Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > PvP Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 123
In short they are way too weak.

And spawncamping is on the rise. I can even name a fleet or two who consistently do it (but due to forum rule I can't mention names).

The turrets at the spawnpoint aren't enough to discourage a concerted spawnpoint suppression effort. And lets face it, nobody likes getting whacked at the spawn without much of a chance to fight back. Games are much better without such underhanded tactics.

So what can and should be done about it? I think the best way to go about it is to beef up the spawnpoint defenses, if not more numerous then at least make them more effective.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,450
# 2
07-13-2013, 11:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by onenonlydrock View Post
In short they are way too weak.

And spawncamping is on the rise. I can even name a fleet or two who consistently do it (but due to forum rule I can't mention names).

The turrets at the spawnpoint aren't enough to discourage a concerted spawnpoint suppression effort. And lets face it, nobody likes getting whacked at the spawn without much of a chance to fight back. Games are much better without such underhanded tactics.

So what can and should be done about it? I think the best way to go about it is to beef up the spawnpoint defenses, if not more numerous then at least make them more effective.
They can fix glitches/bugs that mess up stats on respawn. They can make the "respawn" animation a warp in w/power levels set correctly. The defenses on this map should be weak. It's not a base defense it's 2 sides going after contested resources. W/o the bugs et al it would be a legitimate team tactic to suppress reinforcement from entering the encounter. This and Kerrat are the maps where camping makes sense imo.

Edit: to add a couple of y.
[Zone] Dack@****: cowards can't take a fed 1 on 1 crinckley cowards Hahahaha you smell like flowers
Random Quote from Kerrat
"Sumlobus@****: your mums eat Iced Targ Poo"
C&H Fed banter

Last edited by p2wsucks; 07-13-2013 at 12:00 PM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 514
# 3
07-13-2013, 12:01 PM
Don't those last two sentences contradict each other?
12th Fleet Are recruiting Active PvP'ers.
We have Full T5 starbase, Teamspeak and over 200 active members.

Go to Recruitment room and beam up! You'll be glad you did.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,450
# 4
07-13-2013, 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by magniacapra View Post
Don't those last two sentences contradict each other?
Not at all. Fixing bugs isn't the same as asking for immunity or better defenses on respawn.
[Zone] Dack@****: cowards can't take a fed 1 on 1 crinckley cowards Hahahaha you smell like flowers
Random Quote from Kerrat
"Sumlobus@****: your mums eat Iced Targ Poo"
C&H Fed banter
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 123
# 5
07-13-2013, 12:18 PM
Then to argue p2w's point, if the point is to go after contested resources then any and all combat should center around said contested resources, not the spawnpoint. By making spawnpoints harder or even impossible to attack you then keep the combat where it belongs, at those contested points.

You could say that suppressing a spawnpoint helps you bottle up the other team so you can access said contested resources, but that's just as effectively one by actually surrounding their spawnpoint, not directly going into it.

Spawncamp suppression has gotten to the point where not only can you easily do it, but the person who spawns does not have sufficient time or power to set up an effective defense.

As for Ker'rat, I say it doesn't need to change. There's already multiple spawnpoints, which helps limit the other team's ability to camp.

Hmmm... maybe if multiple spawnpoints were introduced that would solve the problem.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,450
# 6
07-13-2013, 12:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by onenonlydrock View Post
Then to argue p2w's point, if the point is to go after contested resources then any and all combat should center around said contested resources, not the spawnpoint. By making spawnpoints harder or even impossible to attack you then keep the combat where it belongs, at those contested points.

You could say that suppressing a spawnpoint helps you bottle up the other team so you can access said contested resources, but that's just as effectively one by actually surrounding their spawnpoint, not directly going into it.

Spawncamp suppression has gotten to the point where not only can you easily do it, but the person who spawns does not have sufficient time or power to set up an effective defense.

As for Ker'rat, I say it doesn't need to change. There's already multiple spawnpoints, which helps limit the other team's ability to camp.

Hmmm... maybe if multiple spawnpoints were introduced that would solve the problem.
Sorry I don't follow the logic of fighting at the resources. I'd blockade where the blockade would be most effective, and not spread my forces thin needlessly.
[Zone] Dack@****: cowards can't take a fed 1 on 1 crinckley cowards Hahahaha you smell like flowers
Random Quote from Kerrat
"Sumlobus@****: your mums eat Iced Targ Poo"
C&H Fed banter
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,268
# 7
07-13-2013, 03:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by onenonlydrock View Post
Then to argue p2w's point, if the point is to go after contested resources then any and all combat should center around said contested resources, not the spawnpoint. By making spawnpoints harder or even impossible to attack you then keep the combat where it belongs, at those contested points.

You could say that suppressing a spawnpoint helps you bottle up the other team so you can access said contested resources, but that's just as effectively one by actually surrounding their spawnpoint, not directly going into it.

Spawncamp suppression has gotten to the point where not only can you easily do it, but the person who spawns does not have sufficient time or power to set up an effective defense.

As for Ker'rat, I say it doesn't need to change. There's already multiple spawnpoints, which helps limit the other team's ability to camp.

Hmmm... maybe if multiple spawnpoints were introduced that would solve the problem.
Regarding Ker'rat: The Multiple spawnpoints addition hasn't been quite. . .finished. People are still spawning a lot on the traditional Federation spawnpoint. But yes, multiple spawnpoints pretty much make spawncamping far less effective. What would be even better is if you could designate a spawnpoint, in the event one starts being camped.
Rihannsu
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 566
# 8
07-13-2013, 04:36 PM
Why do you guys keep making new posts about this same issue? Can't you check older posts and put your posts there? What if I made this exact reply as a new thread huh?

You get spawncamped because your team doesnt have power to fight the enemy, so they come shoot something on your spawn.
Say the word, it saves the world.
CUUCUUMBEER! "-With slight partigen with it."
Proud member or DPS-800 "-We kill dem mines with our scitter turrets."
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 290
# 9
07-13-2013, 05:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxfire View Post
You get spawncamped because your team doesnt have power to fight the enemy, so they come shoot something on your spawn.
Please explain the logic in that statement. Honest, no trolling.

If you're getting spawncamped, hence killed before you can even get your power levels up, how are you supposed to have the "power to fight the enemy"? The camping team is giving the other team no chance to put up a decent defense, which is basically the whole point of spawncamping: kick your opponent while they're down so they won't stand a chance. Very unsportsmanlike.

OTOH, though, it is a war game after all, and there's nothing sportsmanlike about war.

"Attack your enemy where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected." - Sun Tzu, 'The Art of War'

Cheers.
Husker - RugBurn
Zaan - Mel'Kor - Zarek
Ensign
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 12
# 10
07-13-2013, 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maltinpolar
Please explain the logic in that statement. Honest, no trolling.
A lot of times spawncamps happen in cap&hold because the opposite team is absolutely routed. I don't usually see them happen until the other team is already winning the snot out of the game.

I haven't played cap&hold in forever, or much pvp at all really, so maybe tactics have changed. I also play kdf, which cares a lot less about someone trying to camp spawn, so there's that, in all fairness. >_>
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 07:20 AM.