No, this is not important enough to require developer attention
A number of the suggested fixes have at least some level if merit, but at the end of the day it comes down to feasibility. Significantly changing the AI of NPCs, and lowering the damage ceiling simply aren't realistic expectations, if not bad ideas altogether. The simplest solution, at least as I see it, and as has already been mentioned, is to raise the floor. A more comprehensive tutorial system, the removal of substandard choices across the board, and clearly defined mission objectives would all go along way to closing the gap. In video games, players are supposed to get better, not worse. Any suggestion that involves making players worse, or not as good as they used to be, is antithetical at best.
[...]The simplest solution, at least as I see it, and as has already been mentioned, is to raise the floor. A more comprehensive tutorial system, the removal of substandard choices across the board, and clearly defined mission objectives would all go along way to closing the gap. [...]
"Rasing the ceiling." So you want everybody to blow up the core king's guard of the Borg Queen in five minutes? On Elite?
It is hilarious how you can wilfully choose to put words in someone's mouth.
No, this is not important enough to require developer attention
Yes, I would. I want everyone to do over do over 9000! Seriously though, why does raising the ceiling automatically translate to one-shoting borg cubes and whatnot? So am I to assume, that in addition to wanting those at the top to be cut off at the knees, you also don't want new or casual players to get "good" easily? It's starting to sound like you want elevate your own status at the expense of the top-tier, while simultaneously keeping down those currently below you. If I'm off base then I apologize, but that is how you are coming off.
We could add another layer even to the suggestion. Bring back elites. AND then create Nightmare Mode (or whatever they want to call it). Where all the odds are stacked in the NPCs' favor. Rules are broken. And everything is designed to make it nigh impossible for the players.
That might be fun.
(And THEN bring back my favorite map, No Win Scenario ... NIGHTMARE NO WIN! Wow that might be awesome).
While it would certainly be an interesting challenge, I am trying to pick some low hanging fruit here. The Pareto principle seems to apply where you get a disproportionately large benefit by fixing a relatively small number of specific problems. Asking the devs to create an additional set of pve queues above elite would be considered a stretch goal.
True. But Cryptic does have some experience in the past (with City of Heroes) in doing that particular concept of "harder than elite" content.
[...]The simplest solution, at least as I see it, and as has already been mentioned, is to raise the floor. A more comprehensive tutorial system, the removal of substandard choices across the board, and clearly defined mission objectives would all go along way to closing the gap. [...]
"Rasing the ceiling." So you want everybody to blow up the core king's guard of the Borg Queen in five minutes? On Elite?
It is hilarious how you can wilfully choose to put words in someone's mouth.
Thank you. After all the efforts here, I thought I might also give it a try. Glad you liked the performance.
Well, you have in your favour that the quality of your sarcasm exceeds the quality of your suggestions on how to balance videogames - which is not a high standard given you are now attacking the only correct way to deal with the problem you identify.
No, this is not important enough to require developer attention
It won't solve YOUR problem, as will nothing short of you own suggestions. If assuming I haven't read every comment in this, and the other threads you created on this very topic makes you feel more secure in your position then so be it.
No, this is not important enough to require developer attention
Maybe I'll start three
Edit: I shouldn't have said this. It's bad form to engage in this type of behavior as it lends nothing to the discussion. That being said, there is no discussion. The point of this thread was to determine how people felt about a particular issue. I think that's been accomplished 5 or 9 pages ago. If opposing points of views are automatically assumed wrong, and no other solutions can be offered, except those that agree with the OP's stance, then there is no point in discussing this any further. Personally, I think this is an interesting topic, even if I don't agree with the basic premise. Generally speaking, I usually just lurk around the forums and never comment, but this discussion has peaked my interest. As this is a forum for people that play STO, the players have a right to state their opinions. If you start a thread, you should be prepared to encounter opposing Points of View.
[...]
Well, you have in your favour that the quality of your sarcasm exceeds the quality of your suggestions on how to balance videogames - which is not a high standard given you are now attacking the only correct way to deal with the problem you identify.
"The only correct way". That is a very small world you live in if the only solution to a problem is to exclude players from playing games.
What did I just say about putting words in people's mouths?
Unlike you, I have never advocated for excluding players, I have never advocated for nerfing players, and I don't choose to ignore words people use so that I can make their arguments appear weaker - as you have done 3 times on this page alone, nevermind the rest of the three threads on the subject.
Now, back to the subject: A battle value system to make all those maps playable for everyone, and with the desired level of intensity. Wouldn't that be beautiful?
You mean in public queues only?
I would prefer running new things with my friend, who is a veteran of most of the content in this game, the first few times. He explains things to me as I go along...and what I did wrong afterwards.
"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
No, this is not important enough to require developer attention
Also, I remember in Neverwinter, I was blocked from some battles because of my class being popular (too many people my Level/class, whatever it is) so it took forever for the program to build a match that would include me.
Is it a really good idea to break up the number of people attempting to queue up?
"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
Now, back to the subject: A battle value system to make all those maps playable for everyone, and with the desired level of intensity. Wouldn't that be beautiful?
You mean in public queues only?
[...]
I mean in the way I described them earlier. I sense a misunderstanding here - a battle value system is quite likely not meant as what you think it to be.
To give an example as an elaboration on the earlier description: With the BV system as I envision it, you could have the following team doing a map that is set to require a combined team BV of 2200:
- 25x Miranda class - level 5 captains. BV per ship: Something around 2.
- 1x Geneva class command cruiser, level 60 tac captain, fully maxed out, Mk XIV gear, player spent tons of money on KLW, PL and the likes for maximum DPS, Battle Value something around 2000.
- 1x T5U Armitage Heavy Escort Carrier, only mission reward gear, level 54 engineer captain, dps medium, BV probbaly something like 150.
This is obviously an extreme example, but maybe that transports the meaning of the idea better than the more theoretical explanation earlier.
still not understanding your theorycraft here on top of that you are failing to take into account the skill of the helmsman which will send the dps up on top of that it would lock out queues to people which seems counter productive rather than this bv system an initiative to teach people about builds and positioning might be better suited
Assuming this was an issue of fairness, where a particular grouping of players somehow gave them a distinct advantage over other players, I could understand an argument for keeping groups of high-end players out of the same queue. But why can't a group of skilled Sci pilots go into the same queue and Grav Well the s**t out of everything if they so chose? There are no epic drops in this game, so there is no exclusion to mission rewards. Since most players are likely LV 60 tactical captains, most players will be waiting on the significantly fewer engineers and sci captain to finish their missions, and come off their 30 min cooldowns, before they can enter a queue.
Not to mention being stuck in a limbo where everything is so easy there is no prospect for learning. Not to mention that separating starting and veteran players will deny those starting players opportunities to learn.
The more i think about using a Battle Value as a way to detmine what queues are available, the more i am convinced it is a bad idea.
E.g. how is performance measured? Solely DPS or is providing team healing and crowd control also factored in. Players who focus on spike damage may be stuck at lower difficulty while they are often those who decide if optionals are met or not.
It's not a bad idea at all. Look how potential measured in your average mmo: If you go on a raid, you suggested by system what gear tier you should have. And if you happen to have a junk on you, you'll be kicked unless your team don't mind that.
BV is even more precise measure. And please describe why anyone might need a veteran player to learn about encounter mechanics? To learn about how things work you just need to play once, from start, to end WITHOUT anyone guiding you during action. And that means easy should be easy and forgiving. And if someone still don't want to learn it a hard way, they can always can form a team and bypass a queue.
Comments
It is hilarious how you can wilfully choose to put words in someone's mouth.
True. But Cryptic does have some experience in the past (with City of Heroes) in doing that particular concept of "harder than elite" content.
Well, you have in your favour that the quality of your sarcasm exceeds the quality of your suggestions on how to balance videogames - which is not a high standard given you are now attacking the only correct way to deal with the problem you identify.
Edit: I shouldn't have said this. It's bad form to engage in this type of behavior as it lends nothing to the discussion. That being said, there is no discussion. The point of this thread was to determine how people felt about a particular issue. I think that's been accomplished 5 or 9 pages ago. If opposing points of views are automatically assumed wrong, and no other solutions can be offered, except those that agree with the OP's stance, then there is no point in discussing this any further. Personally, I think this is an interesting topic, even if I don't agree with the basic premise. Generally speaking, I usually just lurk around the forums and never comment, but this discussion has peaked my interest. As this is a forum for people that play STO, the players have a right to state their opinions. If you start a thread, you should be prepared to encounter opposing Points of View.
What did I just say about putting words in people's mouths?
Unlike you, I have never advocated for excluding players, I have never advocated for nerfing players, and I don't choose to ignore words people use so that I can make their arguments appear weaker - as you have done 3 times on this page alone, nevermind the rest of the three threads on the subject.
You mean in public queues only?
I would prefer running new things with my friend, who is a veteran of most of the content in this game, the first few times. He explains things to me as I go along...and what I did wrong afterwards.
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
It is on page 8...half way down.
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
Is it a really good idea to break up the number of people attempting to queue up?
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
still not understanding your theorycraft here on top of that you are failing to take into account the skill of the helmsman which will send the dps up on top of that it would lock out queues to people which seems counter productive rather than this bv system an initiative to teach people about builds and positioning might be better suited
Assuming this was an issue of fairness, where a particular grouping of players somehow gave them a distinct advantage over other players, I could understand an argument for keeping groups of high-end players out of the same queue. But why can't a group of skilled Sci pilots go into the same queue and Grav Well the s**t out of everything if they so chose? There are no epic drops in this game, so there is no exclusion to mission rewards. Since most players are likely LV 60 tactical captains, most players will be waiting on the significantly fewer engineers and sci captain to finish their missions, and come off their 30 min cooldowns, before they can enter a queue.
I propose a poll for that
It's not a bad idea at all. Look how potential measured in your average mmo: If you go on a raid, you suggested by system what gear tier you should have. And if you happen to have a junk on you, you'll be kicked unless your team don't mind that.
BV is even more precise measure. And please describe why anyone might need a veteran player to learn about encounter mechanics? To learn about how things work you just need to play once, from start, to end WITHOUT anyone guiding you during action. And that means easy should be easy and forgiving. And if someone still don't want to learn it a hard way, they can always can form a team and bypass a queue.
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!