My biggest complaint is that one who doesnt fight and just sits to wait it out...then they end up on the score board with zeros accross the board. I dont mind a one sided fight...assuming that everone is actually fighting.
Possibly the player in question is praticing fed anti-carrier tactics?
I personally do not think there is any problem with doing that. PvP is not a lot of peoples cup of tea and I because they have a "daily" people will grind it. You need to get over the fact that not everyone wants to PvP and stop trying to punish people for making the choice not to get involved in a rediculous display of machoism. I do not believe Cryptic can do anything because it is not breaking the rules, show me in any of Cryptic's game rules where it says "In PvP, you must be part of a team and you MUST fight". Because I believe they do not say that and therefore you do not have the right to "Judge" other players on the basis of your own elitism. Its discriminatory.
You want to end AFK players in PvP. One solution only. GET RID OF THE DAILY!
Brilliant..
Now, Im not into PvE, particulary the ground kind of PvE
Sooo..
Get rid of daily PvE ground missions..
Get rid of daily PvE space missions..
Finally add a vendor where you can pick up any item for free (which is what these people are doing anyways)
Or maybe not..
Maybe add a consequence for not participating/winning in Daily PvP.. There are several PvE missions that can be failed (Some diplomacy things, Alhena daily, Freighter daily, Satelite daily, Breen Patrol - And most likely the new Deferi daily as well)
Maybe make it so either
1) If you not score atleast 50k damage and 25k healing in a Arena, 75k/35k in C&H (and an appropiate amount for Ground PvP) you.. Do.. Not.. Get.. Rewarded
2) If you do not win, you get nothing.
3) You get bonus for winning 3 matches - 3 Emblem total for 3 matches, 6 additional emblems for 3 victories.
1) If you not score atleast 50k damage and 25k healing in a Arena, 75k/35k in C&H (and an appropiate amount for Ground PvP) you.. Do.. Not.. Get.. Rewarded
2) If you do not win, you get nothing.
3) You get bonus for winning 3 matches - 3 Emblem total for 3 matches, 6 additional emblems for 3 victories.
1]] Well, i had a Cap-n-hold last night to where i was the highest scoring KDF player and had 78k damage and 50k healing. the other 4 players had way less. yet we still Won the game due to capping points. Under this constraint i would have been the only person to win on the KDF side.....and the feds would have Won their points because they had higher damage values.
I get the intention behind it, despite the current one obviously fails.
2]] while it wouldn't be fair to fed pug teams that try and win it would force them into playing more FvF or even worse to not PvP at all....and then the PvP community suffers the loss.
having a loss only give 1 emblem and then allows you to go through 3 losses to get your emblems is a fair compromise. The Win would also count for 1 emblem point too....after all you have to do 3 matches to get credit. So, rewarding a win or loss for the same amount lessens the futility of losing and not getting any credit.
3]] This would only benefit the Pre-made teams. It is rare to get a KDF pug team player to get 3 straight wins when FED Pre-mades also queue and have the better teamwork and skill balancing. It would be something different to have a special mission counter that records wins only.....get 15 wins and it gives 3 extra emblems. that way anyone has access to it but makes it tantamount to having a win in either FvF or KvF.
** Removing the emblems from PvP would just make the fights less frequent and only small in facing certain players constantly.
** Restricting the emblem rewards to KvF will just frustrate 'poor' PvP players to acquit all together. FvF should be a stepping stone to perfecting the PvP build and gaining confidence into FvK play.
I took it that way in the beginning and when i made a KDF toon and actually leveled him back in August....it was very easy to compete and finish perfecting a build to be a certain role...not 2 or 3, but 1 role.
1]] Well, i had a Cap-n-hold last night to where i was the highest scoring KDF player and had 78k damage and 50k healing. the other 4 players had way less. yet we still Won the game due to capping points. Under this constraint i would have been the only person to win on the KDF side.....and the feds would have Won their points because they had higher damage values.
I get the intention behind it, despite the current one obviously fails.
Obviously there should be added "cap" scores for C&H
2]] while it wouldn't be fair to fed pug teams that try and win it would force them into playing more FvF or even worse to not PvP at all....and then the PvP community suffers the loss.
having a loss only give 1 emblem and then allows you to go through 3 losses to get your emblems is a fair compromise. The Win would also count for 1 emblem point too....after all you have to do 3 matches to get credit. So, rewarding a win or loss for the same amount lessens the futility of losing and not getting any credit.
Or it would force them to work together, improve their PvP
3]] This would only benefit the Pre-made teams. It is rare to get a KDF pug team player to get 3 straight wins when FED Pre-mades also queue and have the better teamwork and skill balancing. It would be something different to have a special mission counter that records wins only.....get 15 wins and it gives 3 extra emblems. that way anyone has access to it but makes it tantamount to having a win in either FvF or KvF.
Then they will need to work better together, KDF ships are every bit as powerful as the Fed ships now (now they have a copy of the best Fed healer and a dedicated SV - Both ships also have "refit-powers", so they really outclass their Fed counterparts.
The idea was: Give them 3 emblems for participating, and an additional 6 for continuing to PvP and win 3.. Sure Premade fleets will have a advantage, but why shouldnt they get rewarded for practicing and flying together?
** Removing the emblems from PvP would just make the fights less frequent and only small in facing certain players constantly.
Removing them is one sure way to get rid of the AFKers.. They have no business queing up and ruining other peoples experience. They should get nada, zip, zilch - Damn leechers.
** Restricting the emblem rewards to KvF will just frustrate 'poor' PvP players to acquit all together. FvF should be a stepping stone to perfecting the PvP build and gaining confidence into FvK play.
I took it that way in the beginning and when i made a KDF toon and actually leveled him back in August....it was very easy to compete and finish perfecting a build to be a certain role...not 2 or 3, but 1 role.
And it is equally easy for a Fed..
That's not a lesson PvEs will learn, and they shouldn't even. If the gear is irrelevant, then that might need changing. But even ignoring gear - these days, Emblems can be used to by the retrofits, and they are costly.
It would be dangerous for Cryptic to say "you don't need this". It seems the "grind" is a necessary component of the game to keep people subscribed, as annoying as this is. If you can prove Cryptic otherwise, do it.
(I would say that the Weekly episodes with the "special reward" - that is really special - is a good method to achieve that, but apparantly there is still a significant number of players that don't play them. Of course, a "PvP" or "Raid" only person might not care about them.)
My concern with vote-to-kick options is the potential for abuse (End of match, everyone kick Hale!), but it might be one way.
The alternative solution would be to reward only wins. Your daily would be "Win 1 PvP battle" and that's it. Winning is very hard if you're AFK (or one of your team is). But of course, it can be reallly really very hard sometimes and might make pepole even more frustrated about PvP ("I'll never win!"), so I'd prefer a mix of "small reward" for participation only and a bigger reward for winning.
An alternative way might be to reward things like "Kill 5 Captains/player ships" or "Heal 100,000 damage on other ships".
.
Yeah but considering just how many dailies we have. (I have some serious time to dedicate to this game, and I can't finish all the dailies on my main and alts, still squeeze in going to work, working out, eating food,) I think they could just skip out on the PvP with minimal slowdown at this point. If they don't want to pvp, there's more than enough ways to hit 10+ emblems a day without doing pvp.
It's one thing when someone decides to take the game to the next level and want to learn how to pvp and they do it badly. I encourage that sort of behavior. It's when they don't even try that it really really ticks me off. Especially since I'm there to have fun and preferably Win. I don't mind losing, as long as everyone on the team can say they gave it their best effort. (which is also why Fed Pugs infuriate me so much in general)
For me it's not about the grind at this point. I like using my highpowered toys against other people's high powered toys. And when I start feeling 'bored' I just make a new character and learn how to play it. Which is sort of why I find the character slot thing kind of dangerous, as it discourages this mentality unless you pay extra for it.
Well with the Vote To Kick, it should only trigger in special circumstances (and that can be easily programmed. It's in Halo3, and quite a few other games. One of the circumstances in those games is Kick the Team Killing ****** ***** for example) such as them going Idle during a match, not capping a point, and not participating in battle. Players should get a Warning by the game that they are being flagged for Vote To Kick, and if they do not respond or change their actions in 30 seconds the vote comes up.
Obviously there should be added "cap" scores for C&H
So some special counter that records how long you sat inside the area of influence for the cap point??
So, they guy who chooses to cap more points will still be flagged as a winner versus they same team player that chooses to go around attacking the other side...he would rack up some good damage numbers and thus get a win due to the flag action you mentioned prior. I dont see a failure in checks and balances here...do you....any chance for a possible misuse or wrong recording?
Or it would force them to work together, improve their PvP
While you and I and others would think so...it doesnt happen this way.
The reward is there....3 emblems....all you have to do is join the match and do 'something'! As it is now, not with the 'new safeguards' we are talking about, this 'something' is what we are up in arms about. Hiding, suicide runs, sitting dead the whole match or sitting behind the spawn point at base camp.
My point is you cannot force these kinds of people to co-operate. I will PvP anyways.....remove the reward and you will turn 'potential' PvP'ers off 'cause there is no reward for joining in the first place and then they suffer from lack of confidence or some other reason to not be engaged in the fight.
That was the argument i was trying to make; thus, by giving 1 point, whether win or fail, you still participate, you still learn & you still get your emblems.
Then they will need to work better together, KDF ships are every bit as powerful as the Fed ships now (now they have a copy of the best Fed healer and a dedicated SV - Both ships also have "refit-powers", so they really outclass their Fed counterparts.
The idea was: Give them 3 emblems for participating, and an additional 6 for continuing to PvP and win 3.. Sure Premade fleets will have a advantage, but why shouldnt they get rewarded for practicing and flying together?
I was trying to tie your 3 emblems participation into actually making those 2 PvP missions for 15 of 15 system for 3 emblems each time you complete it. There is no daily, but it is dependent on the fact it only records the win. 15 wins nets you 3 extra points...always. So those that PvP regularly get more out of it and encourages more participation to complete 15 wins.
Whether or not ships are balanced is another argument of itself.
Removing them is one sure way to get rid of the AFKers.. They have no business queing up and ruining other peoples experience. They should get nada, zip, zilch - Damn leechers.
Removing them is one way to get rid of a lot of players, not just the afk'ers.
**the 'Cap' point counter you suggest
**2 min afk auto-boot
**no reward for lack of participation filter
**a report function similar to 'report spam' would boot the player with majority of vote for players team.
These would be 'safeguards' to contend with afk'ing or non-participation and would better serve the serious players.
And it is equally easy for a Fed..
i do not disagree. I just 'surmise' that certain cruisers i can destroy before my cloak comes off a timer while others can tackle 2 or 3 KDF ships. Outside help aside, a lot of it has to do with skill choice and wonder if many PvE players think there builds will work well in PvP....then when it doesnt they QQ about imbalance and such. I was trying to allude that a PvP build is specific and works well in PvE also, but the lack of certain skills or use of those skills 'improperly' . I was there at one point in time in each MMO i played in regard to PvP and feel a lot of that is present with the so-called 'bad players' in PvP here.
Any kicking mechanism is prone to griefing and abuse if players are in control of it. Dropping emblem rewards from the losing side will double queue times for pvp, and they are far too long already. People would drop from the mission if they thought they were going to lose so they could more quickly get in a mission they had a chance to win. Dropping players mid-match and putting in a different player after start means lots of people end up in missions they can't win from the first minute since the score is already lopsided. I remember that happening in the early days: enter mission to see you're behind 14-1, never even see a teammate before you're ganked and you lose, or maybe it's lopsided but takes a long time to finish without ever getting close in score.
Rules set up to stop pure afk'ing can still be circumvented by macros or by whatever method those looking only for the reward can find, and they can always find something. One problem I see that hasn't been brought up is that people don't like to lose. If they think they are going to lose no matter what, some of them will go afk or find some way to not participate, and for some that will feel better than playing hard and losing. Better for their ego to feel like they had no care of winning in the first place than to feel they got creamed. I would argue that in part this comes from the high insult level from pvp players in general. Often I see not that someone lost, but that he is a loser. His entire being can be summed up by a smirking player. I see this on the forums a lot too. The chest thumping, schoolyard mentality I see often among pvp'ers turns off lots of people. Most of those don't pvp at all because of it, but some will choose to go ahead and get the rewards with minimum interaction with people they dislike, and nothing says minimum interaction like going afk.
I don't pvp for emblems but if I were pining for a new ship needing hundreds of emblems I might do it, but I would only be doing it for the emblem reward. So I'd be unlikely to be a valuable member of the team. Emblem rewards for pvp will always mean that some are doing it only for the emblems. This will always have an adverse effect on pvp as a whole. Unfortunately, pvp queues are largely empty already and lowering the number of people who enter them will mean even fewer will enter knowing they will wait a long time for the match.
In the end, I don't see a solution to the problem that doesn't hurt pvp as a whole. If you had enough players to keep the queues moving quickly you could implement some of the ideas presented here, but we're a long way from that. I'd consider taking away the ability to chat with the opposition like they did in Dark Age of Camelot to improve the numbers of players coming in who simply didn't want to be verbally abused when they lose. Or when they win. Get a critical mass of players in pvp and you can afford to winnow some of them out. Right now you can't.
They could start by removing the Borg stuff in Kerrat , a spawn each end and a ticket count that starts at around say 5k , once its zero game over , open pvp that would attract them all , surely someone at Cryptic could do this in a day no more and wed havew a great open instance pvp zone for S3 till they look at it more.
After all Kerrat has been broke and the bane of PvP since launch and ignored .
They could start by removing the Borg stuff in Kerrat , a spawn each end and a ticket count that starts at around say 5k , once its zero game over , open pvp that would attract them all , surely someone at Cryptic could do this in a day no more and wed havew a great open instance pvp zone for S3 till they look at it more.
After all Kerrat has been broke and the bane of PvP since launch and ignored .
This......during headstart I was "ok" with its flaws seeing that the first month would be a rough journey for STO.....yeah we've passed 300 days now....the excuses are gone. Kerrat really could have been something amazing.....I envy our alternate realities.
Personally, what does it matter if you win or lose in PVP, you still get points and emblems? Besides I think that having to punish somebody because they don't really want to be there is detestable. Typical human view on things, if somebody does not obey, shoot them. Besides PvP is really irrelivant to the infrastucture of the game. Its not an integral componant like WoW's PvP is. Personally, I really do not want to get destroyed multiple times in a PvP, nobody really does. Its not selfishness, its preservation. The avarage player is not going to give a flying **** about people on the other side of the world that are raging at them for not joining it.
Cryptic are bribing people to PvP because there is NOT that much to do when you reach VA except level another character through the mundane missions you did before or do STF's that require people to actually get a group that agree with each other (equally mundane). Oh and lets not forget the ONE mission per week which is usually achievable in about 10-15 minutes.
The games lack of content is what is causing this debate. WoW never had this problem, it had rich raiding content for people that did not enjoy top level PvP. Cryptic should take a lesson out of Blizzard's success and duplicate that. Star Trek has much more rich and colourful lore that they can destroy, so why not just go ahead and create more STF's then one per 3 months. Why not create lower level STF's like instances.
All this keeps the PvP's happy and the PvE's happy. So why are Cryptic so undeniably lazy?
Seriously, I am sick of wasting my time trying to PvP when there are people who will come in the PvP Arena, refuse an invite to the team, then run, gun, get himself killed, then just sit there and stay dead while my team struggles to have a fair PvP game. As soon as I see one of these AFKPVPers hit the scene, I just want to exit the map right then and there. But if I do that, I feel like it would be a jerk thing to do, so I stay and take my punishment.
We need to come up with some way of either A: Preventing this or B: Punishing those who do this. This has been talked about a bit on the PvP forums, but I honestly do not feel like this is getting the attention it deserves. I personally feel (and I say personally because I speak for nobody but myself here) like it is about time for a Dev to chime in and talk about this.
Not trying to sound rude if I am coming off that way, just aggravated.
That is wrong... you don't have the right to punish people for being forced to do PvP. Because I hate to say it but there is **** all to do at VA. Blame Cryptic, not the player.
That is wrong... you don't have the right to punish people for being forced to do PvP. Because I hate to say it but there is **** all to do at VA. Blame Cryptic, not the player.
You *can't* be serious. Nobody is forced to do PvP. Ugh, I'm not even going to waste my time....
Personally, what does it matter if you win or lose in PVP, you still get points and emblems? Besides I think that having to punish somebody because they don't really want to be there is detestable.
You are not punished for not PvPing. You are not forced to PvP. If you don't enjoy it, don't do it. Saying "Hey, you get a reward for PvPing" is not being forced to PvP. I am not forced to do an STF, despite there being plenty of rewards for it. Nor am I forced into Fleet Actions, despite the rewards. I am missing out of tons of Emblems every day becuase I cannot possibly complete all the possibly ways to earn them with my 4 end-game characters.
For people like you it seems best to just create a cap on Emblems we can earn per day. Then you can no longer feel forced (as irrational as it is) to PvP or punished for failure or non-participation in PvP. You just do the 3-4 PvE ways to gather Emblems and be done with it.
For those that still think AFKing in PvP is the quickest way to get closer to the Emblem "Cap", removing that "speed" advantage would be key.
- Only 1 Emblem for 3 matches.
- 2 Emblems for each win.
Just AFKing and probably costing your team the win is ineffecient. You make more Emblems in a Fleet Action or the Deferi Daily in the same time.
heres the rub, only feds do this in pvp, and 99% of pvp is fed vs fed, take out fed vs fed and youll cut this by at least 99% as now youll be against kdf teams, we dont afk, we just decloak and burn you to the ground. and you can always group with friends and que together to avoid the ******s
That is wrong... you don't have the right to punish people for being forced to do PvP. Because I hate to say it but there is **** all to do at VA. Blame Cryptic, not the player.
read the end users license aggreement, engaging in a game mode, whether pvp or stf or whatever, and going afk, making others do the work for you, falls under leeching, causing another player grief by taking up space that a usefull person could be in, hindering them from enjoying their play time.
you are 1 leech, the others outnumber you and are having their fun playtime ruined, cryptic needs to crack down on its own rules, institude a hard afk detection that is firm and punishes.
auto respawn after dieing, auto afk and boot from game after 30 seconds of not moving shooting or healing inside of pvp maps, auto temp bans for repeat offenders.
So some special counter that records how long you sat inside the area of influence for the cap point??
So, they guy who chooses to cap more points will still be flagged as a winner versus they same team player that chooses to go around attacking the other side...he would rack up some good damage numbers and thus get a win due to the flag action you mentioned prior. I dont see a failure in checks and balances here...do you....any chance for a possible misuse or wrong recording?
Well, yes and no.. Capping should give points (enough that actively capping points can push you above the limit for payout, as well as contend for "winning" the scores), naturally, damage and healing should also count towards the scores (as there are more roles to play on a C&H than capping; defending allied points, seek and destroying opponent cappers, healing friendly forces etc)
While you and I and others would think so...it doesnt happen this way.
The reward is there....3 emblems....all you have to do is join the match and do 'something'! As it is now, not with the 'new safeguards' we are talking about, this 'something' is what we are up in arms about. Hiding, suicide runs, sitting dead the whole match or sitting behind the spawn point at base camp.
My point is you cannot force these kinds of people to co-operate. I will PvP anyways.....remove the reward and you will turn 'potential' PvP'ers off 'cause there is no reward for joining in the first place and then they suffer from lack of confidence or some other reason to not be engaged in the fight.
That was the argument i was trying to make; thus, by giving 1 point, whether win or fail, you still participate, you still learn & you still get your emblems.
Correct, you cannot force them to cooperate, but seriously.. Id rather play 2 C&Hs in 1 hour will full and motivated teams, than 10 with multiple leechers on both sides (seriously, I was in a match the other day - 8 on each side.. 1 team had 4 active players the other 5... That means that out of 16 players, the 7 was not playing. Sure I get my PvP, but the principle of it is wrong.
If they just wanna complete, they can just make 3 challenge matches against a fleetmember or friend, set the cap value to 100, and just have one side cap a point.. It takes like 4-5 minutes tops per match... And we will get rid of them in the ques.
I was trying to tie your 3 emblems participation into actually making those 2 PvP missions for 15 of 15 system for 3 emblems each time you complete it. There is no daily, but it is dependent on the fact it only records the win. 15 wins nets you 3 extra points...always. So those that PvP regularly get more out of it and encourages more participation to complete 15 wins.
Whether or not ships are balanced is another argument of itself.
Besides the numbers, we are saying the same thing really.. Im just saying that actively winning should give "more" than something that can be AFKd.
Removing them is one way to get rid of a lot of players, not just the afk'ers.
**the 'Cap' point counter you suggest
**2 min afk auto-boot
**no reward for lack of participation filter
**a report function similar to 'report spam' would boot the player with majority of vote for players team.
These would be 'safeguards' to contend with afk'ing or non-participation and would better serve the serious players.
You might be right, but if those people cannot be bothered to improve themselves, to the point where they benefit their team, do you really think they will ever become PvP players? If they will never become PvP players, why do we need them in PvP matches? Id personally be glad to be rid of them.
I understand your arguement, I just dont agree with it.
i do not disagree. I just 'surmise' that certain cruisers i can destroy before my cloak comes off a timer while others can tackle 2 or 3 KDF ships. Outside help aside, a lot of it has to do with skill choice and wonder if many PvE players think there builds will work well in PvP....then when it doesnt they QQ about imbalance and such. I was trying to allude that a PvP build is specific and works well in PvE also, but the lack of certain skills or use of those skills 'improperly' . I was there at one point in time in each MMO i played in regard to PvP and feel a lot of that is present with the so-called 'bad players' in PvP here.
There are plenty of guides around on these forums. There are several PvP and PvE oriented fleets, more than willing to accept new members - Hell, my own fleet is primarily PvP, and we will take anyone that shows interest in PvP, and are a cool person (by "cool" I mean one that doesnt smacktalk, complain or beg for parts).. Skill doesnt factor in when we accept new players, and we will readily give away parts if people need them. Finally, there are players (like myself) that will respond with honest advice if asked about PvP, even across factions/fleets.
Thanks for taking your time to present objective arguements, I understand your concerns, and while I might not agree, I do respect your opinions.
Remember when they introduced private queues, and the 'flaw' to complete your pvp dailys with them?
Almost everyone was relieved. No more afk leechers! Months later this still is an issue. And you know what?
I told you so!
I said allowing that would be a bad idea.
Not only have the people left the 'public' queues who don't want to indulge in pvp for their emblems, but also people who get annoyed at the increasing queue times outside of US primetime.
Now the only people left in public games are the ones who want to wtfpwn others, players who either haven't figured out yet how to use the private queue for their daily or are to stupid for that, and pitiable players who try to take a peek at pvp. Yay for that. A whole lot of players who would play pvp if there wasn't an easier solution for their 'rewards' is missing. *shrug*
Congratulations, you wanted 'rewards' for private queues, now deal with the outcome.
heres the rub, only feds do this in pvp, and 99% of pvp is fed vs fed, take out fed vs fed and youll cut this by at least 99% as now youll be against kdf teams, we dont afk, we just decloak and burn you to the ground. and you can always group with friends and que together to avoid the ******s
This is no longer true. Of course, you will say they are just "Fed alts", but it doesn't matter. You can't rely on the "K" anymore to deliver motivated players at all times. It will probably take some time until it's as bad as some FvF matches, but hey, the more players the Klingons get, the more "bad apples" you get, too.
The problem is that "bad apples" are not a subset of PvP players, but a subset of players in general. If there are 5 % of all players interested in PvP and 1 % of all players are "bad apples" that will leech or go AFK in PvP matches, the 5 % PvP players will meet those 1 % often. The KDF side was a pre-selected sample of players that had a considerably higher then 5 % ratio of PvP players, but this selection doesn't change the 1 % rate of "bad apples". With more players with more diverse interests then "just PvP" added to the KDF, the relative ratios change...
(Of course, like with any good statistic, these percentages are pulled out of my behind and for illustrative purposes only.)
Remember when they introduced private queues, and the 'flaw' to complete your pvp dailys with them?
Almost everyone was relieved. No more afk leechers! Months later this still is an issue. And you know what?
This is actually possible? I thought that idea was had and not implemented or removed until some final issues were resolved. (Which never happened)
I told you so!
I said allowing that would be a bad idea.
Not only have the people left the 'public' queues who don't want to indulge in pvp for their emblems, but also people who get annoyed at the increasing queue times outside of US primetime.
Now the only people left in public games are the ones who want to wtfpwn others, players who either haven't figured out yet how to use the private queue for their daily or are to stupid for that, and pitiable players who try to take a peek at pvp. Yay for that. A whole lot of players who would play pvp if there wasn't an easier solution for their 'rewards' is missing. *shrug*
Congratulations, you wanted 'rewards' for private queues, now deal with the outcome.
And remember, I Told You So.
I also don't understand what you are saying here? Are you saying we have less players in PvP because people took the private Queue as "easy" way out? Well, that doesn't explain the AFKs in the reqgular quees at all.
AFKers are not people that don't queue. They are people that queue, enter a match, and don't contribute.
heres the rub, only feds do this in pvp, and 99% of pvp is fed vs fed, take out fed vs fed and youll cut this by at least 99% as now youll be against kdf teams, we dont afk, we just decloak and burn you to the ground. and you can always group with friends and que together to avoid the ******s
You are not correct, Ive seen plenty of Klingons AFK.. Granted, its not, by any stretch, as common as on Fedside, but it do happen.
I also don't understand what you are saying here? Are you saying we have less players in PvP because people took the private Queue as "easy" way out? Well, that doesn't explain the AFKs in the reqgular quees at all.
AFKers are not people that don't queue. They are people that queue, enter a match, and don't contribute.
There were quite a few people who participated while doing their daily which are now using the private queue shortcut because it is so much more convenient. It's one thing to be done in five or ten minutes with pvp 'chores' instead of having to queue for an hour or more. Because those people are not there anymore the remaining AFKers are so much more a nuisenance. Since the probability is higher that you encounter one or more in your match now.
That is wrong... you don't have the right to punish people for being forced to do PvP. Because I hate to say it but there is **** all to do at VA. Blame Cryptic, not the player.
There were quite a few people who participated while doing their daily which are now using the private queue shortcut because it is so much more convenient. It's one thing to be done in five or ten minutes with pvp 'chores' instead of having to queue for an hour or more. Because those people are not there anymore the remaining AFKers are so much more a nuisenance. Since the probability is higher that you encounter one or more in your match now.
I didn't actually know this was possible. I thought all rewards from the private challenge matches were gone.
That is wrong... you don't have the right to punish people for being forced to do PvP. Because I hate to say it but there is **** all to do at VA. Blame Cryptic, not the player.
People aren't forced to though.
There are several ways to get emblems without ever touching PvP Arenas, assault, or C&H:
You can do the Weekly Series Dailies
You can do STF dailies
You can do Exploration Dailies
You can do Warzone dailies (where no on minds if you're an AFK hero)
Fleet Action Dailies
Saying "I want everything but without participating in everything" is a terrible philosophy.
Should nonparticipants be rewarded in STFs? No.
Should nonparticipants be rewarded in Weekly Series Dailies? No.
Should non participants be rewarded in Exploration? No.
So, what makes PvP so different that nonparticipants should get rewarded? I'm all ears.
If you don't participate, you don't get anything - you should also be discouraged from requeueing as your actions ruin the game for others. AFK Heroes have no right to ruin the game for others simply due to their own desire for emblems.
There are several ways to get emblems without ever touching PvP Arenas, assault, or C&H:
You can do the Weekly Series Dailies
You can do STF dailies
You can do Exploration Dailies
You can do Warzone dailies (where no on minds if you're an AFK hero)
Fleet Action Dailies
Saying "I want everything but without participating in everything" is a terrible philosophy.
Should nonparticipants be rewarded in STFs? No.
Should nonparticipants be rewarded in Weekly Series Dailies? No.
Should non participants be rewarded in Exploration? No.
So, what makes PvP so different that nonparticipants should get rewarded? I'm all ears.
If you don't participate, you don't get anything - you should also be discouraged from requeueing as your actions ruin the game for others. AFK Heroes have no right to ruin the game for others simply due to their own desire for emblems.
:rolleyes: Darren, I love it when you lay the smack down like this.
Comments
Possibly the player in question is praticing fed anti-carrier tactics?
Brilliant..
Now, Im not into PvE, particulary the ground kind of PvE
Sooo..
Get rid of daily PvE ground missions..
Get rid of daily PvE space missions..
Finally add a vendor where you can pick up any item for free (which is what these people are doing anyways)
Or maybe not..
Maybe add a consequence for not participating/winning in Daily PvP.. There are several PvE missions that can be failed (Some diplomacy things, Alhena daily, Freighter daily, Satelite daily, Breen Patrol - And most likely the new Deferi daily as well)
Maybe make it so either
1) If you not score atleast 50k damage and 25k healing in a Arena, 75k/35k in C&H (and an appropiate amount for Ground PvP) you.. Do.. Not.. Get.. Rewarded
2) If you do not win, you get nothing.
3) You get bonus for winning 3 matches - 3 Emblem total for 3 matches, 6 additional emblems for 3 victories.
1]] Well, i had a Cap-n-hold last night to where i was the highest scoring KDF player and had 78k damage and 50k healing. the other 4 players had way less. yet we still Won the game due to capping points. Under this constraint i would have been the only person to win on the KDF side.....and the feds would have Won their points because they had higher damage values.
I get the intention behind it, despite the current one obviously fails.
2]] while it wouldn't be fair to fed pug teams that try and win it would force them into playing more FvF or even worse to not PvP at all....and then the PvP community suffers the loss.
having a loss only give 1 emblem and then allows you to go through 3 losses to get your emblems is a fair compromise. The Win would also count for 1 emblem point too....after all you have to do 3 matches to get credit. So, rewarding a win or loss for the same amount lessens the futility of losing and not getting any credit.
3]] This would only benefit the Pre-made teams. It is rare to get a KDF pug team player to get 3 straight wins when FED Pre-mades also queue and have the better teamwork and skill balancing. It would be something different to have a special mission counter that records wins only.....get 15 wins and it gives 3 extra emblems. that way anyone has access to it but makes it tantamount to having a win in either FvF or KvF.
** Removing the emblems from PvP would just make the fights less frequent and only small in facing certain players constantly.
** Restricting the emblem rewards to KvF will just frustrate 'poor' PvP players to acquit all together. FvF should be a stepping stone to perfecting the PvP build and gaining confidence into FvK play.
I took it that way in the beginning and when i made a KDF toon and actually leveled him back in August....it was very easy to compete and finish perfecting a build to be a certain role...not 2 or 3, but 1 role.
bla'de'bla-bla
Yeah but considering just how many dailies we have. (I have some serious time to dedicate to this game, and I can't finish all the dailies on my main and alts, still squeeze in going to work, working out, eating food,) I think they could just skip out on the PvP with minimal slowdown at this point. If they don't want to pvp, there's more than enough ways to hit 10+ emblems a day without doing pvp.
It's one thing when someone decides to take the game to the next level and want to learn how to pvp and they do it badly. I encourage that sort of behavior. It's when they don't even try that it really really ticks me off. Especially since I'm there to have fun and preferably Win. I don't mind losing, as long as everyone on the team can say they gave it their best effort. (which is also why Fed Pugs infuriate me so much in general)
For me it's not about the grind at this point. I like using my highpowered toys against other people's high powered toys. And when I start feeling 'bored' I just make a new character and learn how to play it. Which is sort of why I find the character slot thing kind of dangerous, as it discourages this mentality unless you pay extra for it.
Well with the Vote To Kick, it should only trigger in special circumstances (and that can be easily programmed. It's in Halo3, and quite a few other games. One of the circumstances in those games is Kick the Team Killing ****** ***** for example) such as them going Idle during a match, not capping a point, and not participating in battle. Players should get a Warning by the game that they are being flagged for Vote To Kick, and if they do not respond or change their actions in 30 seconds the vote comes up.
So, they guy who chooses to cap more points will still be flagged as a winner versus they same team player that chooses to go around attacking the other side...he would rack up some good damage numbers and thus get a win due to the flag action you mentioned prior. I dont see a failure in checks and balances here...do you....any chance for a possible misuse or wrong recording?
While you and I and others would think so...it doesnt happen this way.
The reward is there....3 emblems....all you have to do is join the match and do 'something'! As it is now, not with the 'new safeguards' we are talking about, this 'something' is what we are up in arms about. Hiding, suicide runs, sitting dead the whole match or sitting behind the spawn point at base camp.
My point is you cannot force these kinds of people to co-operate. I will PvP anyways.....remove the reward and you will turn 'potential' PvP'ers off 'cause there is no reward for joining in the first place and then they suffer from lack of confidence or some other reason to not be engaged in the fight.
That was the argument i was trying to make; thus, by giving 1 point, whether win or fail, you still participate, you still learn & you still get your emblems.
I was trying to tie your 3 emblems participation into actually making those 2 PvP missions for 15 of 15 system for 3 emblems each time you complete it. There is no daily, but it is dependent on the fact it only records the win. 15 wins nets you 3 extra points...always. So those that PvP regularly get more out of it and encourages more participation to complete 15 wins.
Whether or not ships are balanced is another argument of itself.
Removing them is one way to get rid of a lot of players, not just the afk'ers.
**the 'Cap' point counter you suggest
**2 min afk auto-boot
**no reward for lack of participation filter
**a report function similar to 'report spam' would boot the player with majority of vote for players team.
These would be 'safeguards' to contend with afk'ing or non-participation and would better serve the serious players.
i do not disagree. I just 'surmise' that certain cruisers i can destroy before my cloak comes off a timer while others can tackle 2 or 3 KDF ships. Outside help aside, a lot of it has to do with skill choice and wonder if many PvE players think there builds will work well in PvP....then when it doesnt they QQ about imbalance and such. I was trying to allude that a PvP build is specific and works well in PvE also, but the lack of certain skills or use of those skills 'improperly' . I was there at one point in time in each MMO i played in regard to PvP and feel a lot of that is present with the so-called 'bad players' in PvP here.
Rules set up to stop pure afk'ing can still be circumvented by macros or by whatever method those looking only for the reward can find, and they can always find something. One problem I see that hasn't been brought up is that people don't like to lose. If they think they are going to lose no matter what, some of them will go afk or find some way to not participate, and for some that will feel better than playing hard and losing. Better for their ego to feel like they had no care of winning in the first place than to feel they got creamed. I would argue that in part this comes from the high insult level from pvp players in general. Often I see not that someone lost, but that he is a loser. His entire being can be summed up by a smirking player. I see this on the forums a lot too. The chest thumping, schoolyard mentality I see often among pvp'ers turns off lots of people. Most of those don't pvp at all because of it, but some will choose to go ahead and get the rewards with minimum interaction with people they dislike, and nothing says minimum interaction like going afk.
I don't pvp for emblems but if I were pining for a new ship needing hundreds of emblems I might do it, but I would only be doing it for the emblem reward. So I'd be unlikely to be a valuable member of the team. Emblem rewards for pvp will always mean that some are doing it only for the emblems. This will always have an adverse effect on pvp as a whole. Unfortunately, pvp queues are largely empty already and lowering the number of people who enter them will mean even fewer will enter knowing they will wait a long time for the match.
In the end, I don't see a solution to the problem that doesn't hurt pvp as a whole. If you had enough players to keep the queues moving quickly you could implement some of the ideas presented here, but we're a long way from that. I'd consider taking away the ability to chat with the opposition like they did in Dark Age of Camelot to improve the numbers of players coming in who simply didn't want to be verbally abused when they lose. Or when they win. Get a critical mass of players in pvp and you can afford to winnow some of them out. Right now you can't.
After all Kerrat has been broke and the bane of PvP since launch and ignored .
This......during headstart I was "ok" with its flaws seeing that the first month would be a rough journey for STO.....yeah we've passed 300 days now....the excuses are gone. Kerrat really could have been something amazing.....I envy our alternate realities.
Cryptic are bribing people to PvP because there is NOT that much to do when you reach VA except level another character through the mundane missions you did before or do STF's that require people to actually get a group that agree with each other (equally mundane). Oh and lets not forget the ONE mission per week which is usually achievable in about 10-15 minutes.
The games lack of content is what is causing this debate. WoW never had this problem, it had rich raiding content for people that did not enjoy top level PvP. Cryptic should take a lesson out of Blizzard's success and duplicate that. Star Trek has much more rich and colourful lore that they can destroy, so why not just go ahead and create more STF's then one per 3 months. Why not create lower level STF's like instances.
All this keeps the PvP's happy and the PvE's happy. So why are Cryptic so undeniably lazy?
That is wrong... you don't have the right to punish people for being forced to do PvP. Because I hate to say it but there is **** all to do at VA. Blame Cryptic, not the player.
You *can't* be serious. Nobody is forced to do PvP. Ugh, I'm not even going to waste my time....
For people like you it seems best to just create a cap on Emblems we can earn per day. Then you can no longer feel forced (as irrational as it is) to PvP or punished for failure or non-participation in PvP. You just do the 3-4 PvE ways to gather Emblems and be done with it.
For those that still think AFKing in PvP is the quickest way to get closer to the Emblem "Cap", removing that "speed" advantage would be key.
- Only 1 Emblem for 3 matches.
- 2 Emblems for each win.
Just AFKing and probably costing your team the win is ineffecient. You make more Emblems in a Fleet Action or the Deferi Daily in the same time.
read the end users license aggreement, engaging in a game mode, whether pvp or stf or whatever, and going afk, making others do the work for you, falls under leeching, causing another player grief by taking up space that a usefull person could be in, hindering them from enjoying their play time.
you are 1 leech, the others outnumber you and are having their fun playtime ruined, cryptic needs to crack down on its own rules, institude a hard afk detection that is firm and punishes.
auto respawn after dieing, auto afk and boot from game after 30 seconds of not moving shooting or healing inside of pvp maps, auto temp bans for repeat offenders.
Thanks for taking your time to present objective arguements, I understand your concerns, and while I might not agree, I do respect your opinions.
Almost everyone was relieved. No more afk leechers! Months later this still is an issue. And you know what?
I told you so!
I said allowing that would be a bad idea.
Not only have the people left the 'public' queues who don't want to indulge in pvp for their emblems, but also people who get annoyed at the increasing queue times outside of US primetime.
Now the only people left in public games are the ones who want to wtfpwn others, players who either haven't figured out yet how to use the private queue for their daily or are to stupid for that, and pitiable players who try to take a peek at pvp. Yay for that. A whole lot of players who would play pvp if there wasn't an easier solution for their 'rewards' is missing. *shrug*
Congratulations, you wanted 'rewards' for private queues, now deal with the outcome.
And remember, I Told You So.
This is no longer true. Of course, you will say they are just "Fed alts", but it doesn't matter. You can't rely on the "K" anymore to deliver motivated players at all times. It will probably take some time until it's as bad as some FvF matches, but hey, the more players the Klingons get, the more "bad apples" you get, too.
The problem is that "bad apples" are not a subset of PvP players, but a subset of players in general. If there are 5 % of all players interested in PvP and 1 % of all players are "bad apples" that will leech or go AFK in PvP matches, the 5 % PvP players will meet those 1 % often. The KDF side was a pre-selected sample of players that had a considerably higher then 5 % ratio of PvP players, but this selection doesn't change the 1 % rate of "bad apples". With more players with more diverse interests then "just PvP" added to the KDF, the relative ratios change...
(Of course, like with any good statistic, these percentages are pulled out of my behind and for illustrative purposes only.)
This is actually possible? I thought that idea was had and not implemented or removed until some final issues were resolved. (Which never happened)
I also don't understand what you are saying here? Are you saying we have less players in PvP because people took the private Queue as "easy" way out? Well, that doesn't explain the AFKs in the reqgular quees at all.
AFKers are not people that don't queue. They are people that queue, enter a match, and don't contribute.
You are not correct, Ive seen plenty of Klingons AFK.. Granted, its not, by any stretch, as common as on Fedside, but it do happen.
There were quite a few people who participated while doing their daily which are now using the private queue shortcut because it is so much more convenient. It's one thing to be done in five or ten minutes with pvp 'chores' instead of having to queue for an hour or more. Because those people are not there anymore the remaining AFKers are so much more a nuisenance. Since the probability is higher that you encounter one or more in your match now.
Forced to....
WTF.
People aren't forced to though.
There are several ways to get emblems without ever touching PvP Arenas, assault, or C&H:
- You can do the Weekly Series Dailies
- You can do STF dailies
- You can do Exploration Dailies
- You can do Warzone dailies (where no on minds if you're an AFK hero)
- Fleet Action Dailies
Saying "I want everything but without participating in everything" is a terrible philosophy.So, what makes PvP so different that nonparticipants should get rewarded? I'm all ears.
If you don't participate, you don't get anything - you should also be discouraged from requeueing as your actions ruin the game for others. AFK Heroes have no right to ruin the game for others simply due to their own desire for emblems.
Don't forget fleet actions dailies.
:rolleyes: Darren, I love it when you lay the smack down like this.
Yeah man, you make several excellent points that I agree with. No excuses.