test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

PvP Undesirables.

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited March 2010 in PvP Gameplay
I'm talking of course about players who either fail to grasp PvP correctly or blatantly refuse to take part, ruining the teams chances.

I'm not exactly sure why these people are playing STO in the first place, they either lack the Brain functionality to make connections and grasp depth and tactics in which case they need 24/7 care not video games, or in the latter case don't even enjoy the PvP combat and are simply taking the laziest method of progression. Which would be fine if they chose a faction that wasn't entirely based on said combat, in the Klingons.

If there are responses to this thread, I would expect replies such as ''The exp reward for losing isn't that bad, suck it up you pansy.'' Or ''klings are OP NERF NERF NERF, durp-e-durp.'' But to address these points immediately and avoid drawn out debates later, this isn't about balance or the difference in the reward, it's about making the game more enjoyable and having enforceable rules.

PvP definitely needs a vote to boot function, ideally. Blacklisting less ideally but workable. If the players on a team in PvP believe a player is a hindrance they should be allowed to get a new team-mate from the pool and preserve their chances of victory, rather then continue a hopeless game with hopeless team-mate/s.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    It is an issue, but I don't think the boot option is the solution. The solution lies within empowering fleet functionality.

    I would like to see new buffs/debuffs that can be earned by fleets and used only on or when grouped with fleet members. Take a teamwork approach to building value within the fleet system and we will see people participate within the fleet system more, thus leading to better fleets and better groups.

    As it is now, a lot of people I fight against are all part of different fleets. They may not notice that I usually fight beside at least one member of my own fleet, thus I have a comfort level and cooperation advantage before the fight even begins.

    I enjoy this because my fleet is organized, but others don't because there is no incentive to organize fleets.

    Empowering the fleet system would do wonders for PvP in STO. A lot of good will come when the fleet system encourages interaction between Tier 5 players and lower tier players, which right now is not really possible outside of a role playing environment.

    The more incentive players have to group with other players they know and trust, the stronger the community becomes in general. Right now the game lacks mechanics that encourage players working together within the same fleet. There is no game mechanic that supports fleets in combat. These simple changes will have impact across the community at large, and solve issues like the one you are describing for the majority of players.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Elgey wrote:
    I'm talking of course about players who either fail to grasp PvP correctly or blatantly refuse to take part, ruining the teams chances.

    I'm not exactly sure why these people are playing STO in the first place, they either lack the Brain functionality to make connections and grasp depth and tactics in which case they need 24/7 care not video games, or in the latter case don't even enjoy the PvP combat and are simply taking the laziest method of progression. Which would be fine if they chose a faction that wasn't entirely based on said combat, in the Klingons.

    If there are responses to this thread, I would expect replies such as ''The exp reward for losing isn't that bad, suck it up you pansy.'' Or ''klings are OP NERF NERF NERF, durp-e-durp.'' But to address these points immediately and avoid drawn out debates later, this isn't about balance or the difference in the reward, it's about making the game more enjoyable and having enforceable rules.

    PvP definitely needs a vote to boot function, ideally. Blacklisting less ideally but workable. If the players on a team in PvP believe a player is a hindrance they should be allowed to get a new team-mate from the pool and preserve their chances of victory, rather then continue a hopeless game with hopeless team-mate/s.

    this used to happen alot in world of warcraft to where people would just sit around some where outta the way and quiet and stealth or just be outta line of sight all together and while not technically afk there not in any way participating in the game effectivly draining a spot from one team battles in wow got up to 40vs40 and while here its 15vs15 every little person helps.. perhaps introuduce a revamp of the current reward system baised soly on participation? no dmg no healing no shield healing = no rewards

    the vote functions not a good idea imo people would boot outta pure spite in some case's it wouldnt be a fair voting option getting rid of people who do participate but may be knew and doing little dmg for example.

    alot of people i've run into on fed side seem to have the super man mentality anytime someone gives advice or trys to take charge they turn into the the child "im can do what i want and you cant tell me any thing different!!!!!!" sort of TRIBBLE its funny and at the same time sad and pathetic. why just the other night even i saw a few people running around full impulse for what ever reason so i offered a little advice and said try to keep your weapon level at around 70 or your not going to do any damage when the klings pop on you. sure enough i got the childish answer and had to argue with this ibrainless, childish piece of TRIBBLE luckily i seemd to have hurt his/her fillings and he/she left soon after the convorsation was over.

    stuff like the above is rampant hardly any feds wanna work as a group and frankly i cant stand it i wouldnt care if we lost and they all tryd at least hardly any of them seem to even know sci team and engineering team can be used on others.. forget if they even know what VM or RSP is most of the time.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I'm not exactly sure why these people are playing STO in the first place,

    Ummm... perhap's it's because STO is NOT pvp centric? (UNLESS those players are Klingons, THEN I will agree with you)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    The game already has a boot function.

    Simply find 4 other players to group with and run pvp with them. Problem solved.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I agree with you, I had one such person on the Fed side earlier today. One person got us all grouped up, tried to organise things and some TRIBBLE said they don't care about winning they just want the reward, then proceeded to cry about the Klingons in zone chat. I kinda wished I could have friendly fired their TRIBBLE.

    Quitters and jerks make PvP less fun. Whether it's Feds making no effort at all or Klingons zoning in then spending the next 10 minutes cloaked, it's just not fun.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    wellll thier are many reason a person may not pull his weight, first few time we all let our nerves get us and we frezze. or they dont know thier buttons to well ect ect. it just to bad you cant just do as you want even though they payed as much for thier game as yours and pay per month to play. but i fear you have to deal with it for that s the way of gamming. they cant be pvp gods like some of you :) lol but they have as much right to do as they please in game as long as they dont break tos.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Pheema wrote:
    I agree with you, I had one such person on the Fed side earlier today. One person got us all grouped up, tried to organise things and some TRIBBLE said they don't care about winning they just want the reward, then proceeded to cry about the Klingons in zone chat. I kinda wished I could have friendly fired their TRIBBLE.

    Quitters and jerks make PvP less fun. Whether it's Feds making no effort at all or Klingons zoning in then spending the next 10 minutes cloaked, it's just not fun.

    Wow.. thats... irritating.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Pheema wrote:
    I agree with you, I had one such person on the Fed side earlier today. One person got us all grouped up, tried to organise things and some TRIBBLE said they don't care about winning they just want the reward, then proceeded to cry about the Klingons in zone chat. I kinda wished I could have friendly fired their TRIBBLE.

    Quitters and jerks make PvP less fun. Whether it's Feds making no effort at all or Klingons zoning in then spending the next 10 minutes cloaked, it's just not fun.


    I lol'd when I read your first paragraph. Wouldn't that just be a surprise to someone? Whine whine whine, and the next thing you know, you're own faction opens up on you instead. lol. "Here's a quantum torpedo from Bob, saying "Shut the hell up!" " lol.

    What would be very very interesting, though I think very highly undoable, would be to have friendly fire. Maybe not the ability to directly target someone on your own side, but if happen to fly yourself right through your teams Alpha strike, I would think that a photon torpedo from your side would hurt just as much as one from the others.

    It's an interesting idea, but I have no idea how you might make it work.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Elgey wrote:
    I'm talking of course about players who either fail to grasp PvP correctly or blatantly refuse to take part, ruining the teams chances.

    I'm not exactly sure why these people are playing STO in the first place, they either lack the Brain functionality to make connections and grasp depth and tactics in which case they need 24/7 care not video games, or in the latter case don't even enjoy the PvP combat and are simply taking the laziest method of progression. Which would be fine if they chose a faction that wasn't entirely based on said combat, in the Klingons.

    If there are responses to this thread, I would expect replies such as ''The exp reward for losing isn't that bad, suck it up you pansy.'' Or ''klings are OP NERF NERF NERF, durp-e-durp.'' But to address these points immediately and avoid drawn out debates later, this isn't about balance or the difference in the reward, it's about making the game more enjoyable and having enforceable rules.

    PvP definitely needs a vote to boot function, ideally. Blacklisting less ideally but workable. If the players on a team in PvP believe a player is a hindrance they should be allowed to get a new team-mate from the pool and preserve their chances of victory, rather then continue a hopeless game with hopeless team-mate/s.

    I do not agree with your stance.

    Many people came to play this game to command a Star Ship and Join in to Combat with it, the mechanics employed in this game have been borrowed by Fantasy Games, and many people just do not relate to this.

    In the Countless Star Trek battles we have seen in over 40 years of Star Trek, there was never such mechanics in combat...

    Ships have Crews that take care of their Ship and they do not beam over Science teams and tactical Teams and Engineering teams to one another during combat they dispatch these teams as part of their own Combat operations inside their assigned ships.

    Besides, you cannot beam anyone over to another ship if that ship's shields are up. So the whole mechanic is rather un-Trek and more in line with EQ and WOW than anything else.

    Fleets, have nothing to do with it..we are all part of the same Fleet anyways, STAR FLEET.

    The Guild-Fleets we can create in game are just a convention of MMORPG's to help people communicate and play the game with others with more ease, however they do not constitute a First Class player status either, and people not in a Guild Fleet are not Second Class Players either, as it seems to be implied in your post.

    The Problem is not with the people, the problem is with the Mechanics of the game, it just happens that players part of a Guild Fleet are in a better position to find workarounds to the current mechanics and use these to the Teams advantage, playing the game as if it were EQ or WOW in Space using the same Guild Coordination they do in other games.

    But that does not make it OK.

    If you want everyone to start playing in a more team oriented game like a real Fleet Battle like we saw in DS-( episodes, then, the game's mechanics have to be made to match that dynamic and not WoW's Dynamic, and then people will do what they have to do within that framework.

    Segregation Ideology will not solve the issue, only changes to the current system.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Elgey wrote:
    I'm talking of course about players who either fail to grasp PvP correctly or blatantly refuse to take part, ruining the teams chances.

    I'm not exactly sure why these people are playing STO in the first place, they either lack the Brain functionality to make connections and grasp depth and tactics in which case they need 24/7 care not video games, or in the latter case don't even enjoy the PvP combat and are simply taking the laziest method of progression. Which would be fine if they chose a faction that wasn't entirely based on said combat, in the Klingons.

    If there are responses to this thread, I would expect replies such as ''The exp reward for losing isn't that bad, suck it up you pansy.'' Or ''klings are OP NERF NERF NERF, durp-e-durp.'' But to address these points immediately and avoid drawn out debates later, this isn't about balance or the difference in the reward, it's about making the game more enjoyable and having enforceable rules.

    PvP definitely needs a vote to boot function, ideally. Blacklisting less ideally but workable. If the players on a team in PvP believe a player is a hindrance they should be allowed to get a new team-mate from the pool and preserve their chances of victory, rather then continue a hopeless game with hopeless team-mate/s.

    If you put someone on ignore you wont be in a match with them again. I do that for willful idiots, those who refuse to join a team, just sit and leech, or get ****y when offered basic advice (like come join the fedball). Not for incompetents though, I figure as long as your trying you might get better, but if your a willful idiot id rather just never play with you again.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Yeah this is a true story.
    I join a game 4 other guys are there and I thought "Cool there is already 5!"
    But then they all set off in full impulse IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS and within 1 and a half minutes it was 4-0.
    I left.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Manannan wrote:
    If you put someone on ignore you wont be in a match with them again. I do that for willful idiots, those who refuse to join a team, just sit and leech, or get ****y when offered basic advice (like come join the fedball). Not for incompetents though, I figure as long as your trying you might get better, but if your a willful idiot id rather just never play with you again.

    QFE to that
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I see this a lot more on the klingon side of things just because the nature of some of the pvp missions. I run one fed and two klinks. When i am pvping on the klink side i often see individuals jump in and not participate or help their team just cause they have to die 25 times. You often here them say, well i only have to die x amount more times. I have engaged many such people that just stand there and don't even fight back.

    I receive these missions as well but always help my team and fight. I know i'm going to die durning the course of the match. Sometimes more than others. I typically much prefer ground pvp over space, i feel there is a lot more imbalance in space pvp over ground. The first ground match i barely broke even, i got 7 kills with 6th deaths. The very next match i ended up with 30 kills and 2 deaths. It's just the nature of the team you end up on in pug's. I am a very good ground pvp but it's just the nature of the beast sometimes you end up outnumbered, may spawn several times in the middle of multiple enemy's etc.

    So since your going to die anyway, why must you stand there, get killed over and over and not help your team. This drives me absolutely crazy when i'm pvping on the klingon side. Which is why i feel the boot option would be nice. Those types of people need a quick exit from the match.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Kelmvor wrote:
    So since your going to die anyway, why must you stand there, get killed over and over and not help your team. This drives me absolutely crazy when i'm pvping on the klingon side. Which is why i feel the boot option would be nice. Those types of people need a quick exit from the match.

    This is annyoing i know. First of all i have to believe those players have no respect for their comrades. In this case i'm pretty sure you cant do anything. On the other side i have the feeling it is one way to protect myself. I often hear this "dying Quest excuse" right after they recognized they will lose. Practically it makes no sense to stop fighting and go over too the "running in procedure" but i guess its a possible way to hide their lack of skill. To give an explaination for the great amount of deaths thex can live with.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Manannan wrote:
    If you put someone on ignore you wont be in a match with them again. I do that for willful idiots, those who refuse to join a team, just sit and leech, or get ****y when offered basic advice (like come join the fedball). Not for incompetents though, I figure as long as your trying you might get better, but if your a willful idiot id rather just never play with you again.

    I'm not sure that is accurate. I was put on ignore by a fellow klingon and I routenly am in the same match as him/her. I can't send them tells but I still kick TRIBBLE along side them. Where were you told that ignoring someone excludes them from the same match?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    OP, I totally agree and actually made a similar post adressing this and other issues.
    http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=141753
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Luepert wrote: »
    Yeah this is a true story.
    I join a game 4 other guys are there and I thought "Cool there is already 5!"
    But then they all set off in full impulse IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS and within 1 and a half minutes it was 4-0.
    I left.

    LMAO.. this happens constantly! You could add charge straight into a group of Klingons and not drop out of full impulse until they are at like range 3 and then scream about their weapons not firing and spamming "i thought you all were behind me' !
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Pheema wrote:
    I kinda wished I could have friendly fired their TRIBBLE.

    Obviously you are the better man!

    But seriously, get the @*$!% over yourselves.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Suraknar wrote: »
    I do not agree with your stance.

    Many people came to play this game to command a Star Ship and Join in to Combat with it, the mechanics employed in this game have been borrowed by Fantasy Games, and many people just do not relate to this.

    In the Countless Star Trek battles we have seen in over 40 years of Star Trek, there was never such mechanics in combat...

    Ships have Crews that take care of their Ship and they do not beam over Science teams and tactical Teams and Engineering teams to one another during combat they dispatch these teams as part of their own Combat operations inside their assigned ships.

    Besides, you cannot beam anyone over to another ship if that ship's shields are up. So the whole mechanic is rather un-Trek and more in line with EQ and WOW than anything else.

    Fleets, have nothing to do with it..we are all part of the same Fleet anyways, STAR FLEET.

    The Guild-Fleets we can create in game are just a convention of MMORPG's to help people communicate and play the game with others with more ease, however they do not constitute a First Class player status either, and people not in a Guild Fleet are not Second Class Players either, as it seems to be implied in your post.

    The Problem is not with the people, the problem is with the Mechanics of the game, it just happens that players part of a Guild Fleet are in a better position to find workarounds to the current mechanics and use these to the Teams advantage, playing the game as if it were EQ or WOW in Space using the same Guild Coordination they do in other games.

    But that does not make it OK.

    If you want everyone to start playing in a more team oriented game like a real Fleet Battle like we saw in DS-( episodes, then, the game's mechanics have to be made to match that dynamic and not WoW's Dynamic, and then people will do what they have to do within that framework.

    Segregation Ideology will not solve the issue, only changes to the current system.

    The reason why PvP can seem so un-Star Trek like compared to the movies and tv shows is the amount of effort cryptic has put into team mechanics. It plays just like WoW pvp. Right down to Arthi Basin aka Capture and Hold.

    There are no mighty starships in this game, just crowd control, vent teams, and easy pickings. Just like WoW.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I've never really understood the mentality of pvpers tbh, it always seems to get trapped in a circle of anger.

    IE: Noob joins your side of a match, noob dies lots and ends up costing you the match. You then proceed to get very angry over a match you lost on a game; a match that no one will remember a week from now, or even an 5 hours from now. You're getting angry and frustrated over literally nothing.

    Further, as you become angry and frustrated, you begin to alienate the rest of the gaming group, eventually causing the more causal players to stop pvping all together. Eventually, you end up with a select handful of people on both sides that play pvp.

    You then proceed to get angry and frustrated over the fact that no one else is pvping, as it would seem that you've forgotten that you've driven them all away from pvp with your "I must always win" attitude.

    Seriously, it's just a game.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Lord_Xomic wrote: »
    I've never really understood the mentality of pvpers tbh, it always seems to get trapped in a circle of anger.

    IE: Noob joins your side of a match, noob dies lots and ends up costing you the match. You then proceed to get very angry over a match you lost on a game; a match that no one will remember a week from now, or even an 5 hours from now. You're getting angry and frustrated over literally nothing.

    Further, as you become angry and frustrated, you begin to alienate the rest of the gaming group, eventually causing the more causal players to stop pvping all together. Eventually, you end up with a select handful of people on both sides that play pvp.

    You then proceed to get angry and frustrated over the fact that no one else is pvping, as it would seem that you've forgotten that you've driven them all away from pvp with your "I must always win" attitude.

    Seriously, it's just a game.

    Lord i couldn't agree with you more. I typically usually hate pvp games in most mmo's for that reason. However with that said I understand that pvp'rs are just naturually more competitive then the general population. I am an old high school jock who now is a Jr. High soccer, sorry, football for all my european friends, and Ref three other sports at the jr, high school and college levels. So i have a pretty competitive nature.

    Even as highly competitive I usually stay away from pvp on most mmo's. It just usually ends up boiling down to a lot of griefing, yelling, and arguments. The only other pvp game i have come to love is a game called battleground europe. A complete WWII simulation. The reason I love it besides it's just great fun is the two opposing sides can't talk to one another. They can't send each other tells, yell comments, insults, or anything in open chat. It just comes across as scrambled letters. I really enjoy that feature, wish it was implemented here. I would love not being able to hear what the enemy yells in open chat. Would cut down on a lot of whining.

    What i think cryptic has done that I really like is it doesn't matter if you win or lose. I have yet to see a mmo that rewards both sides no matter who wins or loses. If you die you still get your skill points, badges, etc. I really think that goes a long way to just trying to create an atmosphere that is just all about fun. So it's beyond me why people have to scream and yell, cry, get angry or frustrated. I love those matches where everyone just yells, gga.

    think about it. we all just waisted 20 minutes of our lives when we could be out curing cancer.. It's not like we are doing anything really meaningful except just escape the real world for a few hours and help line the pockets of cryptic executives.. = ).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Lord_Xomic wrote: »
    I've never really understood the mentality of pvpers tbh, it always seems to get trapped in a circle of anger.

    IE: Noob joins your side of a match, noob dies lots and ends up costing you the match. You then proceed to get very angry over a match you lost on a game; a match that no one will remember a week from now, or even an 5 hours from now. You're getting angry and frustrated over literally nothing.

    Further, as you become angry and frustrated, you begin to alienate the rest of the gaming group, eventually causing the more causal players to stop pvping all together. Eventually, you end up with a select handful of people on both sides that play pvp.

    You then proceed to get angry and frustrated over the fact that no one else is pvping, as it would seem that you've forgotten that you've driven them all away from pvp with your "I must always win" attitude.

    Seriously, it's just a game.

    I've actually pvp'd in like games for years now. WoW put the must always win attitude in alot of people when you really did have to always win to achieve the highest ranks in a literal competition. Alot of people have never recovered from that mindset. With the pvp in this game set up as it is now, I'm dissapointed if I always win or alway loose. In this game I find it most fun to sometimes win and sometimes loose.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Vlaxitov wrote: »
    I've actually pvp'd in like games for years now. WoW put the must always win attitude in alot of people when you really did have to always win to achieve the highest ranks in a literal competition. Alot of people have never recovered from that mindset. With the pvp in this game set up as it is now, I'm dissapointed if I always win or alway loose. In this game I find it most fun to sometimes win and sometimes loose.

    It has been around as long as competition itself.

    There is nothing wrong with always playing to win, the problem is specific to those who don't know how to handle losing.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Kelmvor wrote:
    I see this a lot more on the klingon side of things just because the nature of some of the pvp missions. I run one fed and two klinks. When i am pvping on the klink side i often see individuals jump in and not participate or help their team just cause they have to die 25 times. You often here them say, well i only have to die x amount more times. I have engaged many such people that just stand there and don't even fight back.

    I receive these missions as well but always help my team and fight. I know i'm going to die durning the course of the match. Sometimes more than others. I typically much prefer ground pvp over space, i feel there is a lot more imbalance in space pvp over ground. The first ground match i barely broke even, i got 7 kills with 6th deaths. The very next match i ended up with 30 kills and 2 deaths. It's just the nature of the team you end up on in pug's. I am a very good ground pvp but it's just the nature of the beast sometimes you end up outnumbered, may spawn several times in the middle of multiple enemy's etc.

    So since your going to die anyway, why must you stand there, get killed over and over and not help your team. This drives me absolutely crazy when i'm pvping on the klingon side. Which is why i feel the boot option would be nice. Those types of people need a quick exit from the match.


    The only time I have ever followed the "Oh I guess I'm going to die, I'll just sit here until the end of the match" is when I'm the only one in the zone, and there are 5 klingons. lol.

    I've had a couple matches where I've jumped in, and I'll do a /who just to see if this match might be somewhat balanced. (I.E. 3 v 3, ect.) Instead, it'll show up that I'm the only fed player and there are 3 to 5 klingons. In that case, I will usually make a zone broadcast, stating that I'm the only fed player and that they are more than welcome to kill me until the match is over.

    With queue lengths being what they are, I cannot fault the Klingon players on a broken match making system, or the fact that other fed players that might have been queued, bailed. With the exception of assault missions, even the losing faction get's something so I'll just stick around, take my shields offline and let them destroy me. lol.

    In some cases, the Klingons are understanding and we've even done like mini games within the pvp match. One on one matches, ect. Other times, there are players that just don't care and will destroy me with no regard. They just want to get it over with. But, that is the only time I've ever deliberatly not tried to fight back.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Lord_Xomic wrote: »
    I've never really understood the mentality of pvpers tbh, it always seems to get trapped in a circle of anger.

    IE: Noob joins your side of a match, noob dies lots and ends up costing you the match. You then proceed to get very angry over a match you lost on a game; a match that no one will remember a week from now, or even an 5 hours from now. You're getting angry and frustrated over literally nothing.

    Further, as you become angry and frustrated, you begin to alienate the rest of the gaming group, eventually causing the more causal players to stop pvping all together. Eventually, you end up with a select handful of people on both sides that play pvp.

    You then proceed to get angry and frustrated over the fact that no one else is pvping, as it would seem that you've forgotten that you've driven them all away from pvp with your "I must always win" attitude.

    Seriously, it's just a game.

    Way to lump a bunch of players into one type. You do not truly believe that PVPers as a general rule are not out for fun do you? PVPers like having new players in a game, more targets=more fun. The OP isnt even talking about this type of player. He was mentioning the idiots that ruin a match, the ones that stand around and die on purpose just to complete some quest or get the points, or the feds that enter into an arena and broadcast how they have dropped their shields to "quicken" the match. These are not Noobs, these are players that do not want to be nor should be in PVP. But some ingame mechanic makes them feel they NEED to be, when in fact they do not.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Igax wrote: »
    Way to lump a bunch of players into one type. You do not truly believe that PVPers as a general rule are not out for fun do you? PVPers like having new players in a game, more targets=more fun. The OP isnt even talking about this type of player. He was mentioning the idiots that ruin a match, the ones that stand around and die on purpose just to complete some quest or get the points, or the feds that enter into an arena and broadcast how they have dropped their shields to "quicken" the match. These are not Noobs, these are players that do not want to be nor should be in PVP. But some ingame mechanic makes them feel they NEED to be, when in fact they do not.

    I hope that you're not referencing me with the "dropping shields to quicken the match" sentence. I only do that when I'm the only Fed in the zone. Hard to upset other players when I'm the only one on that team.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Igax wrote: »
    Way to lump a bunch of players into one type. You do not truly believe that PVPers as a general rule are not out for fun do you?

    Yes.

    I honestly and truly believe that people who spend most of their time pvping do not understand how to have fun playing a game.

    And I also believe that pvpers are the cause of their own problems when it comes to overpowered powers or builds, and lack of population.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Lord_Xomic wrote: »
    Yes.

    I honestly and truly believe that people who spend most of their time pvping do not understand how to have fun playing a game.

    And I also believe that pvpers are the cause of their own problems when it comes to overpowered powers or builds, and lack of population.

    at this point, the best i can do is point you out the the Timmy, Johnny, & Spike archetypes of the MTG tcg. All three like to have fun, but how they win comes in different ways

    timmy likes to play big creatures
    johnny likes to view the connections between cards
    spike likes to win

    Spike is the competitive player. Spike plays to win. Spike enjoys winning. To accomplish this, Spike will play whatever the best deck is. Spike will copy decks off the Internet. Spike will borrow other players' decks. To Spike, the thrill of Magic is the adrenalin rush of competition. Spike enjoys the stimulation of outplaying the opponent and the glory of victory
    ~~
    now that said if you fail to recognize the similarity there isnt much we can do to convince you.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I pvp just to have fun.

    Anyways...while playing my klingon, i'm called "coward" for being in cloak, and attacking from, and re-entering cloak, to reposition myself for any incoming "impulse" Fed player.

    While playing Star Fleet toon, I'm called a "coward", by the klingons, when I put power to my engines, and evasive man. away from the 5 v 1 skirmish at one of the nodes in C&H map. so my skills can come off cool down, so I can re-enter the fight, at my choosing.

    Usually theres always one player who wants to dictate how another player "should" play the pvp match.

    Some times, I just want to type in the zone chat "Are you paying the monthly fee for me, so I can play STO?, No? then STFU! You don't tell, me how I want to play."

    Of course typing all that out would be a waste of energy, and no fun, as I prefer to play the game, then be antgonize by some ignorant bigot who gets offended easily. And my start crying because his feeling was hurt...or ego. :D (oh then again, I would have fun doing that too, ****ing someone off, ROFL)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Lord_Xomic wrote: »
    I've never really understood the mentality of pvpers tbh, it always seems to get trapped in a circle of anger.

    IE: Noob joins your side of a match, noob dies lots and ends up costing you the match. You then proceed to get very angry over a match you lost on a game; a match that no one will remember a week from now, or even an 5 hours from now. You're getting angry and frustrated over literally nothing.

    Further, as you become angry and frustrated, you begin to alienate the rest of the gaming group, eventually causing the more causal players to stop pvping all together. Eventually, you end up with a select handful of people on both sides that play pvp.

    You then proceed to get angry and frustrated over the fact that no one else is pvping, as it would seem that you've forgotten that you've driven them all away from pvp with your "I must always win" attitude.

    Seriously, it's just a game.

    Thank you for speaking the truth :)
Sign In or Register to comment.