test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

A small suggestion for PVP

12346

Comments

  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    brian334 wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    The PvP community have always expressed open contempt for everything that makes the game money so that's to be expected. PvP players have not indicated themselves to be profitable customers, so they get ignored. Even this thread is full of suggestions they disable half the game to give you your precious balance. Never gonna happen. They're running a business here and disabling things people pay for isn't good business.

    I respect your right to hold any opinion you want, but where does this come from? I don't recall ever hearing a PvP player expressing contempt for new ships, for new gear, or new vanity items. I have heard discussions about the way some ships were laid out, the Bortasque for example, but I have completely missed the 'contempt for anything that makes the game money' bit. In fact, it was PvPers buying those ships and consoles they complained about who did the complaining.
    I'm referring to the tendency to call bought things "pay to win" and earned things "forced grinding." As I already said, even this thread contains many people asking consoles, traits, etc non-stock gear to be disabled or forbidden in PvP. OK, so that's not all the things that make the game money, since there are costumes and things which are non-gameplay-affecting, but it's most of the things that make the game money.
    Which brings us to the second sentence: as a percentage of the STO player base the PvP community was always small. But per individual, the PvP community spent more money than anyone else in the game. Nobody else had the need to own every console, every ship type, every gimmick STO sold. They may nbot have bought the TOS Klingon wardrobe, but they bought every ship STO issued. The PvP players were what the casinos call whales: they spent money on the game. I remember. I was there. Every new item was field tested in PvP.
    Cryptic's the one with the real statistics on that and they apparently don't agree. For that matter, I do have to call exaggeration on "bought every ship." Most of the ship consoles are locked to the ship they came from. Sure, PvPers no doubt got the leech and such, and post-DR the ones with good traits, but not every ship. Not unless they were also collectors.
    Now, every suggestion disabling half the game, again, I ask, where is that? The suggestions I see are asking for things specific to PvP and have nothing to do with PvE. Your PvE experience will not change. Back in the day PvP players, who were on the cutting edge of new item purchases, often found unintended effects from items and brought these to the attention of the developers. The few times developers did actually nerf something it was always blamed on the PvP guys, but the truth is, almost always the nerf was almost the opposite of what the PvP crowd recommended. It was a running joke in OPvP that if you want an item nerfed, demand a buff.

    Nobody wants to disable anything for PvE play. The PvP crowd just wants a level playing field when players join PvP. We don't have that, and right now is the worst it's ever been. Why shouldn't PvP be considered as a potential customer base, and treated as the loyal customers we've been all along? That's the part I don't understand: how ready you are to toss us out of your game when we could be spending more money and paying for PvE development along with our PvP developent. We aren't excluding you!
    So what? You're asking they disable things in PvP. That doesn't encourage people to buy those things.

    I don't care what they disable. And I'm not tossing anyone out of anything. But Cryptic wants people to buy things and disabling things in PvP makes the disabled things less valuable. I understand why they wouldn't want to do it. I wouldn't do it if I were in charge.
    warpangel wrote: »
    There is one thing guaranteed to bring players into any activity and that's good unique rewards. But barely anyone wants to talk about that. The PvP people hate talking about rewards at all and the PvE people just want their guaranteed universal choice boxes, as fast and easy as humanly possible. And them Cryptic listens to.

    Rewards are the one thing Cryptic apparently struggles the most with. It's always the same old, same old for everything, every time. Dil and all-marks. Boring and non-diverse. No reason to play. Events at least have their unique tokens, but it's always once-per-day and events are rare (no, borg alert is not a real event even if they now call it one). So again, no reason to play more than that.

    :disappointed:

    I don't hate talking about rewards. I just don't know which ones you have in mind. We asked for better PvP rewards for many years back when the PvP community was still vibrant. PvP gear, PvP marks, all sorts of stuff that would have no negative impact on the PvE crowd. As I recall, it was PvEers who objected to that. What we got was a daily dil bump that nobody in PvP needed because, quite frankly, after you learn to PvP, the PvE game gets ridiculously easy.

    So, what kind of rewards do you want to talk about? I'm listening.
    It doesn't matter what exactly the rewards are, as long as they are 1) unique and 2) desireable. 1,440 dil ore for 3 runs is neither. Having a full rep for it with its own marks would certainly be all STO-style (as long as they didn't spoil them with the accursed choiceboxes like everything else). But just as well could do with direct drops of gear, clothes, pets, doffs, anything droppable that people would want.

    Worrying about PvEers objecting is a red herring. That's Cryptic's mistake in the rewards structures, listening to players in the wrong places. Because of course everyone always wants to get stuff free and easy, but it's not the players' job to decide what is required to earn a reward, it's the developers'. Everything should have its own reward, it's own reason to play. And if someone doesn't want to play something, they don't deserve the rewards playing it would give.
  • brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,186 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    I'm referring to the tendency to call bought things "pay to win" and earned things "forced grinding." As I already said, even this thread contains many people asking consoles, traits, etc non-stock gear to be disabled or forbidden in PvP. OK, so that's not all the things that make the game money, since there are costumes and things which are non-gameplay-affecting, but it's most of the things that make the game money.

    How does this in any way affect PvE? Nobody is calling for the disabling of anything in PvE. If you don't PvP this affects you not at all. Are you saying that because you don't have fun this way it is wrong for those who do to request it? All you have to do to avoid any negative experience regarding these requests is to continue not PvPing and you're golden.
    warpangel wrote: »
    Cryptic's the one with the real statistics on that and they apparently don't agree. For that matter, I do have to call exaggeration on "bought every ship." Most of the ship consoles are locked to the ship they came from. Sure, PvPers no doubt got the leech and such, and post-DR the ones with good traits, but not every ship. Not unless they were also collectors.

    Yes, I exaggerated to make a point. However, it wasn't much of an exaggeration. Within hours of a new release there were people on the OPvP channel who were setting up test matches for every new item that came out, and you'd see the new ship, console, or whatever popping up every new match. PvP players bought. As to Cryptic's numbers, I can't say. They never shared them with me. I am of the opinion that it wasn't a monetary decision, but that's just the impression I got from speaking to the developers who did speak to us back then.
    warpangel wrote: »
    So what? You're asking they disable things in PvP. That doesn't encourage people to buy those things.

    I don't care what they disable. And I'm not tossing anyone out of anything. But Cryptic wants people to buy things and disabling things in PvP makes the disabled things less valuable. I understand why they wouldn't want to do it. I wouldn't do it if I were in charge.

    Again, how does this affect PvE in any way? Disabling a thing in PvP doesn't change anything, even for the same player who takes the item into PvE at a later time. This is a case of shooting the horse who might break his leg at some future point in time. Your argument makes no sense. If the item has the same properties in PvE before and after it is modified in PvP, how can you say it becomes less valuable?
    warpangel wrote: »
    It doesn't matter what exactly the rewards are, as long as they are 1) unique and 2) desireable. 1,440 dil ore for 3 runs is neither. Having a full rep for it with its own marks would certainly be all STO-style (as long as they didn't spoil them with the accursed choiceboxes like everything else). But just as well could do with direct drops of gear, clothes, pets, doffs, anything droppable that people would want.

    Good ideas. At last we have a place to begin a positive discussion.
    warpangel wrote: »
    Worrying about PvEers objecting is a red herring.

    But you are doing exactly that. Every time we try to begin a discussion about how PvP might be made viable, we are drowned in a sea of protests by PvEers who insist that we're trying to ruin their game. In fact, this discussion we're having is just that: a demand that those who like PvP shut up and go away so we don't ruin your fun.

    The real red herring has always been that PvP has ever had a negative impact on PvE.

    We don't want to spoil your fun! Why do you insist on spoiling ours?
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    brian334 wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    I'm referring to the tendency to call bought things "pay to win" and earned things "forced grinding." As I already said, even this thread contains many people asking consoles, traits, etc non-stock gear to be disabled or forbidden in PvP. OK, so that's not all the things that make the game money, since there are costumes and things which are non-gameplay-affecting, but it's most of the things that make the game money.

    How does this in any way affect PvE? Nobody is calling for the disabling of anything in PvE. If you don't PvP this affects you not at all. Are you saying that because you don't have fun this way it is wrong for those who do to request it? All you have to do to avoid any negative experience regarding these requests is to continue not PvPing and you're golden.
    I have never said anything about it affecting PvE, so I have no idea what you're talking about.
    Again, how does this affect PvE in any way? Disabling a thing in PvP doesn't change anything, even for the same player who takes the item into PvE at a later time. This is a case of shooting the horse who might break his leg at some future point in time. Your argument makes no sense. If the item has the same properties in PvE before and after it is modified in PvP, how can you say it becomes less valuable?
    It affects Cryptic, who want to sell things. If an item is modified not to work in PvP, it's less valuable for people who would want to use it in PvP, and they are less likely to buy it.

    PvE has nothing whatsoever to do with this subject.
    warpangel wrote: »
    It doesn't matter what exactly the rewards are, as long as they are 1) unique and 2) desireable. 1,440 dil ore for 3 runs is neither. Having a full rep for it with its own marks would certainly be all STO-style (as long as they didn't spoil them with the accursed choiceboxes like everything else). But just as well could do with direct drops of gear, clothes, pets, doffs, anything droppable that people would want.

    Good ideas. At last we have a place to begin a positive discussion.
    warpangel wrote: »
    Worrying about PvEers objecting is a red herring.

    But you are doing exactly that. Every time we try to begin a discussion about how PvP might be made viable, we are drowned in a sea of protests by PvEers who insist that we're trying to ruin their game. In fact, this discussion we're having is just that: a demand that those who like PvP shut up and go away so we don't ruin your fun.
    I haven't said a word about PvE, other than to note that Cryptic listens too much to people demanding more stuff for less gameplay.
  • where2r1where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    @warpangel The talk about "tiers" and "turning off consoles" etc.... It is an attempt to get a more casual level of PvP going.

    I am sure people understand it can NOT be permanent. Nor do they want it to be. Just steps where PvP is doable for those who don't collect everything and play at that elite level.

    You can't just stop improving characters otherwise PvP competition becomes static. No counters to figure out, means no new tactics to try out. How does it work for or against you or your team? Is a huge part of PvP. You have to infuse a new puzzle pieces into the game or there is nothing left to do.

    Unfortunately, a that is a problem with PvP in STO is that at the Elite end is sooooo far above and beyond...just like in PvE. Plus, at the Elite end, it is a deadlock (not enough variety). And when they go head to head...they can't kill each other. So, it just becomes an expensive waiting game...waiting for someone to make a slip up.

    ...so what is left but go kill new players? It is unfortunate.
    Anyone not geared to the teeth just becomes sitting ducks for anyone who is.

    Hence, in PvP games, one separates players by tier and "gimp" the tiers...
    so the matches are closer to even and one learns to build up to it.

    We are not stopping all spending for elites...they can still do that if they want.
    But looking for something for those of us not at that level of spending.
    "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
    edited October 2018
    Sorry, I am typing between getting breakfast done.... let me see if I can make a parallel....
    Tiering in PvP is similar to "scaling" in PvE.

    I was checking some stuff on my AoD character, yesterday.
    She can join the queue....TFO: Starbase One while AT LEVEL 6!!!

    She is still in the Tier 0 ship, 2 beams and a torpedo, one Tac, Eng, Sci boff ability. Because I finished USS Azure mission on her last night and is now Level 7, she just unlocked Attack Pattern A. LOL!

    IN that TFO....how would she stand up to a finished Level 65 character? She doesn't.
    And she does not learn anything either.

    I know this IS a bit extreme example.

    (thinking on this after coffee and breakfast....is this even working for PvE?)
    Post edited by where2r1 on
    "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
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    where2r1 wrote: »
    @warpangel The talk about "tiers" and "turning off consoles" etc.... It is an attempt to get a more casual level of PvP going.

    I am sure people understand it can NOT be permanent. Nor do they want it to be. Just steps where PvP is doable for those who don't collect everything and play at that elite level.

    You can't just stop improving characters otherwise PvP competition becomes static. No counters to figure out, means no new tactics to try out. How does it work for or against you or your team? Is a huge part of PvP. You have to infuse a new puzzle pieces into the game or there is nothing left to do.

    Unfortunately, a that is a problem with PvP in STO is that at the Elite end is sooooo far above and beyond...just like in PvE. Plus, at the Elite end, it is a deadlock (not enough variety). And when they go head to head...they can't kill each other. So, it just becomes an expensive waiting game...waiting for someone to make a slip up.

    ...so what is left but go kill new players? It is unfortunate.
    Anyone not geared to the teeth just becomes sitting ducks for anyone who is.

    Hence, in PvP games, one separates players by tier and "gimp" the tiers...
    so the matches are closer to even and one learns to build up to it.

    We are not stopping all spending for elites...they can still do that if they want.
    But looking for something for those of us not at that level of spending.
    So the "elites" are then fine with all the "imbalanced," "pay to win," "forced grind" stuff staying on? Don't think so. The players who have kept this topic circulating here for years aren't newbies.

    Having players ranked and tiered by performance is theoretically a good idea. It's obviously possible to rank players by gear and/or win/loss/kill/death records and match players of similar scores together. Lots of games do that. Cryptic even created that player potential algorithm...that they never enabled for PvP. The problem with separating players is that unless the PvP Endeavor is on, there aren't enough players in the queues to play together, much less separately.

    Perhaps adding rewards to attract players in, and enabling the player potential system for PvP...if it works, which is far from clear in the comprep queues. Maybe they never enabled it because it didn't work right.

    But even if they did do that, disabling players' gear, whether it's permanently or pending some algorithmic determination of sufficient "eliteness," is not good for sales. It's always in the company's best interests to say "if you buy <insert item here>, you'll be more powerful."

    Using better gear should simply increase your "player potential" score and therefore match you with better-geared opponents...assuming there were enough players queued to choose from.
  • brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,186 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    where2r1 wrote: »
    @warpangel The talk about "tiers" and "turning off consoles" etc.... It is an attempt to get a more casual level of PvP going.

    I am sure people understand it can NOT be permanent. Nor do they want it to be. Just steps where PvP is doable for those who don't collect everything and play at that elite level.

    You can't just stop improving characters otherwise PvP competition becomes static. No counters to figure out, means no new tactics to try out. How does it work for or against you or your team? Is a huge part of PvP. You have to infuse a new puzzle pieces into the game or there is nothing left to do.

    Unfortunately, a that is a problem with PvP in STO is that at the Elite end is sooooo far above and beyond...just like in PvE. Plus, at the Elite end, it is a deadlock (not enough variety). And when they go head to head...they can't kill each other. So, it just becomes an expensive waiting game...waiting for someone to make a slip up.

    ...so what is left but go kill new players? It is unfortunate.
    Anyone not geared to the teeth just becomes sitting ducks for anyone who is.

    Hence, in PvP games, one separates players by tier and "gimp" the tiers...
    so the matches are closer to even and one learns to build up to it.

    We are not stopping all spending for elites...they can still do that if they want.
    But looking for something for those of us not at that level of spending.
    So the "elites" are then fine with all the "imbalanced," "pay to win," "forced grind" stuff staying on? Don't think so. The players who have kept this topic circulating here for years aren't newbies.

    Having players ranked and tiered by performance is theoretically a good idea. It's obviously possible to rank players by gear and/or win/loss/kill/death records and match players of similar scores together. Lots of games do that. Cryptic even created that player potential algorithm...that they never enabled for PvP. The problem with separating players is that unless the PvP Endeavor is on, there aren't enough players in the queues to play together, much less separately.

    Perhaps adding rewards to attract players in, and enabling the player potential system for PvP...if it works, which is far from clear in the comprep queues. Maybe they never enabled it because it didn't work right.

    But even if they did do that, disabling players' gear, whether it's permanently or pending some algorithmic determination of sufficient "eliteness," is not good for sales. It's always in the company's best interests to say "if you buy <insert item here>, you'll be more powerful."

    Using better gear should simply increase your "player potential" score and therefore match you with better-geared opponents...assuming there were enough players queued to choose from.

    There are two barriers to PvP that are currently virtually insurmountable, and all the rewards in the game won't change that:

    1) Those players who have been grinding longest have traits and gear which make them all but unkillable.

    2) The learning curve to get into a competitive position in PvP is exceedingly steep.

    Those two issues are what's being addressed in various ways by the posters. Even with an 8k dil reward for entering a single match, the queues won't fill because the players know they will last two seconds when faced with the veterans who have been in PvP since Season 2. And the new guy? He's never going to be competitive because even if he grinds all day every day for the gear and traits, the older guy will be grinding away for the new stuff, thus will always and permanently be remaining in the lead.

    The Tiered PvP idea allows groups to fight their peers. Is it the best solution? I don't know, but I believe it's a place to start.
    The Gear-Capping idea is another idea which prevents players from becoming all but unkillable. Again, a place to start.

    The one place we can't start is by encouraging a bunch of players to jump into the meat grinder. Nobody likes to lose, but if the fight's fair they can take it. When the fight is not only not fair but decidedly lopsided in favor of one group, they will not play.

    Rewards are a nice idea, but in themselves will not solve the problem with new players joining PvP. To attract and keep new players in PvP there needs to be a place they can go to learn and grow, and to have at least a chance to win once in a while. As it stands, in any match there will be one guy nobody can kill, even with the entire team focused on him. That guy needs to be either in a league with other players like him, or somehow brought back to power levels with which the average player can compete. Otherwise, his only role will be to drive the new guys away from PvP, no matter what the rewards might be.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    brian334 wrote: »
    There are two barriers to PvP that are currently virtually insurmountable, and all the rewards in the game won't change that:

    1) Those players who have been grinding longest have traits and gear which make them all but unkillable.

    2) The learning curve to get into a competitive position in PvP is exceedingly steep.

    Those two issues are what's being addressed in various ways by the posters. Even with an 8k dil reward for entering a single match, the queues won't fill because the players know they will last two seconds when faced with the veterans who have been in PvP since Season 2. And the new guy? He's never going to be competitive because even if he grinds all day every day for the gear and traits, the older guy will be grinding away for the new stuff, thus will always and permanently be remaining in the lead.

    The Tiered PvP idea allows groups to fight their peers. Is it the best solution? I don't know, but I believe it's a place to start.
    The Gear-Capping idea is another idea which prevents players from becoming all but unkillable. Again, a place to start.

    The one place we can't start is by encouraging a bunch of players to jump into the meat grinder. Nobody likes to lose, but if the fight's fair they can take it. When the fight is not only not fair but decidedly lopsided in favor of one group, they will not play.

    Rewards are a nice idea, but in themselves will not solve the problem with new players joining PvP. To attract and keep new players in PvP there needs to be a place they can go to learn and grow, and to have at least a chance to win once in a while. As it stands, in any match there will be one guy nobody can kill, even with the entire team focused on him. That guy needs to be either in a league with other players like him, or somehow brought back to power levels with which the average player can compete. Otherwise, his only role will be to drive the new guys away from PvP, no matter what the rewards might be.
    The last time the PvP endeavor ran, I ventured into that usually-deserted tab of queue window labeled "PvP," checked "join all" and got a ground Arena. I found the enemy team were "all but unkillable." I attacked them and got killed, repeated until the match was over (didn't even look which team won, but probably not mine since the others were dying kinda often, too) and I got my reward (the same reward I would've gotten no matter what) and decided since there are people in the queue I might as well do two more runs to get the 3 runs for the daily dil and a point on the accolade which I still didn't have on that toon.

    So I queued to all again, got the same Arena, and there were the same people there, just a bit different teams. I played it until it ended again, maybe died a bit less it seemed some of the good players were on my team this time, and then did the last run again the same thing. Got my dil and +1 for the "Run daily PvP mission X times" accolade. After that, I had no more rewards to get so I went to do something else.

    Neither of your barriers were in any way insurmountable for me. I couldn't have cared less about being competitive, or that the others were much better than me. I got what I came to get. The only insurmountable barrier was the reward wrapper saying "you've had enough."

    Sure, I don't like to lose either. But if it pays the same as winning, I can take it. I will play if its worth playing.

    I agree that matchmaking based on gear or "player potential" would be good, if there are enough players there to match. If there aren't enough players to match, all the system can do is either put whoever is there together or not let them play at all. And the Endeavors prove time and time again, rewards (even as lame a reward as the Endeavor box is) are the driving force there.

    But gear-capping just isn't going to happen. It doesn't matter if it's "a place to start." Because as I've explained it would dig into Cryptic's bottom line so they'd never do it. Ask for Player Potential to be enabled for PvP, that's at least theoretically possible.
    patrickngo wrote: »
    yet you still promote the myth that PvP is somehow ruining your game.
    Where have I said anything like that?
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    So what? You're asking they disable things in PvP. That doesn't encourage people to buy those things.

    I don't care what they disable. And I'm not tossing anyone out of anything. But Cryptic wants people to buy things and disabling things in PvP makes the disabled things less valuable. I understand why they wouldn't want to do it. I wouldn't do it if I were in charge.
    Yeah, I've never seen a game with PvP that actually disabled stuff you bought or ground to get in PvP. I mean, I was once competitive in Avengers Alliance PvP.
    preparetodie_by_marhawkman-da75j2n.png
    While this is terrifying to newbies, I actually never got to the top tier rewards in AA's PvP. this isn't the list of my character's attacks, this is actually just a display of the passive buffs I started combat with.... most of them, the screen isn't big enough and some scrolled off the bottom... yes, really. Honestly the main difference between my gear and what you'd see in top tier PvP is my stats(HP, etc...) are lower than what an Adamantium league player would have. Which was explicitly pay-to-win since you can't grind to get the stuff you need to increase your stats that high. BUT, the reward for Adamantium was something that would be available to grind to get later, so Vibranium tier was as high as you needed to get for good rewards.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,186 Arc User
    For the record, I don't advocate disabling powers unless the captain drops down to a tier at which those powers are not available.

    Thus a level 60 Fleet Admiral who wants to tool around in a Tier 2 match should be limited to Tier 2 abilities so the Lieutenant Commanders don't get steamrolled.

    This would allow captains to play with their purchased low tier ships without being steamrolled by T6 Oberths and allow Lieutenant Commanders to play in a match where they are not at a gear/skill/trait disadvantage.

    If a captain wants to play at his max tier, nothing would be disabled at all. It's only when they drop down to play in the lower tiers that I advocate level matching.
  • where2r1where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    I agree. There is no indication "fixing" PvP in any way, shape or form would NOT effect the rest of the game. NOR if it would work at all.

    Look at what happened with mission NPC scaling when they made adjustments for scaling on PvE queues for random TFOs.

    Off Topic:
    And in my curiosity, I DID run my Level 6 through the TFO that was unlocked for her....with, well, pretty much what I expected would happen. Starter ship, 3 weapons, and a few Skill point, 4 basic traits scaled up to Level 35.....still got run over by "scaled" down members of the "team".

    I don't think it is going to work without turning off upper level stuff on the "scaled down" maps. Unfortunately, I am terrified to even think about how that gets implemented.
    "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
    There is one way I can think of that might fix this huge gap thing.... unlock Rep, Specializations and R&D right from the get go. Just let players start collecting and adding to from Tutorial.

    Because, really, if that is the "end game" in your game....it is kinda yuck.
    "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
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    brian334 wrote: »
    For the record, I don't advocate disabling powers unless the captain drops down to a tier at which those powers are not available.

    Thus a level 60 Fleet Admiral who wants to tool around in a Tier 2 match should be limited to Tier 2 abilities so the Lieutenant Commanders don't get steamrolled.

    This would allow captains to play with their purchased low tier ships without being steamrolled by T6 Oberths and allow Lieutenant Commanders to play in a match where they are not at a gear/skill/trait disadvantage.

    If a captain wants to play at his max tier, nothing would be disabled at all. It's only when they drop down to play in the lower tiers that I advocate level matching.
    But a veteran player "dropping down" into newbie games would still be unfair even with reduced gear. They would come to that T2 match with a C-Store ship and all mk4 purple gear. A new player won't stay a LtCom long enough to match that. Not unless they're spending lots of cash to get it without gameplay. And that's before considering the skill difference between a level 10-19 player who will have played the game for a few hours at most and a years-old veteran.

    Having special queues with requirements for what you're allowed to bring might be fun (and for more than just ship tiers), but they wouldn't be a newbie haven. They would be dominated by people who have learned to make the best of the allowed builds, just as much as the unrestricted queues are.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    I've never seen any game make a serious attempt at allowing low level characters to compete with high levels. AA did have a token effort at scaling up, but the reality was that new players still had terrible stats and got curbstomped.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,186 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    brian334 wrote: »
    For the record, I don't advocate disabling powers unless the captain drops down to a tier at which those powers are not available.

    Thus a level 60 Fleet Admiral who wants to tool around in a Tier 2 match should be limited to Tier 2 abilities so the Lieutenant Commanders don't get steamrolled.

    This would allow captains to play with their purchased low tier ships without being steamrolled by T6 Oberths and allow Lieutenant Commanders to play in a match where they are not at a gear/skill/trait disadvantage.

    If a captain wants to play at his max tier, nothing would be disabled at all. It's only when they drop down to play in the lower tiers that I advocate level matching.
    But a veteran player "dropping down" into newbie games would still be unfair even with reduced gear. They would come to that T2 match with a C-Store ship and all mk4 purple gear. A new player won't stay a LtCom long enough to match that. Not unless they're spending lots of cash to get it without gameplay. And that's before considering the skill difference between a level 10-19 player who will have played the game for a few hours at most and a years-old veteran.

    Having special queues with requirements for what you're allowed to bring might be fun (and for more than just ship tiers), but they wouldn't be a newbie haven. They would be dominated by people who have learned to make the best of the allowed builds, just as much as the unrestricted queues are.

    If you will note, gear quality was also addressed in my post about tiered PvP. It would only apply to those who drop down, though. So a captain dropping into a T2 match would be restricted to green quality gear by the system, (he wouldn't have to reslot any items, the level matching system would take care of it,) while the Lieutenant Commander would be able to bring anything he has.

    And I agree that players with more skill would dominate, but the new guys wouldn't be in the current situation where it is the equivalent of a local playground football team facing off against the current World Cup Champions. They would have a chance to learn and to improve. The current situation allows a player to log into PvP, get curbstomped, and have no idea how or why it happened.
  • ucgsquawk#5883 ucgsquawk Member Posts: 279 Arc User
    Just a quick note, in my suggestion there was nothing stopping players playing at the max tier and using anything they've got equipment wise.

    Its only when you play the lower tiers that equipment and ships are restricted. Thus allowing a more even playing field for newer players.

    Veterans will quickly blow through any requirements (xp earned, games played ...whatever) on lower tiers and be able to jump up. The tier requirements aren't supposed to be a hurdle, just a speed bump to keep newer players playing up through the tiers a little slower and giving them time to learn.
    Yes there will be a skill imbalance as veterans at a lower tier have an advantage...but now the advantage is skill based more than equipment and it allows newer players to get experience and develop the PvP skills without being obliterated in the first few seconds. What do you learn from being shredded in a few seconds other than "wow I'm way out of my league here, better not do that again".
    Most new players aren't going to spend months asking questions and creating builds to compete against that, they'll move on.

    If you want a thriving PvP in a game you have to create a system that allows and even welcomes newer players to learn and gain experience playing a game, let's them work their way up to the tougher players without dong nothing but research and grinding just to survive the opening shot.
    Don't look at it as just an MMORPG... Think in terms of ftp combat games like world of tanks. Build the PvP in that mold and you start broadening your player base...and possibly even bring in new players with the idea of a star trek rpg/combat game.

    It would provide a whole new advertising side that could draw in players just for the chance to play a star trek space combat MMO.
  • brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,186 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    brian334 wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    brian334 wrote: »
    For the record, I don't advocate disabling powers unless the captain drops down to a tier at which those powers are not available.

    Thus a level 60 Fleet Admiral who wants to tool around in a Tier 2 match should be limited to Tier 2 abilities so the Lieutenant Commanders don't get steamrolled.

    This would allow captains to play with their purchased low tier ships without being steamrolled by T6 Oberths and allow Lieutenant Commanders to play in a match where they are not at a gear/skill/trait disadvantage.

    If a captain wants to play at his max tier, nothing would be disabled at all. It's only when they drop down to play in the lower tiers that I advocate level matching.
    But a veteran player "dropping down" into newbie games would still be unfair even with reduced gear. They would come to that T2 match with a C-Store ship and all mk4 purple gear. A new player won't stay a LtCom long enough to match that. Not unless they're spending lots of cash to get it without gameplay. And that's before considering the skill difference between a level 10-19 player who will have played the game for a few hours at most and a years-old veteran.

    Having special queues with requirements for what you're allowed to bring might be fun (and for more than just ship tiers), but they wouldn't be a newbie haven. They would be dominated by people who have learned to make the best of the allowed builds, just as much as the unrestricted queues are.

    If you will note, gear quality was also addressed in my post about tiered PvP. It would only apply to those who drop down, though. So a captain dropping into a T2 match would be restricted to green quality gear by the system, (he wouldn't have to reslot any items, the level matching system would take care of it,) while the Lieutenant Commander would be able to bring anything he has.

    And I agree that players with more skill would dominate, but the new guys wouldn't be in the current situation where it is the equivalent of a local playground football team facing off against the current World Cup Champions. They would have a chance to learn and to improve. The current situation allows a player to log into PvP, get curbstomped, and have no idea how or why it happened.

    The concept's been floated before, the problem is twofold:

    1. it takes lots of resources to build that sort of sorting into the game.
    2. nobody at Cryptic can handle doing it, and they don't have the budget to hire people who can.

    the base, root problem is in the staffing and resources end, Cryptic doesn't have the right KIND of people and Cryptic doesn't have enough people.

    see, it would take having somebody on staff whose 'job' is the PvP, just like you have ship artists and environmental artists and costume artists, to implement any successful change would require having at least one specialist on staff, with some pull, to organize it, design it, and test elements before delivery to execution.

    Last one of those they had, was fired early on with no replacement, and no even loose appearance of a replacement.

    Then, they fired the next dev who bothered to learn anything about the subject.

    There is an operant culture at Cryptic studios that is hostile to the idea of PvP, and it is the dominant culture on the STO team, and has been since 2011.

    these are people who are largely incapable of understanding what you're saying, because it originates from a mentality that is somewhere between 'alien' and 'frightening' to them.

    I don't disagree. I believe you have found the head of the nail here.

    But I believe you may be overlooking something that is very apparent to me: growth. The developers do not own STO. They are employees of the owners. Owners want profit. There is an untapped gold mine in STO, one which has been closed, boarded up, and cemented over, yes, but the gold is still there waiting to be mined.

    The model to use in mining this gold is not the Asheron's Call/World of Warcraft model, it's the World of Tanks model. That game vaulted a minor computer software developer into a world leader based on nothing but PvP. They don't even pretend to have a story.

    STO already owns the best Spaceship PvP game ever invented. Its variety of functional builds and its lack of a single optimum build insures that players will constantly work to improve, which means they will constantly buy stuff. In a very short time PvP could pay for is development costs and after that it would be free money. And the thing is, it really doesn't require all that much to make PvP accessible.

    So, my issue here is to show that it can be done, it is not expensive to do, and that most of what is needed already exists in the game. One well advertised PvP tournament would bring players into the game, expanding the customer base. If done even marginally well this would lead to players sticking around, and this would lead to more ship sales.

    Right now, what do you do with that T2 Connie? Why would anyone buy a ship you can use for maybe a week before it becomes obsolete? Tiered PvP opens the door for those low tier C-store ships, and they will begin to fly of the shelves.

    And that's the huge selling point: the first profits of Tiered PvP come from assets already built and available in the game. All you have to do to reap them is create a special, level, playing field and then let gamers know it exists.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    I think most of this discussion is never going anywhere simply because of how some people seem to not want to admit that dumping everyone into the same PvP pool is a bad idea. To rephrase what has been said many times by the DPS leaguers... Give 20 people the exact same build and you'll see 20 different results. It's like in Overwatch… That game doesn't HAVE mechanical character customization. Top tier players smoke inexperienced players like it's nothing.... in a mirror match. So no, forcing people to use identical builds won't make it even. Honestly ranking players based on wins/losses is the only method I've seen that really worked.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,186 Arc User
    I think most of this discussion is never going anywhere simply because of how some people seem to not want to admit that dumping everyone into the same PvP pool is a bad idea. To rephrase what has been said many times by the DPS leaguers... Give 20 people the exact same build and you'll see 20 different results. It's like in Overwatch… That game doesn't HAVE mechanical character customization. Top tier players smoke inexperienced players like it's nothing.... in a mirror match. So no, forcing people to use identical builds won't make it even. Honestly ranking players based on wins/losses is the only method I've seen that really worked.

    I could support that idea.
  • where2r1where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    And...we are back to: no leaderboard or even a working scoreboard per match to feed results into a leaderboard.

    And if you want to use a Tiered system...you would need one for each tier.

    And would someone who has been "been in the system" for so long....are they good enough to move up to the next tier?

    I offer myself up as an example: I have all the reps, specializations, and all that stuff filled, I got more than enough TRIBBLE collected to upgrade upgrade upgrade...but even with everything....would I BE a good, competitive team mate??? No.
    Post edited by where2r1 on
    "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
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    The competitive Player Potential system is supposed to consider win/loss statistics already, along with gear and whatever else they talked about, I forget. I think it's really disingenious to call something as being so very hard to do when it's already done in another area of the game.
Sign In or Register to comment.