test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

I remain convinced that T2 PvP is this game's best PvP

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited March 2010 in PvP Gameplay
This is eerily similar to Warhammer Online, where the early-tier BGs were easily the most enjoyable experience in the game.

This stage of the game has superior balance: Feds get cruisers and science ships; klingons essentially only get escorts (some with universal BOFF slots), but have cloak.

Also, there is simply less button-mashing. In T5 you have no fewer than 12 BOFF powers to put on your hotbar, in addition to your personal powers and universal powers like Evasive Maneuvers, not to mention batteries, manually-activated mines and torps if you are like me and bind spacebar to "fire all phasers," and so on. Trying to manage all this TRIBBLE while maneuvering your ship just gets overwhelming. In T2 you just have four BOFF powers, most of which will probably be defensive, and 1-2 personal powers.

Simpler action = more fun action. See TF2.

Finally, there are very few B.S. overpowered abilities. There's no VM, and if you spec for subnucleonic, extend shields, or RSP stacking you will severely gimp your offensive abilities. So it can be done, but you pay a severe price.

I've pretty much abandoned my T5 main in favor of my T2 alts. There's no T5 PvE, and T5 PvP just can't compare. :cool:
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I had a great deal of enjoyment in T2, while I would not call it "simple".
    There is a great deal of tactical richness to be found in T2, while the BO powers may be less the art of flying and fighting your ship is a great deal of fun.

    Yours in T2 Tactical Plasma,
    Star*Dagger
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I had a great deal of enjoyment in T2, while I would not call it "simple".
    There is a great deal of tactical richness to be found in T2, while the BO powers may be less the art of flying and fighting your ship is a great deal of fun.

    Yours in T2 Tactical Plasma,
    Star*Dagger

    Perhaps "simple" was not the right term, any more than TF2 is simple. But both have a purity of gameplay not found in the T5 button-mashing-fest.

    Doubt I'll be logging onto my T5 for a long time.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I'd go one step higher. T2 is pretty decent, but it's prone to a lot of moves you can't counter. Say you run with Sci team in your only sci slot, but then you get tractored. You get burned. You attack someone, and they pop RSP, but you don't have it. You get burned.

    Some things can be countered with some teamwork (such as, you're missing sci team and you get jammed), but it's really rock/paper/scissors at t2, and I'm not a fan of that kind of play.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    And Cryptic may need to take note of this thread methinks.

    This is in line with some other people asking for less Ability based Combat and more tactical Ship, basic Offense Defense Combat system.

    And I wish for that too, Warhammer ticket me off the higher we went due to the ever growing list of CC and meta combat abilities. But Warhammer is not exactly a good candidate to compare this with.

    because Ships are not suposed to be characters or play as Characters.

    You want CC and traditional Fantasy mechanics..fine, implement them in the ground portion of the game, the spaceportion should not be like that.

    The best candidate for comparison would be POTBS in my opinion, Ship to Ship combat at its best, if only that game did not involve involuntary Loss, or a revamped economy that eliminates the "20 min PvP and 5 days of PVE grind to Finance it" I would still be playing it.

    Coming from UO it is not the loss per se that bother mes, it is however what comes in between, In UO we did not have to grind for hours on end to have fun in PvP, so while there was involuntary loss you could re-equip yourself in a matter of minutes without going broke either. In other words, UO was not Money Centric. POTBS is unfortunatelly Money Centric, and so is EVE.

    But POTBS Combat (PvP) was memorable glorious, intense, tactical and a hell of a fun ride! be it in Ad Hoc engagements or Port battles, devising tactical strategies for the next battle maneuvers trying to come up with unnexpected ones, you really felt being in the battlefield and that both sides engaged in strategic mind games, no different than all ofthe great battles in our history.

    I have hoped STO would be a tactical Combat of that level, at this time it is not in par with that caliber, and while it is still tactical and I am thankful about it, it is so only up to a certain degree...and it could be lots better.

    On a side not, I am not a PVEer per se, I usually dislike PVE specially if it is forced upon one in a game, but STO is the first game where I actually enjoy it, because it does have a tactical element to it, and to me it doe snot feel repetitious at all. But PVP is more like WoW and Warhammer (where stacking abilities and immobilizing the enemy is the norm of fighting and to me that is not fight at all)...and that is disappointing.

    I hope for improvements there.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    POTBS ship combat works well because it is SLOW, incredibly slow compared to STO. POTBS had lots of potential that was never realized.

    I agree 100 percent on Warhammer and the CC. T1 and T2 were by far the best. T4 was a joke with all the roots, knockback, knockdown, pulls etc.

    I don't mind some CC. I think people enjoy the pvp and combat because it is fairly quick. In POTBS you can get into an extended battle that last a very long time. With the extreme death penalty leaving or allowing your self to get killed is usually not an option as you might also get 5 of your friends sunk too.


    There is no way to have tactical battles in STO with maps the size of postage stamps.

    The Klinks need a better Sci ship period but especially in T2.

    I enjoyed all tiers. None stuck out more than another.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Tier three stuck out the most for me. Tier one and two seemed horribly one sided and I played both. Tier three felt the most balanced but a science ship would round out 3 and 4. Tier 5 needs a carrier change they need to buff it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Baconnaise wrote:
    Tier three stuck out the most for me. Tier one and two seemed horribly one sided and I played both. Tier three felt the most balanced but a science ship would round out 3 and 4. Tier 5 needs a carrier change they need to buff it.

    only if they fix the spawning abuse.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I think you're right. I would love this game to be more like Starfleet Command: Volume II. No powers, no abilities, just maneuver, reroute power levels, time your attacks, watch your phaser capacitor, etc.

    Heck, SFC2 even had enjoyable music.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Hmm i like t5 the most, but must end in pretty balanced setup with no idiots stacking overused skills.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Well.. Im a sucker for challenges...

    As Fed I really enjoyed T4 in my Galaxy, Klingons have some pretty nasty setups here (Vorcha tanks and Science BOPs)..

    As Klingon I think Ive enojyed T2 the most (only against good teams, the games where Feds impulse into their deaths doesnt interest me)..
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    WAR went downhill fast after T2. Such a shame.
    Anyway I do somewhat share the OP's sentiments. Although I think T5 PvP is fun as well, T2 was probably the most fun so far. Crowd control should be nerfed cq turned into mezzez (= breaks on damage)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I tend to feel the same way with a lot of MMOs I've played, and I often enjoy the lower levels of PvP much more than the higher ones. So far though I am enjoying most of the tiers in STO. I haven't reached T5 yet, because I keep deciding I don't like how I have spent my skillpoints and restarting, so I can't comment on that one, but I think my favourite so far is/was T3.
    Having said that though, I really liked it when I entered my first T4 battle and saw that ships were now actually different sizes, with a huge Galaxy class starship and a tiny Defiant flying next to it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    The insane number of "special abilities" in high level space is what made me quit it in PvP. I don't mind being able to do some crazy stuff once in a while but spending more time creating space anomalies, polarity inversion and other "super stuff" than shooting phasers seems wrong to me.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I must concur that T2 is the best PvP tier. Starting in T3 you see some of the ridiculous CC.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Maybe the overall pvp would be interesting if BO abilties had longer 2-3 cooldown. But i guess the "the combat is too slow" crowd would be too anoying on forums after. Buuut i would rather see BO skills used with perfect timing with greater effect, than cycling them asap.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Otheym81 wrote: »
    I'd go one step higher. T2 is pretty decent, but it's prone to a lot of moves you can't counter. Say you run with Sci team in your only sci slot, but then you get tractored. You get burned. You attack someone, and they pop RSP, but you don't have it. You get burned.

    Some things can be countered with some teamwork (such as, you're missing sci team and you get jammed), but it's really rock/paper/scissors at t2, and I'm not a fan of that kind of play.

    But it is team oriented, not dueling.

    Although I've been tractor beamed several times in T2 PvP and it hasn't resulted in me getting burned. Science Team buys me the time I need. And as to RSP, that just means you ignore that guy for 15s. He's only got one and it won't be back for 3 minutes.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Dalnar wrote:
    Maybe the overall pvp would be interesting if BO abilties had longer 2-3 cooldown. But i guess the "the combat is too slow" crowd would be too anoying on forums after. Buuut i would rather see BO skills used with perfect timing with greater effect, than cycling them asap.

    Well I think combat is too fast. T2 is most enjoyable because the fights are more about weapons fire exchange and maneuvering, tactical coordination rather than BO abilities spam.

    There is no other way to say it so i will say it... Certain BO abilities and the degree of importance they play in Combat are unfun, and make the game unfun too as a result.

    i understand that there is a Developer or maybe a couple behind the design as it is, that may feel insulted (we are all protective of our creations), however I believe the capacity to go back re-evaluate one's stance and be able to make changes is a greater testimony of a truly brilliant idea or Creation.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Dalnar wrote:
    Maybe the overall pvp would be interesting if BO abilties had longer 2-3 cooldown. But i guess the "the combat is too slow" crowd would be too anoying on forums after. Buuut i would rather see BO skills used with perfect timing with greater effect, than cycling them asap.

    while increasing cooldown puts a hardcap on how often you use skills, it doesnt affect the fact that you can still instagib unprotected people in t4+
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I figured this out for myself ( after the millionth reroll) and it seems that lots of people are doing the same ( I even read a post that mentioned this before I posted in snb and vm are not fun). So no need to make a list about all the imbalances.However, I'm not even enjoying t2 anymore. Even though there is soo much more balance/actual roles in t2, the teams just never start out even and you gain more for a fast loss than a slow win. Also, in t2, your level can be very important as compared to t3 and so on. Anyways, I played.... lets say 10 games today and 1 game was close. The other team started out way ahead ( 1200 to 100ish) because they had more people, than my team got more people and started to win... and than they won by getting the few points that they needed to win. Did I care that I lost?....nope. DId I care that I played 1 game when I could have played 3 ( vitually 3 times as much xp/ rewards)? yup. Was the game ever balanced?... nope. Will STO ever be balanced?......, Well, Ive played since beta, enjoyed my time and feel it was money well spent but fun and balance seems to be no where insight ( and see this is why I do not like open tree skill systems... it creates unbalanced or boring clones). Hmm, should I grind easy, boring and repetitive pve or grind inbalanced and outnumbered pvp?
Sign In or Register to comment.