test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

PvP participation continues to decline.

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited July 2010 in PvP Gameplay
Hi all.
I'm noticing a decrease in the already small amount of PvP players.
Whats alarming the most is its Starfleet players as much as the minority Klingon player.
I was wondering if Cryptic have any ideas to breathe new life into PvP?
I've had to give up and leave the queue after extreme wait times alot this week.
Is Cryptic considering PvP a low priority issue?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1345

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I've said it from the beginning. There are two things that are needed to save PvP.

    First, we need BALANCE. Klingon ships have a HUGE advantage, especially at lower level. When you're able to outdamage your foes in excess of 10-1 without any real effort, it points to a problem. If you leave that discrepancy be because it evens out at higher level, you will still lose PvPers, because no one will get to higher levels. The low level imbalance will scare off the people who might have carried on if it was balanced. This is absolutely critical.

    Second, we need something to fight FOR. We're at war, but there's not really any reason to fight. No systems change hands, it's just empty combat. This is highly suggested.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I think trekkies in general consider pvp a low priority issue.
    Its like trying to sell candy to a kid who has no teeth, can he eat it? Yea but its going to take some time.
    Then again, I know many people expected pvp to be totally different than was presented here and then you have to deal with the whole balance mess and its a never ending debate about stats,overpowered/underpowered items, wah and moar wah.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Personally, I hope PvP dies altogether. I'm tired of game developers making sweeping nerfs (i.e. SWG's NGE and STO's escort DPS nerf) solely because of the great minority known as PvP whiners.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I disagree it is caused or has anything to do with Klingons being OP at lower levels. I don't think there is even a balance issue any more after the latest nerf bat.

    At this point I think there needs to be more space maps and I think some of them need to have smaller overall populations to play. Instead of 20 players total make it smaller denominations.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Man pvp has everything to do with someone being overpowered at any level. I maintain that its a never ending cycle of insanity. A downward spiral even.I cant speak for anyone else but since I started gaming in uo, ive grown sick overtime of hearing all the wahh that is associated with pvp and its overall effects on the game in general. PvP balancing ruins games. I have never seen games get better because of balance passes and item stat tweaking. I think its just caused more bitterness, boredom and cancellations in the long run.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I have stopped PvPing with my RA5s and BG5 for the moment. This is mainly due to the queues, I spend ages for the queue to pop only for it to be an unbalanced match.

    Something needs to be done to bring more people into the PvP queues. And the leet Gods of PvP need to learn not to chase them away.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    PVP whiners?

    When have I ever opened my mouth about a thing to do with PVP? I think its the carebears ruining PVP.

    Overpowered Klingons? Like hell they are lol
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Yea, whiners of the wah wah variety. They come in all types of fruity shapes and sizes.

    PvP to a dev is like a father taking his son to gamestop, the kid says i want that game! so he buys the kid a game, then the kid gets home and sees that latest game commercial and now the father has to run back to gamestop.

    Thats never ending insanity! lol
    wah and moar wah Cry moar!?

    Oh god please no just stop. shhhh, hush, logout, cancel, go away stoppit, quit, no, just.. ffs leave the game alonnnnnneeeahhh. hahaha
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    aguila432 wrote: »
    Yea, whiners of the wah wah variety. They come in all types of fruity shapes and sizes.

    You forgot flavors :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Yea and they ruin mmos by small forces of whiny fruity flavor hordes.
    Once they come in TRIBBLE and pillage the game stats, theyre off to next mmo to ruin that.

    Thanks for mentioning the oversight. lol
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    It's a fact, Klingon ships are overpowered compared to the Federation equivalents, at least they were last time I did an evaluation.

    I compared the Klingon Cruiser to the Federation Cruiser. The Klingon Cruiser had slightly more hull (due, I think to the Captain having slightly superior Cruiser skills), very slightly less Shields, more crew and VASTLY superior firepower, in addition to the HUGE startegic advantage of the Cloak, and VASTLY superior manueverability.

    How was firepower superior? Cannons, and lots of them. All Klingon ships have access to them, ONLY Federation Escorts do. Better firepower, better manueverability, comparable durability and first strike capability = overpowered. Numbers don't lie.


    Now, I'll admit, I haven't tested it recently, but I suspect the discrepancy has already driven off most people who might have tried it. I know for my part, the reason I don't PvP is largely that discrepancy. Perhaps it no longer exists, but I've little reason to try and find out.


    The bottom line is that everyone plays to have fun. That means everyone wants to be competetive. If someone isn't, they're not going to play, because it's just not fun. No one wants to be cannon fodder.

    If that makes me a "Carebear" then so be it. You can call me names and continue to play by yourself.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I don't think theres much of a discrepency. The cloak is a pretty big advantage though, all things aside.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I don't think theres much of a discrepency. The cloak is a pretty big advantage though, all things aside.

    The nerf to cannons may have take care of a large part of it, as I say, I haven't checked. In any case, the Klingons retain some huge advantages.

    Let us assume that firepower is now balanced.
    Klingons have greatly superior manueverability.
    Klingons have comparable durability (shields/hull).
    Klingons have a huge tactical advantage in the cloak.

    That shows two significant advantages for the Klingons. I don't think you can argue any of them.

    It should have looked more like this:

    Firepower is roughly comparable.
    Klingons have superior manueverability.
    Federation has superior durability.
    Klingons have the tactical advantage of the cloak.
    Federation has even more durability to allow for the cloak.


    (Or something like that.) For each advantage one side has, the other has to have a commensurate advantage. Presently, that's not the case.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Okay, if you want to underpower Klingon ships, then make Tribbles explode in Ground combat on use, knocking 95% damage to the Federation players.

    Don't like playing against klingons in ships - Don't. Most Klignons stopped doing ground pvp b/c of the uber tribbles.

    As for cannons, everyone cna use cannons. It is the dual and heavies that are limited to combat ships. You can always get an escort for PvP if you don't like me grinding you to space dust with a 4 front dual hvy cannon pound.... Then you can do the same to me :)

    Besides, seems all the posters forgot 1 simple point. There is NO LOSS in pvp. You play you fight, someoen wins, everyoen gets the same points. Re-queue then rinse and repeat.

    Blakinik
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    ^ THIS ^

    Seriously.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Mojo wrote: »
    The Klingon Cruiser had slightly more hull (due, I think to the Captain having slightly superior Cruiser skills),

    Yeah and the FEDS have "slightly" more content on the PvE side. When they fix that I'll worry about the ONLY gig we have going being EVEN.
    ;)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Yeah and the FEDS have "slightly" more content on the PvE side. When they fix that I'll worry about the ONLY gig we have going being EVEN.
    ;)

    The straw man argument is called a logical fallacy for a reason.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I really like pvp really nothing else to do at RA consiering ive done 60 plus stfs......and yeah ive noticed the ques taking longer and longer it stinks i wish more people would get into it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    there's PvP ?

    I thought that menu was a placeholder, like Andoria and the duels.

    .
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    AtomicFB wrote:
    I disagree it is caused or has anything to do with Klingons being OP at lower levels. I don't think there is even a balance issue any more after the latest nerf bat.

    At this point I think there needs to be more space maps and I think some of them need to have smaller overall populations to play. Instead of 20 players total make it smaller denominations.

    Yes, that. We've had the same old same old same old maps and matches for far too long now. It's way past time for something new. And that stupid thing about not being able to leave a match - that needs to go. It was the end of ground PVP for me. Getting trapped in yet another 5v1 match? No. Hell no.

    That's not been changed, has it?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    I think there needs to be more motivation to PVP. Whats the point in doing it other than bragging rights? There should be some kind of reward or something else to make someone want to sit in a queue and get into a match.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    PVP is a reward in and of itself. i don't understand why people DONT like it personally.

    And BTW, I play Fed side.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Mojo wrote: »
    I've said it from the beginning. There are two things that are needed to save PvP.

    First, we need BALANCE. Klingon ships have a HUGE advantage, especially at lower level. When you're able to outdamage your foes in excess of 10-1 without any real effort, it points to a problem.
    aguila432 wrote: »
    I think trekkies in general consider pvp a low priority issue.
    Personally, I hope PvP dies altogether. I'm tired of game developers making sweeping nerfs (i.e. SWG's NGE and STO's escort DPS nerf) solely because of the great minority known as PvP whiners.

    I think I have to agree w/ all of these statements. I am not a fan of PvP, I have tried it though and when I have it has been less than enjoyable because of how extremely OPed the Klingon ships appear to be. At times it feels like running over and over into a fire because all I have gotten out of it was burned.

    Some Star Trek fans in general don't seem to be big in PvP or combat. There have been tons of threads w/ players requesting LESS combat oriented content, so much so that Cryptic is adding in their new diplomatic core so that people can level w/ less combat.

    I'm also tired of my PvE being affected by nerfs because of attempts to balance powers for PvP.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Yeah and the FEDS have "slightly" more content on the PvE side. When they fix that I'll worry about the ONLY gig we have going being EVEN.
    ;)

    While it's a straw man argument, and as such fallacious, you don' tseem to realize that this is the very reason there is no one to play. People won't do something that isn't fun. Disbalance isn't fun, ergo, people don't PvP. It doesn't matter WHY it's disbalanced, only that it IS.

    I have ground PvPed with my Klingon, and fairly frequently. I've never noticed any tribble disbalance. In fact, with Batlh'etlh in hand, my Klingon is something of a juggernaut. He rarely gets defeated, and usually only if outnumbered. The same is true of my Federation characters.

    Klingons can make the same Tribbles as the Feds can, so what's the problem?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    How about battles are too short in allot of cases. BoP's and escorts can eat your shields and hull in less than 15 seconds. While some PvPers don't mind this (and probobly expect this), there was the attitude giving by the developers that space battles would take more time and not be decided within seconds. Part of this has to do with damage (doesn't help that Kingons and Galaxy-X's get 15% damage bonus on decloak) or the way some tactical patterns stack. It also hurts when science vessels can strip away all defence abilities when defence mechanics rely heavily on buffing.

    But I think the major issue is the map designs and the team communication limitations. Not everone uses voice chat and you can only have five membes on your team which hurts not only healers, but anyone wanting to find where their faction mates are. It also doesn't help when these matches start when teams are 5 to 1 due to those who snoozed or canceled their queue.

    There is a small variety of maps and some maps such as capture and hold are just too small. More variety should be added to these types of PvP in the form of more maps or randomizing the map itself. Just for example, in Capture and hold, why not have each point trigger some form of actions (say the center starbase becomes active and shoots at the opposite team, while sensor array provides a wider sensor net).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    It's too bad the battles aren't more like Starfleet Command (ie Starfleet Battles). Much more tactical. Unfortunately, we're victims of DS9, where Starships were shown doing things the way Starfighters do. Thus, we are stuck with 2 second fights.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Could it be that the reason PvP queues are less now is that some people are bored and taking a break from the game and waiting until Season 2 delivers some new content?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    Mojo wrote: »
    It's too bad the battles aren't more like Starfleet Command (ie Starfleet Battles). Much more tactical. Unfortunately, we're victims of DS9, where Starships were shown doing things the way Starfighters do. Thus, we are stuck with 2 second fights.

    It's only two second fights if your team doesn't know how to use heals.

    This is what irritates me. There are about 5 or so good pvp fleets on the federation side and about 1 good pvp klingon fleet. There are also significantly worse players on the federation side, so what gives? player skill level.
    • The DPS potential between factions is the same; I've seen the damage levels of the best klinks playing their federation alts and reaching the same numbers. The Federation has access to the same exact weaponry and the same exact skills as the KDF.
    • The Healing potential between factions is higher on the federation side; Federation ships have access to a second science or second engineering officer at tier 5, Klingon ships have a 3rd tactical or 3rd engineering or are missing the slot completely.
    • The Klingon cloak only affects the first 10 seconds of battle; The same klingons that kill you within 10 seconds of cloaking will be able to kill you within 10 seconds of engaging if they were on the federation side. The only difference is that Klinks will always shoot first, if you cannot plan accordingly you will fail. No if, ands, or buts.
    • Teams without healers will die; it doesn't matter whose side they are on - Klingon or federation. Against a team with healers you will lose. The amount of reasons why this happens are way to long to bother listing here
    So thats four big reasons why the fail is so epic on this thread. Rather than actually improve, the players in this thread have largely decided to swing the nerfbat (again). I'm just gonna be honest here - try not to suck when you decide swing the nerfbat, chances are your going to hit yourself in the head with it before you actually succeed in getting something nerfed.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2010
    faithborn wrote:
    It's only two second fights if your team doesn't know how to use heals.

    This is what irritates me. There are about 5 or so good pvp fleets on the federation side and about 1 good pvp klingon fleet. There are also significantly worse players on the federation side, so what gives? player skill level.
    • The DPS potential between factions is the same; I've seen the damage levels of the best klinks playing their federation alts and reaching the same numbers. The Federation has access to the same exact weaponry and the same exact skills as the KDF.

      (This is untrue. Until you can show me a Federation Cruiser with Cannons, Klingon ships will always have higher DPS.)


    • The Healing potential between factions is higher on the federation side; Federation ships have access to a second science or second engineering officer at tier 5, Klingon ships have a 3rd tactical or 3rd engineering or are missing the slot completely.


      (This is also untrue. A Klingon Bird of Prey can carry MORE science or engineering officers than any Federation ship, if they choose, because of the generic officer slots. Further, even if it's balanced at tier 5, you're not going to see many people at that level if they've been discouraged at tier 1.)


    • The Klingon cloak only affects the first 10 seconds of battle; The same klingons that kill you within 10 seconds of cloaking will be able to kill you within 10 seconds of engaging if they were on the federation side. The only difference is that Klinks will always shoot first, if you cannot plan accordingly you will fail. No if, ands, or buts.

      (The Klingon cloak only affects the first 4 seconds of the ATTACK. It also allows you to decide when and where to attack. In the case of Birds of Prey, it can even allow you to escape if needed. That it allows you the first strike is often decisive. He who fires first usually wins.)


    • Teams without healers will die; it doesn't matter whose side they are on - Klingon or federation. Against a team with healers you will lose. The amount of reasons why this happens are way to long to bother listing here

      (Also not true. I've seen teams of Birds of Prey or Raptors absolutely demolish all comers. DPS wins more often than anything, and Klingons have superior DPS.)
    So thats four big reasons why the fail is so epic on this thread. Rather than actually improve, the players in this thread have largely decided to swing the nerfbat (again). I'm just gonna be honest here - try not to suck when you decide swing the nerfbat, chances are your going to hit yourself in the head with it before you actually succeed in getting something nerfed.

    Notes within (I'd have used colour, but I can't figure out how yet. Thus, my comments are bracketed).

    If I, flying my Bird of Prey, can do 10-20 times the damage of the most successful Federation ship, never having flown a single PvP mission, and all but ignoring team tactics, then that should tell you something.
Sign In or Register to comment.