Okay, this is an RPG so we can not expect 'death match' style pvp to be popular, but we can refer to other types of rpg pvp. DOTA is an exellent mix of pvp and rpg and would work for us. If we had DOTA syle pvp maps where it is a balanced mix of pvp and rgp-pve you would see it's popularity increase over nite! Follow the DOTA template closley and watch the game spring to life!
Also, here is a few ideas to manage pvp rep...
Pvp marks should be based on the amount of kill points you receive at the end of a match.
Include unique reputation kits and gear for pvp.
The pvp reputation perks could include HP increases or increased stealth perception/stealth movement(see where I am going).
We can have a fun time with pvp in this game but because we are a heavy rpg community what works for an fps will not work for us. We have to find ways to meet the rpg players half way and that is what DOTA does.
Also, here is a few ideas to manage pvp rep...
Pvp marks should be based on the amount of kill points you receive at the end of a match.
Include unique reputation kits and gear for pvp.
The pvp reputation perks could include HP increases or increased stealth perception/stealth movement(see where I am going).
This is a terrible suggestion for what the PvP Rep System should contain and you should go sit in a corner and ruminate on exactly *why* it'd be a bad idea to give bonuses to players who are already very good at PvP that make them tangibly, mechanically stronger against players that are just starting out.
If you feel Keel'el's effect is well designed, please, for your own safety, be very careful around shallow pools of water.
Got to love forum trolls. And what is your suggestion then? Or are you just another negative nancy who complaines about something they have no stake in? Do you even pvp?
Hrmmm, trying to avoid the whole argument over what a RPG is... cause well, everybody and their uncle's neighbor's daughter's best friend at school's grandmother's gardener's ex-wife's cousin's...er...everybody has a different definition of what RPG is.
That being said though, I thought what grim was trying to say was the simple - systems that increase the gap between Player A and Player B....tend to make Player B not want to play and even Player A will get bored eventually.
How about this then, when a player willingly increases their pvp rep(the way sto rep works we choose to advance a teir) to the next teir they are placed in a different ranked grouping where they fight other players in their teir. This way the newer players will be more likely to encounter other players of their skill level and the older, more skilled players will fight players of their skill as well.
It would not seperate them based on their skill level but their reputation tier. To gain access to the beter rep items and perks they would have to accept advancing a tier into a more difficult pvp scenario. T-1 would be grouped with other T-1 and T-2 with other T-2. It's not perfect but it's more than anyone else has suggested.
How about this then, when a player willingly increases their pvp rep(the way sto rep works we choose to advance a teir) to the next teir they are placed in a different ranked grouping where they fight other players in their teir. This way the newer players will be more likely to encounter other players of their skill level and the older, more skilled players will fight players of their skill as well.
You cant buy Skill... you could be at T5 rep but being a poorly skilled captain wouldn't help you much
Which is why they would have to understand that by accepting the tier upgrade they place themselves in a more advanced pvp grouping. So, if a player wanted access to the more advanced rep perks and items they would have to understand that by accepting the upgrade in tier would place them in a more difficult scenario where they are likley to have little success and earn few marks unless they are prepared.
The logic behind a DOTA style map is that pve players can enjoy it too. It would be a scripted war zone at it's core. Faction mobs spawn at each respective base and move toward the enemy base, meeting in the middle and fighting while as players assist in the destruction of "towers" their faction mobs can push deeper into enemy territory and finally assault the opposing main base. It would be fun. DOTA is very popular in the RPG circle and would go over well with our RPG majority.
Pvp is more then 'death matches'. There is tower defense, capture the flag, territory control; There are so many play styles that can be incorperated. What turns the STO community off about our current pvp system is that it is only 'death matches'. The assault map is abused and when people arn't spawn camping the 50 kill count out they are climbing outside of the shanty town arena with Catians and running the virus to the opposing console unopposed.
We need some kind of pvp that is not all about a kill count as well as maps with a larger player capacity so that a single premade team dose not always decide victory or losses. Also, it is my opinion that the 'war games' (fed vs fed) hurts our community. The factions spend all day fighting themselves instead of each other and it causes community divisions. As a federation player I would like to know that my fellow Federation captains where allies and not some elitist who snubs his nose at me after killing me 50 times. We should be united, fighting the KDF instead of each other.
The current game mode is generic and uninspired. It is unworthy of a mmo-rpg. We need some more creative game modes to cause the community to become invested in pvp. This is an mmo not some fps. We have a different mind and way of doing things. We must meet the rpg community half way. We are playing an rpg after all.
It has features like a shooter..
- fast paced battle action
- short deployment routes to the action from the spawn
- small maps
- even numbered teams
- a manageable amount of abilities; the abilities matter here, not much need for gamehardware or binds to make one button push multiple for you on ground.
but at the same time its an RPG by its ability design (healing) and not forcing people into aiming. Thats sort of the best of both worlds because it keeps all those aimbot kids away that most shooters heavily suffer from.
If i'd want a different game i'd just play a different one.. this one is awesome, it just needs a bit of balancing and a bunch of bug fixing (see the concerns posting for the list).
I wouldn't want em to take anything away from the current game at all. If other game modes then hopefully as additions rather then replacements. One possible game mode i would maybe want to see (knowing they have some prison map already) would maybe some sort of prison break scenrario with one team trying to break out/free prisoners and the other team trying to stop em/tag em/lock em in etc in a 2-round system with a timelimit.
Taking a lesson from the DOTA jungle would make for an interesting mode for a STO PvP objective mode: assign tough boss enemies (maybe STF bosses with their scripted events removed) to various places on a map, and make killing them grant a buff to the team or player that struck the finishing blow. Maybe as an improvement to the current Kerrat and Otha, where the mission and the pvp aspect are currently essentially unrelated.
"Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
Yes. The war zone Otha, while broken, has merit. If it where remastered and given new mechanics similar to the assault match it would be a lot of fun. Say the map now has a forest, a city ,and a elevated, rocky hill area and there are 2 opposing bases instead of spawns. The bases could be protected by NPC's or turrets to prevent spawn camping and switching teams as some players like to do on the war zones to greif their own faction.
As you venture deeper into enemy territory (closer to their base) enemy mobs or turrets would spawn but the PVE objective would be worth more points while the objectives in the maps center would be worth less(like an assault match). The bases would also spawn NPC mobs to venture out and create a feeling of battle within the zone by engaging other NPC mobs these mobs would provide the pve enemies as well but would only persist in "enemy territory" near the opposing base because once they reached the center they would encounter the opposing factions NPC mobs and fight to the death.
If Otha where "remastered" it would be an exellent zone to play in. It currently sits bland and broken. You can beam up the same objective multiple times and even change to the opposing team by logging out and back in the opposing spawn.
The point I am making is that the pvp options in this game are lacking. Death matches get old. We need a variety of game play modes and enviornments to play in. If we have more to choose from more players would become intrested in pvp. PVP and PVE can coestist in a way that intrigues our RPG community and challenges our PVP players as well. I think many of you do not understand the point I am making. I am not talking about taking anything away. I am talking about expanding what we have so everyone can have fun.
I think that adding new modes of play and a carefully crafted rep system that is linked to a form of ranking is the best way to encourage pvp. Also, I feel that the boot camp is not the way to encourage players on the long term. For what the boot camp accomplished you could have an automated mission that explains the basics as well as adding pvp kits and class specific equipment sets to the rep system to point players in the right direction. To me, the boot camp seems like a bandage on a gash and is taking up resources that could be better spent in other, more perminent directions.
What if every major sector of space had a war zone as I just described (defera, the new romulan sector, anywhere with a VA adventure zone close by). You could leave the Q's alone and have a kind of 'world pvp'. Also, what if for every player kill you got outside of a arena you received 1 pvp rep mark. The open zones would not be tied to the ranking/ladder system of course.
Also, the open pvp zones could have missions of their own and become a pvp/adventure zone hybrid!
It would seem that a mojority of the ideas I am seeing counter to my own are simplistic and based around the generation of wealth. I am presenting ideas for fun game play which is what we so desperatly need. Do not let greed get in the way of fun.
As someone who played international DotA for about four years, I can say that while your heart's in the right place, you're taking a leaf from the wrong book.
DotA's PvE elements are only superficially attractive to the PvE or casual crowd, and this is partly why League is struggling to blend its two fundamental customer bases... it's because the truth under the surface is that the PvE elements intensify the game's PvP nature: they give extra, hard metrics for players to measure their performance by. None of the PvE "quests" are really optional (especially in DotA of all MOBAs) and your PvP performance is deeply intertwined with how you perform in the PvE. A Spectre with a 20 minute Radiance is a lot scarier than one who gets it at the 35 minute mark.
Some better examples for what you're trying to get at might be Dark Souls, or WAR, or really any game with open world PvP. STO has open world too, it's just that STO's PvE mechanics in space are very narrow, simple and combat-oriented so there's really not much to do with the existing materials. Having only one small map that people even use (Ker'rat) doesn't help much.
For the most part I am speaking of ground. Space is hard to conceptualize due to the nature of the enviornment. And more so, I am refering to how a dota map is alive. There is no shortage of movement and action. The NPCs spawn at either base and march forward into battle but they can not go beyond the enemy towers without the aid of the player.
Comments
This is a terrible suggestion for what the PvP Rep System should contain and you should go sit in a corner and ruminate on exactly *why* it'd be a bad idea to give bonuses to players who are already very good at PvP that make them tangibly, mechanically stronger against players that are just starting out.
Vin Naftero@playhard88 - FED Sciencie
K'tan@playhard88 - KDF Tactical
Argento@playhard88 - RRF Tactical (FED)
That being said though, I thought what grim was trying to say was the simple - systems that increase the gap between Player A and Player B....tend to make Player B not want to play and even Player A will get bored eventually.
You cant buy Skill... you could be at T5 rep but being a poorly skilled captain wouldn't help you much
Think about this:
American Football has been in open beta for 144 years. ~Kotaku
We need some kind of pvp that is not all about a kill count as well as maps with a larger player capacity so that a single premade team dose not always decide victory or losses. Also, it is my opinion that the 'war games' (fed vs fed) hurts our community. The factions spend all day fighting themselves instead of each other and it causes community divisions. As a federation player I would like to know that my fellow Federation captains where allies and not some elitist who snubs his nose at me after killing me 50 times. We should be united, fighting the KDF instead of each other.
www.divisionhispana.com
I agree with what kollins said.
STO ground is some rpg-fps hybrid style game.
It has features like a shooter..
- fast paced battle action
- short deployment routes to the action from the spawn
- small maps
- even numbered teams
- a manageable amount of abilities; the abilities matter here, not much need for gamehardware or binds to make one button push multiple for you on ground.
but at the same time its an RPG by its ability design (healing) and not forcing people into aiming. Thats sort of the best of both worlds because it keeps all those aimbot kids away that most shooters heavily suffer from.
If i'd want a different game i'd just play a different one.. this one is awesome, it just needs a bit of balancing and a bunch of bug fixing (see the concerns posting for the list).
I wouldn't want em to take anything away from the current game at all. If other game modes then hopefully as additions rather then replacements. One possible game mode i would maybe want to see (knowing they have some prison map already) would maybe some sort of prison break scenrario with one team trying to break out/free prisoners and the other team trying to stop em/tag em/lock em in etc in a 2-round system with a timelimit.
https://youtube.com/channel/UCJZ5FBJ9bFaZ6yAFiNpZiRQ/featured?view_as=subscriber
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/CaptainCidStorm
As you venture deeper into enemy territory (closer to their base) enemy mobs or turrets would spawn but the PVE objective would be worth more points while the objectives in the maps center would be worth less(like an assault match). The bases would also spawn NPC mobs to venture out and create a feeling of battle within the zone by engaging other NPC mobs these mobs would provide the pve enemies as well but would only persist in "enemy territory" near the opposing base because once they reached the center they would encounter the opposing factions NPC mobs and fight to the death.
If Otha where "remastered" it would be an exellent zone to play in. It currently sits bland and broken. You can beam up the same objective multiple times and even change to the opposing team by logging out and back in the opposing spawn.
The point I am making is that the pvp options in this game are lacking. Death matches get old. We need a variety of game play modes and enviornments to play in. If we have more to choose from more players would become intrested in pvp. PVP and PVE can coestist in a way that intrigues our RPG community and challenges our PVP players as well. I think many of you do not understand the point I am making. I am not talking about taking anything away. I am talking about expanding what we have so everyone can have fun.
I think that adding new modes of play and a carefully crafted rep system that is linked to a form of ranking is the best way to encourage pvp. Also, I feel that the boot camp is not the way to encourage players on the long term. For what the boot camp accomplished you could have an automated mission that explains the basics as well as adding pvp kits and class specific equipment sets to the rep system to point players in the right direction. To me, the boot camp seems like a bandage on a gash and is taking up resources that could be better spent in other, more perminent directions.
Also, the open pvp zones could have missions of their own and become a pvp/adventure zone hybrid!
DotA's PvE elements are only superficially attractive to the PvE or casual crowd, and this is partly why League is struggling to blend its two fundamental customer bases... it's because the truth under the surface is that the PvE elements intensify the game's PvP nature: they give extra, hard metrics for players to measure their performance by. None of the PvE "quests" are really optional (especially in DotA of all MOBAs) and your PvP performance is deeply intertwined with how you perform in the PvE. A Spectre with a 20 minute Radiance is a lot scarier than one who gets it at the 35 minute mark.
Some better examples for what you're trying to get at might be Dark Souls, or WAR, or really any game with open world PvP. STO has open world too, it's just that STO's PvE mechanics in space are very narrow, simple and combat-oriented so there's really not much to do with the existing materials. Having only one small map that people even use (Ker'rat) doesn't help much.
vids and guides and stuff
[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
vids and guides and stuff
[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples