good games provide ways for the newbies to learn and train themselves to face the pros. This is where STO is weak.

Whew, OK. To summarise, your combat mechanic changes would do little to create the changes you mention. They would also require an extremely heavy investment on the company's part. Due to having so much cost for so little benefit, I emphatically disagree with the changes you suggest.

I really should stop keying out essays on Internet forums. It's a waste of my time.
A Gensokyoan Mech-piloting Starship Admiral Rodent.

Take it easy!
Captain
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 858
# 13
06-28-2013, 09:50 PM
Quote:
Furthermore, such a thing will likely lead to even more elitism on the part of those with more ability. As it is, even with ability to respawn, PvE teams are not happy with a less capable person on their team. With the lack of respawns, teams will be even more handicapped with a less capable person on their team. Also, no-respawns will lead to a scenario where a single mistake by a single player can lead to that player's death and, due to match now being 4v5, will also probably lead to the loss of the team.
I agree, but the reason for this is becaues mechanically speaking the pvp is broken
this forces players to be even more competitive, they have to be in order to pvp.
its amazing there is still pvp, it shows that some people really want this in game
which is a defining factor to me that this will be successful if given some attention
and some tweaks/changes.

But resolving this issue, the will be less stressed about this, you will see less people leave
and over all the quality will improve, and the tension will ease. However, it will never
go away because well people want to win, simply put.

In terms of Hardcore play, Its great, It gives a means of realism, i think it will work here
typically i am against it, But i really believe it will have a very reaslistic, and good impact on pvp. Yes people will be cautious, but that is where tactics will develop, and the pvp will take flight onto a whole never level.


Quote:
Your revisions taken on their own are not particularly effective either. What you have created would destroy a major part of the differences between ships, as all of them would have access to the same level of abilities. The only difference would be in the number of a particular type of ability that ship would have.
If this is addressed to skills then No. Because all three ships will have multiple officers
that apply to it, so that tac ship will also do more damage, the engie more tank
and the sci more cc/heals. this will only improve that because of the removal of the levels on skills, they could now have for example, All 4 skills be in captain rank.

This means that diversity will sore, and caution about spam with it; causing the
games combat to be support by skills rather then lead by it.


Quote:
Also, with 1 skill per officer, it is true that you weaken offense. However, you should also note that you are weakening defense by a similar amount. Hence, very little, if anything, would change with regards to general survivability.
Actually It really wont, Yes it has that change, But not that effect. Because damage
is now 50% less through skills, The tank will have 3 skills to counter 50% of that previous damage, this will improve tanking on cruisers (in fact i think it may be to much, so that we may have to increase the CD rate on the engie-healing skills)

Quote:
The changes you suggest would not do very much to make players more intelligent about use of their skills. The problem is not intelligence. It is knowledge. Players do not have the necessary knowledge to pick good builds because the game does not give it to them. Your suggested changes would not make a difference in this matter. Players would still pick lousy abilities with lousy synergy because they do not know that something better exists.
The problem is people propagate for pvp, that the ignorance must die until they learn
what the knowledgeable know. This is the issue, To resolve this you just take away the room for ignorance, because its a more practical and logical solution, rather then hoping people iwll just go off and read a wall of text or sit down with someone. This solution also just flat out removes that massive bar between the new player, and vet, and all of that Silliness like 1 shotting, perma cc et that comes with it.
Quote:
Whew, OK. To summarise, your combat mechanic changes would do little to create the changes you mention. They would also require an extremely heavy investment on the company's part. Due to having so much cost for so little benefit, I emphatically disagree with the changes you suggest.
The system can be simulated with out the level changes, You can cause the balance from

- 1 skill per officer per GCD (30 sec)

This one change will cause a positive effect on the pvp.

The rest is butter, But i think it helps improve diversity.
whe it comes to profit you have to understand that MANY people want to pvp, they just refuse to do so because of the current mechanics (being owned over and over unfairly).

The future of the games PVE side (which i believe can be twisted into the same content as pvp) Is Exploration. the best way to do this is allow the players to create that content. The most sought out thing
in my interviews was learning and interacting with new races.

This system allow the players to create a dynamic atmosphere (where exploraiton is always changing, and conflict always rising, that never depends on the devs
to patch in new stuff. and potentially can lead to a faster way of the races designed (Borg, Dominion) being added to the game if, for example the devs just added the ships, then all that would need to be done is get in the character editor, make a dominion guy, and boom, You have dominion.

The amount of speed that would come from that to create so many unique races, would largely just depend on the graphics team and their ability to get it quickly integrated into the game (with the coders).

Last edited by uhmari; 06-28-2013 at 09:54 PM.
Captain
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 858
# 14
06-28-2013, 09:57 PM
I am sure this system can be simplified, and improved, So we will see what turns of this discussion, if you have an idea's let me know.


The focal point is to

Allow players to create content (Races).
Have those races be injected into spawn locations
Have those races be intractable for both PvE and PvP
Said Races have a life cycle, they die off, and rise up (depending on some player-related mechanic) For example, the more quests the more it expands, And it continiously contracts its owned space, as a counter weight, if players stop questing with it,
it dies out (or conquest) So it depends on the players to defend it, or play with it for survival
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,297
# 15
06-28-2013, 11:41 PM
Quote:
The rest is butter, But i think it helps improve diversity.
whe it comes to profit you have to understand that MANY people want to pvp, they just refuse to do so because of the current mechanics (being owned over and over unfairly).
Being beaten repeatedly is standard for any game until they learn the ropes. Look at any other MMO.

Quote:
The problem is people propagate for pvp, that the ignorance must die until they learn
what the knowledgeable know. This is the issue, To resolve this you just take away the room for ignorance, because its a more practical and logical solution, rather then hoping people iwll just go off and read a wall of text or sit down with someone. This solution also just flat out removes that massive bar between the new player, and vet, and all of that Silliness like 1 shotting, perma cc et that comes with it.
We shall have to agree to disagree on this part. Dumbing down and removing depth is, IMO, never a good thing for a game. Take chess for example. To be good at it, a player must learn, think and strategise, and this is what makes the game fun. You wouldn't expect a new person to sit down, and within a few sessions, be capable of being an even match for a grandmaster. This is in effect what you are advocating. Essentially, what you are trying to do is transform PvP from a competitive game into a casual one. If you remove room for ignorance by removing knowledge-based mechanics, you are removing the complexity and diversity that makes this game good. Single-shotting and consistent CC only exist because of players who are ignorant, and either have not learnt or refuse to learn.

Removing the bar between new player and vet is actually not a good idea. Making it smaller, yes, that is a good goal, but removing it completely? That would mean that there is no room for exploration of mechanics, no room for development, no room for growth. True, you might get an influx of players at first, but you would then see many leaving because of the inability to expand.

I'm sorry, but this is a fundamental disagreement on my part. The basic mechanics of play are actually sound, in my opinion. There is no need to change the underlying mechanics. If you went back to Season 4 or just before/after F2P, PvP was actually in a fairly decent state, except for bugs. It was only after lockboxes, rep, and fleet equipment came into the picture that things started going wrong.

What I'm primarily disagreeing with is your fundamental assertion that dumbing down the game as a whole is better than a person improving his or herself to be good. That is something I cannot accept, and I believe this is why you are eliciting so much flak from the community. I will not support this.
A Gensokyoan Mech-piloting Starship Admiral Rodent.

Take it easy!
Captain
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 858
# 16
06-29-2013, 12:06 AM
Quote:
Being beaten repeatedly is standard for any game until they learn the ropes. Look at any other MMO.
Yes and as it should be, just at this degree, where 80% Of the pvp population
shuns pvp.
Captain
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 858
# 17
06-29-2013, 12:11 AM
Quote:
We shall have to agree to disagree on this part. Dumbing down and removing depth is, IMO, never a good thing for a game. Take chess for example. To be good at it, a player must learn, think and strategise, and this is what makes the game fun. You wouldn't expect a new person to sit down, and within a few sessions, be capable of being an even match for a grandmaster. This is in effect what you are advocating. Essentially, what you are trying to do is transform PvP from a competitive game into a casual one. If you remove room for ignorance by removing knowledge-based mechanics, you are removing the complexity and diversity that makes this game good. Single-shotting and consistent CC only exist because of players who are ignorant, and either have not learnt or refuse to learn.
In chess everything is a 1 shot, In chess, there is no tank, no cc. lets not
forget this. there in my opinion is a serious lack of what chess has in common with Sto (Strat, Tactics). Its the same old washed up, Use this skill cycle. Rather strategic play.

I'd love to see the pvp evolve so that cruisers are nasty, and feared, and stay away from by sci and Tactical ships. A sort of Captial ship in the game.

Then let the others do either support or dps, but the major battle be cruiser ran.

I wish there was a pvp thread mechanic, that forced a player to attack an engie for a set amount of time. call it like "Locked targeting systems" that locks your target onto you (a taunt). This would help engies excell on their role, and let the others do theirs for healing and dps.

This would evolve tactics, so that tank cruisers would push into an enemy line, and start taunting so the tacticals can go in and pop them with their dps with out having to worry about the rival cruisers pew pew killing them.

It would be interesting to modify beams in a way that would make them do more damage to cruisers, and less to Tactical ships. ( say like a 120%(vs cruiser) and 80% (vs Tactical) difference)
and start to throw Sci vessels into that to stop targeting etc.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,366
# 18
06-29-2013, 10:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhmari View Post
I'd love to see the pvp evolve so that cruisers are nasty, and feared, and stay away from by sci and Tactical ships. A sort of Captial ship in the game.

Then let the others do either support or dps, but the major battle be cruiser ran.

I wish there was a pvp thread mechanic, that forced a player to attack an engie for a set amount of time. call it like "Locked targeting systems" that locks your target onto you (a taunt). This would help engies excell on their role, and let the others do theirs for healing and dps.

This would evolve tactics, so that tank cruisers would push into an enemy line, and start taunting so the tacticals can go in and pop them with their dps with out having to worry about the rival cruisers pew pew killing them.
How about, no. Let me shoot who I want to shoot. Let's not just turn this game into cruisers online, K?

Quote:
It would be interesting to modify beams in a way that would make them do more damage to cruisers, and less to Tactical ships. ( say like a 120%(vs cruiser) and 80% (vs Tactical) difference)
and start to throw Sci vessels into that to stop targeting etc.
Yeah, no. Cruisers are already going to tank and beams still don't do much against cruisers. An extra 20% for beams vs cruiser won't make a difference in the world. On the flipside, cruisers will be even more strained to kill escorts because they won't be doing as much damage to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramming Speed at its finest.
[Combat (Self)] Your Ramming Speed III deals 158125 (201492) Kinetic Damage(Critical) to [Player's Scimitar].
The Great Risian Witch Hunt - a random five minute foundry mission!
Check out my STO Youtube channel!
Why are you hovering over my signature? Play my foundry missions! :-)
Captain
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 858
# 19
06-29-2013, 10:38 PM
Quote:
Yeah, no. Cruisers are already going to tank and beams still don't do much against cruisers. An extra 20% for beams vs cruiser won't make a difference in the world. On the flipside, cruisers will be even more strained to kill escorts because they won't be doing as much damage to them.
It would with the skill revisions.

because they would not be able to Spam heals.
this would soften their tank some, and pure more stress
on sci for healing (which will get some buffs)

i think cruisers tank is a little overpowered, and it needs to come down
guastamate, 10-15%
Captain
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 858
# 20
06-29-2013, 10:39 PM
Quote:
Removing the bar between new player and vet is actually not a good idea. Making it smaller, yes, that is a good goal, but removing it completely? That would mean that there is no room for exploration of mechanics, no room for development, no room for growth. True, you might get an influx of players at first, but you would then see many leaving because of the inability to expand.
Lowering yes, removing it no.

I't should not be x10-15 Damage per a damge, and x 1000-1500% DPS, thats for sure.

Dps of a vet should not exceed 50% Of the newbs total damage/dps.

In other words, If i do 1000 dps, the pro shouldent do more then 1500
If i last 1 minute, they shouldent last more then 1 minute 15 seconds.
Closed Thread

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 11:02 AM.