test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

NEW PVP MAP PLS

2»

Comments

  • where2r1where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    Didn't they remove that PvP 1vs1 thing after people started spamming other players with it and locking up any interactions?

    See why we can't have nice things???
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • where2r1where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    Ok...I can usually make out your typos..But I have no idea what "quineg" is.
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,275 Arc User
    advertising other games IS against the rules, as multiple people have already been censored for it within the past few months - one of which just occurred a few days ago, in fact​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • where2r1where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    I wasn't expecting all this. Sheesh!!! ::::smh::::

    "Quiaff" Shortened form of "Query Affirmative."
    "Quineg" Shortened form of "Query Negative."
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • asuran14asuran14 Member Posts: 2,335 Arc User
    Not sure how much a free for all pvp map would interest the majority or even a minority of the playerbase. Though i would not mind a semi-pvp an pve type battle-zone/map be implemented, which could be worked to give the competitive rep's marks/elite marks from it even. What I mean is a map that has the player on arriving do a short set of story missions showcasing three factions on a world/system that are in a sort of stalemate semi-cold war conflict, which ends up with the players choosing sides in the conflict allying with that group.

    It would be interesting to have a battlezone either a ground or space based on that has both pve aspects to it like pve objectives, but also a larger central area that is abit more pvp oriented as well. When the players arrive they work with the faction they allied with to gain control of the zone, and impede the progress of the other faction/s potentially thru some method. The battlezone could be a area the three groups are researching to help with their claims of some sort like their history, or also unearthing artifacts to learn more of their history
  • where2r1where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    That is a problem with STO, even I notice, now, the loot drops are not keeping up with the level increases. I barely use the upgrade system at all...mostly just out of curiosity. So, I assume Mark 15 really is not needed? They won't even give it away.
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • asuran14asuran14 Member Posts: 2,335 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    asuran14 wrote: »
    Not sure how much a free for all pvp map would interest the majority or even a minority of the playerbase. Though i would not mind a semi-pvp an pve type battle-zone/map be implemented, which could be worked to give the competitive rep's marks/elite marks from it even. What I mean is a map that has the player on arriving do a short set of story missions showcasing three factions on a world/system that are in a sort of stalemate semi-cold war conflict, which ends up with the players choosing sides in the conflict allying with that group.

    It would be interesting to have a battlezone either a ground or space based on that has both pve aspects to it like pve objectives, but also a larger central area that is abit more pvp oriented as well. When the players arrive they work with the faction they allied with to gain control of the zone, and impede the progress of the other faction/s potentially thru some method. The battlezone could be a area the three groups are researching to help with their claims of some sort like their history, or also unearthing artifacts to learn more of their history

    do you realize (with the exception of comp marks) you just described N'Vak, Ker'rat, and Otha? (iow, it already exists.) The only difference being that while Ker'rat, and Otha are faction-locked for sides, and N'Vak is Klingon exclusive (for the moment), you're probably thinking of a 'faction agnostic' map, or an everyone-on-everyone map.

    If you wanna see how well that will work, I recommend going to Ker'rat, and counting noses and instances.

    (hint: it's not as busy as it used to be.)

    part of this, is that your PvE rewards aren't that great (most of the reasons people used to go there have been removed or made obsolete by the Admiralty system) and PvP is crippled by imbalance (it's a wonder the guy they have on systems can walk to the bathroom without motion sickness.)

    Well except that making them faction locked, or faction exclusive is a bigger issue as when you have faction imbalances it harms these types of content quite abit. In the example I gave regardless of what faction you are you could either choose to ally with a group in the battle-zone, or the players get distributed between the groups in the battle-zone to keep the population spread between the groups from getting too imbalanced. Though in the end the bigger issue is if there are enough pvp players left in the game to warrant any such battlezone in either style a free for all or otherwise.
  • asuran14asuran14 Member Posts: 2,335 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    asuran14 wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    asuran14 wrote: »
    Not sure how much a free for all pvp map would interest the majority or even a minority of the playerbase. Though i would not mind a semi-pvp an pve type battle-zone/map be implemented, which could be worked to give the competitive rep's marks/elite marks from it even. What I mean is a map that has the player on arriving do a short set of story missions showcasing three factions on a world/system that are in a sort of stalemate semi-cold war conflict, which ends up with the players choosing sides in the conflict allying with that group.

    It would be interesting to have a battlezone either a ground or space based on that has both pve aspects to it like pve objectives, but also a larger central area that is abit more pvp oriented as well. When the players arrive they work with the faction they allied with to gain control of the zone, and impede the progress of the other faction/s potentially thru some method. The battlezone could be a area the three groups are researching to help with their claims of some sort like their history, or also unearthing artifacts to learn more of their history

    do you realize (with the exception of comp marks) you just described N'Vak, Ker'rat, and Otha? (iow, it already exists.) The only difference being that while Ker'rat, and Otha are faction-locked for sides, and N'Vak is Klingon exclusive (for the moment), you're probably thinking of a 'faction agnostic' map, or an everyone-on-everyone map.

    If you wanna see how well that will work, I recommend going to Ker'rat, and counting noses and instances.

    (hint: it's not as busy as it used to be.)

    part of this, is that your PvE rewards aren't that great (most of the reasons people used to go there have been removed or made obsolete by the Admiralty system) and PvP is crippled by imbalance (it's a wonder the guy they have on systems can walk to the bathroom without motion sickness.)

    Well except that making them faction locked, or faction exclusive is a bigger issue as when you have faction imbalances it harms these types of content quite abit. In the example I gave regardless of what faction you are you could either choose to ally with a group in the battle-zone, or the players get distributed between the groups in the battle-zone to keep the population spread between the groups from getting too imbalanced. Though in the end the bigger issue is if there are enough pvp players left in the game to warrant any such battlezone in either style a free for all or otherwise.

    Faction imbalances didn't used to be that big a problem-the nature of the two being what it is, KDF players were USED to being outnumbered most of the time, but made up for it with superior stealthing (hence the popularity of BoPs), while Feds who were sociable were usually able to have a wingman to counter the surprise attacks and gain position in a furball. Smart feds learned to turn the music and covering noises off and listen for buffing that precedes a decloaking alpha strike, those that didn't? well...they complained on the forums.

    Those that weren't sociable of nature, of course, had a more difficult time. When I reference balance, ti's all about the powercreep. We're at the point where those who grind the most, and sit down with their spreadsheets and work it out, have ships that can't be harmed, much less killed, while no longer requiring stealth, and which administer uncounterable one-shots on pretty much everything but each other. The cost list for that kind of power is high enough to make it simply not worth the effort for most casual players, and largely impossible for newer ones.

    hence, an unbalanced situation generated from the Systems guys (borticus), made worse and never really addressed for longer than it takes to roll out the replacement powercreep or roll back any attempt at balancing.

    It's frustration for anyone who actually used to like the activity, and a treat for trolls, hence the emptiness of Ker'rat presently. Changing the teaming from factional to non-factional won't help that, because you still end up with the same toxic situation. (if factional agnostic worked, the queues would be somewhat busier for PvP, given that was the excuse used when they stripped the faction from the queues to an RVB model-it didn't 'save' PvP, it just saved disc space on the server by removing eight or so maps...)

    Well that is more then one thing that just works against it all together, changing the faction lock on pvp content, or dealing with the powercreep, or rewards for pvp is not going to fix it all unless all three are addressed. Even if you address the powercreep now the amount of players that might populate the pvp content is harder to say would be enough to warrant putting the effort in, back when the pop of pvpers were higher it could have done alot, but now that style of players are dwindling. hell look how even balancing the powercreep on pve side of things goes with a much higher player pop count.

    Making it factionless is not to fix it an make it perfect as doing just one thing will never do that, but it can bring in some players that prefer to be on a even footing, also pve/per types that would rather have a non-que pvp/pve content. Though i will also say that a bigger issue with the competitive ques is just that there is no good reason to do that content as a pve or pvp player just like with the other reps an ques that are not the best payout for the investment into the que.
  • asuran14asuran14 Member Posts: 2,335 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    asuran14 wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    asuran14 wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    asuran14 wrote: »
    Not sure how much a free for all pvp map would interest the majority or even a minority of the playerbase. Though i would not mind a semi-pvp an pve type battle-zone/map be implemented, which could be worked to give the competitive rep's marks/elite marks from it even. What I mean is a map that has the player on arriving do a short set of story missions showcasing three factions on a world/system that are in a sort of stalemate semi-cold war conflict, which ends up with the players choosing sides in the conflict allying with that group.

    It would be interesting to have a battlezone either a ground or space based on that has both pve aspects to it like pve objectives, but also a larger central area that is abit more pvp oriented as well. When the players arrive they work with the faction they allied with to gain control of the zone, and impede the progress of the other faction/s potentially thru some method. The battlezone could be a area the three groups are researching to help with their claims of some sort like their history, or also unearthing artifacts to learn more of their history

    do you realize (with the exception of comp marks) you just described N'Vak, Ker'rat, and Otha? (iow, it already exists.) The only difference being that while Ker'rat, and Otha are faction-locked for sides, and N'Vak is Klingon exclusive (for the moment), you're probably thinking of a 'faction agnostic' map, or an everyone-on-everyone map.

    If you wanna see how well that will work, I recommend going to Ker'rat, and counting noses and instances.

    (hint: it's not as busy as it used to be.)

    part of this, is that your PvE rewards aren't that great (most of the reasons people used to go there have been removed or made obsolete by the Admiralty system) and PvP is crippled by imbalance (it's a wonder the guy they have on systems can walk to the bathroom without motion sickness.)

    Well except that making them faction locked, or faction exclusive is a bigger issue as when you have faction imbalances it harms these types of content quite abit. In the example I gave regardless of what faction you are you could either choose to ally with a group in the battle-zone, or the players get distributed between the groups in the battle-zone to keep the population spread between the groups from getting too imbalanced. Though in the end the bigger issue is if there are enough pvp players left in the game to warrant any such battlezone in either style a free for all or otherwise.

    Faction imbalances didn't used to be that big a problem-the nature of the two being what it is, KDF players were USED to being outnumbered most of the time, but made up for it with superior stealthing (hence the popularity of BoPs), while Feds who were sociable were usually able to have a wingman to counter the surprise attacks and gain position in a furball. Smart feds learned to turn the music and covering noises off and listen for buffing that precedes a decloaking alpha strike, those that didn't? well...they complained on the forums.

    Those that weren't sociable of nature, of course, had a more difficult time. When I reference balance, ti's all about the powercreep. We're at the point where those who grind the most, and sit down with their spreadsheets and work it out, have ships that can't be harmed, much less killed, while no longer requiring stealth, and which administer uncounterable one-shots on pretty much everything but each other. The cost list for that kind of power is high enough to make it simply not worth the effort for most casual players, and largely impossible for newer ones.

    hence, an unbalanced situation generated from the Systems guys (borticus), made worse and never really addressed for longer than it takes to roll out the replacement powercreep or roll back any attempt at balancing.

    It's frustration for anyone who actually used to like the activity, and a treat for trolls, hence the emptiness of Ker'rat presently. Changing the teaming from factional to non-factional won't help that, because you still end up with the same toxic situation. (if factional agnostic worked, the queues would be somewhat busier for PvP, given that was the excuse used when they stripped the faction from the queues to an RVB model-it didn't 'save' PvP, it just saved disc space on the server by removing eight or so maps...)

    Well that is more then one thing that just works against it all together, changing the faction lock on pvp content, or dealing with the powercreep, or rewards for pvp is not going to fix it all unless all three are addressed. Even if you address the powercreep now the amount of players that might populate the pvp content is harder to say would be enough to warrant putting the effort in, back when the pop of pvpers were higher it could have done alot, but now that style of players are dwindling. hell look how even balancing the powercreep on pve side of things goes with a much higher player pop count.

    Making it factionless is not to fix it an make it perfect as doing just one thing will never do that, but it can bring in some players that prefer to be on a even footing, also pve/per types that would rather have a non-que pvp/pve content. Though i will also say that a bigger issue with the competitive ques is just that there is no good reason to do that content as a pve or pvp player just like with the other reps an ques that are not the best payout for the investment into the que.

    There are three problems;

    1. Balance. This is the prime problem and it's one Cryptic doesn't have the ability to address. they have DEMONSTRATED they lack the ability to address it-at least, and keep it addressed. The runaway powercreep and the "release/Nerf/release" cycle are core to their monetization model, which was copied from Magic:The Gathering's model in the 1990s before the CCG crash. (likely one of the main reasons they kept D'Angelo on staff and gave him EP for Delta Rising is his familiarity with using that model to harvest cash from players.)

    2. Rewards. They deliberately undercut the Competitive queues to avoid ever-having-to-do-that-again by setting up early to reward more on non-Competitive content than you could possibly ever gain by actually playing it. The choice was to do this shift early, within two and a half weeks of the Comp Rep going live, which was good for anyone who didn't want to compete with other players or face situations where their DPS build was at a disadvantage. (aka the target demographic for the last nine years.) PvP does not have a reward structure that works currently, so it has no 'draw' for new players.

    3. Relevance. ONe of the reasons it was still active before the RvB of the PvP queues and warzones, was that it had a small draw on roleplayers in addition to competitors. Factional pride provided relevance to what was otherwise an unrewarding (in terms of rewards) activity for a lot of players, FvF gave those who wanted to play "Deaf" with loud music a means of avoiding cloaked opponents. These were removed when first Legacy of ROmulus released (which upset a lot of fed-only players who were, previously, 'big names' in FvF), and then when RvB was announced, it pretty much finished off any relevance pvp had by eliminating that roleplay aspect and showing everyone how empty and unrewarding the activity was. the move also broke the scoreboards so that KDF players weren't even shown in end-of-match, underlining that a huge portion of the PvP community were essentially irrelevant to the game (lots of those players outright left.) The remainder exodused with Delta Rising and the pay-to-win aspect it had on release. More left with Cryptic's doubling down on unstrippable immunities and uncounterable powers when Temporal showed up.

    We're basically at the point where PvP is unsalvageable-it can't be reformed, it can't be saved, it's just this vestigal tumour on the hinder parts of the game, too entrenched in the code to remove, and it's lost most of the audience it might have had (and evidence shows, they got a few to come back with the rebalance, but they left as Cryptic rolled that back. They're not going to come back a second time.)

    your proposed map won't do any better than Ker'rat is doing right now, because there's no audience for it until the issues of Balance, Rewards, and Relevance are addressed. Cryptic is "monty haul" on rewards (part of the problem), their systems guys are incapable of balance and are also tied to a 20 year old profit plan that collapsed an industry (also part of the problem), and they've removed any rational relevance the activity could have (also part of the problem).

    That, in the end, winds you up with a few whistfuls and a few trolls for your "pvp community"-and that doesn't give you a healthy population OR solid growth for the activity. It gives you what we've already got, but since we've already got it, all your proposal really does, is spend money that could be better spent on voice acting.

    Oh I agree it's a catch 22, without the players in the content to warrant making changes to the reward from them an relevance in pvp content it is hard to see them put the effort into balancing anything even if they were willing to. Yet to get more players to do that content you need pvp content that draws from more then the dwindling pvp community that remains, but for anyone to see value in doing that content it needs to be rewarding an have relevance. and without a good balance those players would see the content as unrewarding time sink compared to other content.
This discussion has been closed.