As it is I have no real incentive to do PvP - at all. I have all the accolades done and I get about 20 emblems a day doing the none PvP missions. The time to do the missions (at least in my experience) is far longer than doing the solo missions. If they would drop the missions to say three (3) done and a bonus - say five emblems if you get three wins then I would be interested but otherwise even with the new system I'm still not inspired to them. Fifteen missions - not on your life. Simply not worth it at all win, lose or draw does not matter.
Goal: You want more participating players in public queues.
Problems:
- Certain pvp dailys can be completed far more faster in a private queue.
- Experienced players can game the system to choose which daily they get.
Possible solutions:
Make sure the ability to complete ANY pvp daily via private queues is removed. And you need to spin off the war zones daily from the other two ones. I can complete the later in less than twenty minutes. That competes even with the fastest private queue solution. Both of this needs to be done though or people will gravitate towards the other easier way to achieve their emblems instead of choosing to participate in public queues again.
I think that most people who use the private queues are doing it to get away from AFK players which is the real issue here.
I think it would be best to get rid of PvP rewards altogether when Open PvP is implemented. And put in old-school MMO dungeons within these worlds and have players fight (PvP) for control of these dunegeons, which will drop nice stuff (on rare occasion).
Now there is no AFKers mooching off the system, and PvPers get what they want in fighting which results in rewards. And at the same time, there is actual wins and losses.
Yeah I don't agree with that either. I think folks who exploit the system should be dealt with accordingly.
I know Cryptic tracks information through data logs. It wouldn't be hard for them to introduce a flag system that player x did 0 dmg in multiple rounds. Then they send you a warning and proceed from there.
I think that most people who use the private queues are doing it to get away from AFK players which is the real issue here.
show me one player who plays the game with standard (or increased) settings during his daily and i show you ten who have decreased them to the minimum.
The plan is for participation and wins to be tracked as seperate daily missions.
So the mission list might look like this:
"Play 15 PvP battles" that earns a small amount of Emblems.
"Win 3 PvP battles" that earns a decent amount of Emblems.
"Win 4 PvP battles" (including the original 3 wins from the mission above, so 1 more win) that earns a few Emblems
"Win 5 PvP battles" (including the original 4 wins from the mission above, so 1 more win) that earns a final Emblem
So from the example above, a player that enjoys PvP but fails to win any games will earn some Emblems just for being in 15 games. While playing those 15 games or continuing to play after the 15, if they should win 3 battles they'll earn more Emblems, win 4 and earn more, win 5 and earn the most.
The goal being that you'll earn more Emblems for your devoted time if you work together to win, but you'll still earn something even if you can't pull off a victory.
-snix
That sounds like a plan worth asking the community. It will probably lead to the death of pugs which, might be a good thing, actually probably be just as much a bad thing. I've come to meet a number of players via pugs rather than remain in a closed 'fleet' niche. Making pvp lucrative only if you're in a fleet could undermine pvp more than it already is.
99.999% of my pvp is pug and it's astonishing how some people cannot grasp the concept of capture and hold - seriously there will be times where the rest of the team will pewpew and I'll be the only ship that genuinely caps (and quickly realise I'm dragging out a losing battle and just sit out and allow my team to lose quickly then people say I'm the one on the wrong).
I'm not sure I'm that keen on a leaderboard either not because I'm poor but in pugs where cruisers don't heal and science try and pewpew it's very hard to be your best when as a tactical you have to run knowing you won't get healed or as a cruiser trying to heal a suicidal team mate.
I'm not going to quit or troll over this but naturally I have some concerns and feel I should point out some of the consequences or pitfalls by doing certain things and while pvp may be more competitive it might well get less active because there are no pugs to fill the ranks.
The plan is for participation and wins to be tracked as seperate daily missions.
So the mission list might look like this:
"Play 15 PvP battles" that earns a small amount of Emblems.
"Win 3 PvP battles" that earns a decent amount of Emblems.
"Win 4 PvP battles" (including the original 3 wins from the mission above, so 1 more win) that earns a few Emblems
"Win 5 PvP battles" (including the original 4 wins from the mission above, so 1 more win) that earns a final Emblem
So from the example above, a player that enjoys PvP but fails to win any games will earn some Emblems just for being in 15 games. While playing those 15 games or continuing to play after the 15, if they should win 3 battles they'll earn more Emblems, win 4 and earn more, win 5 and earn the most.
The goal being that you'll earn more Emblems for your devoted time if you work together to win, but you'll still earn something even if you can't pull off a victory.
-snix
I'd like to toss out there that if you're thinking of making 15 cap n hold matches count towards the daily could you put a timer on the map? Some of those matches drag on for upwards of an hour and while I'm not sure what the best limit for a match would be, I've noticed a lot of people (myself included) quit caring after about a half hour or so, though 15 minutes would be good to light a fire under peoples nacelles to focus on the task at hand
Or if a timer isn't the best option how about setting the hold point countdowns so that one side is always counting down. Really just anything to provide an incentive to get people to work on capping points rather than just hovering in the middle of nowhere shooting at each other for an hour.
I really hope the ramifications of how this is going to effect participation has been thought through. Most the people doing PVP don't give me the impression they're doing it because they love the PVP experience and I'll gladly take an AFKer or two over a queue that never fills up. The irony is the very people serious PVPers abhor may be the only ones keeping PVP alive in the game.
I really hope you're gonna fix the pvp balance issues first. Especially Fed vs Klink.
Snix can't create new Klingon players out of nothing, nor can he add a ton of PvE players turned PvP Emblem Hunter to the Klingon faction. Don't buy into the "hype", BrooklynKnight! The games mechanical imbalances are found along player and ship class borders and between powers, not between the factions.
---
On the concern that "casual" PvPers will be discouraged - even casual PvPers will get more Emblems thanks to this, since you can win even when casually playing, even if you have a lot of toons. at least that's what is happening to me (unless you call someone that is not in a PvP fleet, doesn't use vent, and isn't part of premades non-casual.)
I cycle regularly between my 5 characters (only 4 at endgame), and I don't complete all my dailies everyday. There is now a new PvE "Daily" that irst requires you to complete several instances of another PvE Daily to qualify for - no one is getting that reward daily.
Don't think of it as n extra emblems per day, but n extra emblems over a week or two.
show me one player who plays the game with standard (or increased) settings during his daily and i show you ten who have decreased them to the minimum.
With all due respect what does this have to do with AFK players in PvP?
The issue under discussion is people who queue up for PvP matches and then don't participate. That is the real problem.
Especially since they earn more (as been shown by several people in this and other threads) emblems by doing PvE content that just the 3 you get from the PvP daily.
I don't really care if somebody takes the easy way out in PvE. But most players who like PvP want a challenge, not an easy 3 emblems.
With all due respect what does this have to do with AFK players in PvP?
The absence of people who opted out escalates the problem. It's simple statistics.
If you only have twenty people queueing at the moment you play and two of them are afkers odds are pretty high that you encounter them more than once. In C&H it is even very possible that you encounter them every time.
If you could bring back forty people to additional queue at the very same time your pvp experience will increase exponentially.
Not only will your wait times decrease, but you might get pleasant games instead of games which are spoiled because player idle at the spawnpoint or after being killed.
The plan is for participation and wins to be tracked as seperate daily missions.
So the mission list might look like this:
"Play 15 PvP battles" that earns a small amount of Emblems.
"Win 3 PvP battles" that earns a decent amount of Emblems.
"Win 4 PvP battles" (including the original 3 wins from the mission above, so 1 more win) that earns a few Emblems
"Win 5 PvP battles" (including the original 4 wins from the mission above, so 1 more win) that earns a final Emblem
So from the example above, a player that enjoys PvP but fails to win any games will earn some Emblems just for being in 15 games. While playing those 15 games or continuing to play after the 15, if they should win 3 battles they'll earn more Emblems, win 4 and earn more, win 5 and earn the most.
The goal being that you'll earn more Emblems for your devoted time if you work together to win, but you'll still earn something even if you can't pull off a victory.
-snix
This does not fix the issue.
If anything, I'm thinking it will only make it worse, as AFKers will stay in games longer to get the 5 wins needed to get the max Emblems.
From what you have written, AFK players will still "WIN" if the side they are on "WINS".
I had proposed these option in the PVP section, where this thread tends to come up more frequently:
I
1. Players who are AFK(do not enter the perimeter of a Capture Point, stay Cloaked/MESd, or simply don't move/respawn after death) should be banned from queuing for that particular PvP match for a 30 minutes time frame (which would have a cool down similar to Transwarp in that it is only counted when logged in to the game).
2. If possible, look at coming up with a figure which would be the minimum required Damage and/or Healing based on the Team averages (from players with scores higher than say 20,000 in either), and only players meeting this requirement would receive credit for the match.
Basically, if you say you need to get 25% of your Team's Damage/Healing, and the average healing done was 100,000 and average damage was 200,000, then one would need to get 25,000 healing or 50,000 damage in order to receive credit for the match.
*edit* Damage done to NPC "pets" would also need to be calculated, as would Shield Damage done by Tachyon Beam and Charged Particle Burst (think those are the only two that aren't currently counted)
Feds were not in any sort of tight formation and the escort went off to shoot Metrion Gas. Escort got targetted 1st. After that, they were kinda soloing or, at the most, going at us 2 at a time. We were at nine, they had not scored...before 1 by 1 they left. The sci stayed for a bit, I dropped out of the fight after discovering his "teamates" had left, and then he bugged out too.
I sent a PM to the escort and told him that those of us who PvP wait forever to get into a match, and if he was just going to leave, there was no point in queing in the 1st place. His response?
"I'll keep that in mind while I que for an even match."
He went on about how it was uneven, to which I ended the convo with "yes it was uneven, because you were soloing and not working as a team."
Was it uneven? I dunno what equip and BOff powers he had, but here's the breakdown for my side - My character is a joined Trill and an engineer with mostly space stats. She flys the Raptor and this is what it's equipped with:
Covariant Shields MK IV Capx2
Common phaser array forward and aft MK IV
Common phaser dual cannons MK IV
Quantum Torpedo MK III ACCx2
Deflector array MK II
Impulse engines MK IV Full/Turn
Common Shield Emitter Amplifier MK III
Biofucntion monitor MK IV Blue (+18% crew recovery rate)
Zero Point Quantum Chamber MK IV Blue (+13 to quantum torps)
Phaser Relay MK III Blue (+11 to phaser weapons)
BOffs:
Tac 1 has Torp High-yield 1 and Scatter Volly 1
Tac 2 has Beam Overload
Engineer (Klink Borg) has Emergency Power to Shields 1
Sci has Transfer Shield Strength 1
I went over to Fed side after that, got in a match with a PUG, 5 Feds vs 5 Klinks. Klingon players were good and broke up the team about 3 times, BUT....Feds won, I think 15/9. So what does that say about teamwork and PvP?
3 feds vs 3 Klinks at Lt Comm level. I was on Klink side (Lt Comm 6.)
Another thing I would like to emphasize. Because you get less matches this occurances are even more aggravating. If you get to have another match right after this screwed one most people would go 'meh, why bother', but nowadays it just becomes a major issue because you go into the match with the expectation 'darn, i waited like an hour for this one, this better be good'. Which is totally understandable.
On the other hand, if you realize you are totally steamrolling the other team why don't give them some leeway? Drop out of the fight a moment, TELL them to regroup.
In the last month (where I mostly played ground maps) the most asinine players I encountered were a group of obviously voicechat coordinated klinks. regulars. playing the good old overkill every fraking time. even with fairly experienced players you get splitted in arena maps, have to lure someone away from the others and hope to have some lucky crits in the five seconds it takes 'till the rest of the team arrives. in good old shanty town you can expect spawn camping deluxe.
fun times.
the one time I got stranded in a FvF arena just fades in comparision to their behavior. *shrug*
There are what, five areas in Cap and Hold? Every 5'th capture credit results in gaining an additional emblem.
"Deal X damage" Yes, but it's Cap and Hold. Change to "X damage within X kilometers of cap point.". Then it' actually like you're being rewarded for defending rather than spiraling upwards in an endless and useless pvp ball. 25k-50k, 50k-125k, 125k-250k, 250k-> could be used as initial damage numbers when calculating extra emblems.
"Heal X damage" Same idea as doing damage except maybe 25k-100k, 100k-250k, 250k-> being the ranges for healing. As I've stated before "heal other" deserves perhaps a bit more.
"Contribute to destruction of X vessels" Spot on
"Scan x hubs" and "Destroy X nodes" are both good as they are.....
Using my numbers from above would probably result in FAR too many emblems being handed out so you might want to shift the numbers and base them around the three matches within the "daily mission" as opposed to each of three single missions.
in any case it's doubtful that anyone will listen. When a Dev says 'we're working on' it usually means that time and money are already invested in code. They will bust their asses to come out with a bad system instead of 'waste money' and scrap their system in favor of one thats far more beneficial to solving the problem.
For a game that almost has to override their own profanity filters just to name a system, you would think they would contribute more to 'wholesome logic'. Case in point...... "It's not if you win or loose, but how you play the game."
So.. If you split your team up into two.. One part is capping points, the other hunting the opponents to hinder their progress..
Both are contributing
Example:
If I play a match and end up on your team in say a 5v5, proceed to engage 3 opponents for as long as I can youll end up with 4v2 at the actual capture points.
Why shouldnt I be rewarded for securing the field so my team can cap in peace (or atleast with numbers)
Your suggestion will just reduce C&H to two fedballs moving from point to point.
I have an idea,
All you players who hate PVP, why don't you private que up togather, set the match to the lowest setting, I think its 5 kills for arena,or 500 pts for a C&H & get it over with by dieing as fast as possible?would that be to hard?You can get your emblems,& the people who enjoy PVP can do their thing.no one loses.
There , Fixed it.
I havn't read all the way through this thread, & apologize if it's already been said.
Feds were not in any sort of tight formation and the escort went off to shoot Metrion Gas. Escort got targetted 1st. After that, they were kinda soloing or, at the most, going at us 2 at a time. We were at nine, they had not scored...before 1 by 1 they left. The sci stayed for a bit, I dropped out of the fight after discovering his "teamates" had left, and then he bugged out too.
I sent a PM to the escort and told him that those of us who PvP wait forever to get into a match, and if he was just going to leave, there was no point in queing in the 1st place. His response?
"I'll keep that in mind while I que for an even match."
He went on about how it was uneven, to which I ended the convo with "yes it was uneven, because you were soloing and not working as a team."
I went over to Fed side after that, got in a match with a PUG, 5 Feds vs 5 Klinks. Klingon players were good and broke up the team about 3 times, BUT....Feds won, I think 15/9. So what does that say about teamwork and PvP?
LOL- and still they continue the "Klinks are OP" rant even when they give up without trying? Its the attitude that some carry about PvP that is hurting pvp, not the game mechanics themselves (only some areas)
I agree with AmIdoingitright, These Old school PvP haters need to get together and create thier own privtae matches. Problem solved as they no longer have to fight them mean ol"klinks anymore.
The plan is for participation and wins to be tracked as seperate daily missions.
So the mission list might look like this:
"Play 15 PvP battles" that earns a small amount of Emblems.
"Win 3 PvP battles" that earns a decent amount of Emblems.
"Win 4 PvP battles" (including the original 3 wins from the mission above, so 1 more win) that earns a few Emblems
"Win 5 PvP battles" (including the original 4 wins from the mission above, so 1 more win) that earns a final Emblem
So from the example above, a player that enjoys PvP but fails to win any games will earn some Emblems just for being in 15 games. While playing those 15 games or continuing to play after the 15, if they should win 3 battles they'll earn more Emblems, win 4 and earn more, win 5 and earn the most.
The goal being that you'll earn more Emblems for your devoted time if you work together to win, but you'll still earn something even if you can't pull off a victory.
-snix
Snix, please don't do that. The pug matches that I've seen have almost all been ludicrously one-sided, there's no point penalizing the loser more than the geniuses in zone chat already do .
- let us /kick players that haven't moved or healed/dealt damage in reasonable time-frame.
- [and/or] pop up a 'are you here?' prompt to the afkee. (repeat abusers ideally get a short ban from pvp if that's practical)
- take a look at the queuing code, especially what happens if you select 'join any game' - there is a suspicion that you can end up inside the game without any yes/no prompt, putting afk players into the match by accident.
- then just give rewards for participation, with a 'lots of wins' reward (e.g. 20 victories as a weekly or whatever).
On the other hand, if you realize you are totally steamrolling the other team why don't give them some leeway? Drop out of the fight a moment, TELL them to regroup.
Y'know, I've tried that before, and some people get real offended. It only seems to get results when it comes from the same side...assuming they're even paying attention to chat. If people were more receptive, I'd acctually follow your suggestion each time, but I just don't get much positive feedback from the people I've attempted to advise. I rank it up there with the people who ask for help from other players, then don't say "thank you" or acknowledge in some way you just saved them a mountain of time and trouble. Kids these days...
LOL- and still they continue the "Klinks are OP" rant even when they give up without trying? Its the attitude that some carry about PvP that is hurting pvp, not the game mechanics themselves.
I agree with AmIdoingitright, These Old school PvP haters need to get together and create thier own privtae matches. Problem solved as they no longer have to fight them mean ol"klinks anymore.
Lol - or maybe they should just stick to PvE - it's a lot more predictable.
LOL- These Old school PvP haters need to get together and create thier own privtae matches. Problem solved as they no longer have to fight them mean ol"klinks anymore.
I'm thinking if you went on zone chat in ESD, said "anyone else hate pvp & want to get there emblems? tell me & i'll invite you to a private to get it over with" you would have lots of takers, one side kills the other, while the other doesn't fight back.
Everyone's ego is safe,
Who knows, maybe while one side caps in a C&H, someone could test his new Tetryon beam (to kill shields) + Disruptor turrets( for the defense debuff)( not sure what that means but it sounds good)+ Plasma Torpedo (because they look cool) build against someone else.
You know, validate your Build Theory.
Maybe they might actually start to like it.
And any rank can join a private Que, so you could play "see how many Constellation's it takes to kill a GalX" type games. Even RP'ers could have fun with that.
Go to the RP channel, (or even zone chat) say, RP'ers, there is a small fleet of Terran Empire ships( these would be the VA's needing the emblems) approaching earth, we need your help. We need all the LT's through Captains who are available for an urgent mission. If this is you,& you think you're up to it, send me a /tell & we will meet them in space in a private Que .Your help to defend Peace, Freedom, & Cheesy Poofs is desperately needed.
I'd bet it would work.
you could be UBER spanking n00b feds while getting your emblems.
You know, like the Klingons do.
Make it so.
I have an idea,
All you players who hate PVP, why don't you private que up togather, set the match to the lowest setting, I think its 5 kills for arena,or 500 pts for a C&H & get it over with by dieing as fast as possible?would that be to hard?You can get your emblems,& the people who enjoy PVP can do their thing.no one loses.
There , Fixed it.
I havn't read all the way through this thread, & apologize if it's already been said.
Great idea. Unfortunately these people are too anti-social/anti-teamwork to get together to make this happen.
I'm thinking if you went on zone chat in ESD, said "anyone else hate pvp want to get there emblems? tell me & i'll invite you to a private to get it over with" you would have lots of takers, one side kills the other, while the other doesn't fight back.
Everyone's ego is safe,
Who knows, maybe while one side caps in a C&H, someone could test his new Tetryon beam (to kill shields) + Disruptor turrets( for the defense debuff) & Plasma Torpedo (because they look cool) build against someone else.
You know, validate your Build Theory.
Maybe they might actually start to like it.
and any rank can join a private Que, so you could play "see how many Constellation's it takes to kill a GalX" type games. Even RP'ers could have fun with that.
Make it so.
Good Idea. I have tried to get PvE friends to PvP more by offering private matches (at lower levels mostly). Like at LtC going 1 v 2 etc.... And since I'm not a smack talker and the matches "didn't count" it was less pressure on them while getting the experiance of what PvP is.
To quote one of them "Wow you are tricker in your BOP than the NCP klingons" This was a 1 Bop vs 1 Cr and 1 Sci. I lost 10-15, The Sci guy picked it up quick and started to use Jam Sensors after I got him once. The Cr said "help me with my biuld". Which I did.
Maybe more of this "boot camp" type training would help the beginners.
To quote one of them "Wow you are tricker in your BOP than the NCP klingons" This was a 1 Bop vs 1 Cr and 1 Sci. I lost 10-15, The Sci guy picked it up quick and started to use Jam Sensors after I got him once. The Cr said "help me with my biuld". Which I did.
Maybe more of this "boot camp" type training would help the beginners.
Thats the other thing that needs be done. More helping and more accepting of help.
I've almost given up offering my meager experience to other players in a match due to the horrid responses I sometimes recieve.
after a brutal match;
Me, " Anybody wants tips or help with pvp skills?"
Angry player, " Why? so you can just know what I use and know how to better kill me?"
Me, " I'm just trying to help......"
Its sad when a opponent takes pity and tries to help uplift another players experience only to be shutdown and later see that same player crying "OP" on the forums.
Yeah, i just realized that my RP idea is essentially luring n00bs into pvp to get your emblems.:D
However, most of these AFKers don't seem to care HOW they get their emblems,They don't care if anyone else has fun.Just curbstomp n00b's for pvp emblems & then go back to the Stuff you want to do. Go Diplomacy at each other or whatever. Scan flowers maybe.
Yeah, i just realized that my RP idea is essentially luring n00bs into pvp to get your emblems.:D
However, most of these AFKers don't seem to care HOW they get their emblems,They don't care if anyone else has fun.Just curbstomp n00b's for pvp emblems & then go back to the Stuff you want to do. Go Diplomacy at each other or whatever. Scan flowers maybe.
Its thier lust for emblems that caused the issue to begin with in pvp. No one forces them to pvp for these emblems, as you can get more without pvp, but the emblems exist and they feel pressured to go after them regardless of whose gameplay they disrupt.
I'm so happy I bought the STO version that doesn't come with a gun to the head thats makes me do things.
Comments
I think that most people who use the private queues are doing it to get away from AFK players which is the real issue here.
Yeah I don't agree with that either. I think folks who exploit the system should be dealt with accordingly.
I know Cryptic tracks information through data logs. It wouldn't be hard for them to introduce a flag system that player x did 0 dmg in multiple rounds. Then they send you a warning and proceed from there.
Grow a pair Cryptic.:mad:
show me one player who plays the game with standard (or increased) settings during his daily and i show you ten who have decreased them to the minimum.
That sounds like a plan worth asking the community. It will probably lead to the death of pugs which, might be a good thing, actually probably be just as much a bad thing. I've come to meet a number of players via pugs rather than remain in a closed 'fleet' niche. Making pvp lucrative only if you're in a fleet could undermine pvp more than it already is.
99.999% of my pvp is pug and it's astonishing how some people cannot grasp the concept of capture and hold - seriously there will be times where the rest of the team will pewpew and I'll be the only ship that genuinely caps (and quickly realise I'm dragging out a losing battle and just sit out and allow my team to lose quickly then people say I'm the one on the wrong).
I'm not sure I'm that keen on a leaderboard either not because I'm poor but in pugs where cruisers don't heal and science try and pewpew it's very hard to be your best when as a tactical you have to run knowing you won't get healed or as a cruiser trying to heal a suicidal team mate.
I'm not going to quit or troll over this but naturally I have some concerns and feel I should point out some of the consequences or pitfalls by doing certain things and while pvp may be more competitive it might well get less active because there are no pugs to fill the ranks.
I'd like to toss out there that if you're thinking of making 15 cap n hold matches count towards the daily could you put a timer on the map? Some of those matches drag on for upwards of an hour and while I'm not sure what the best limit for a match would be, I've noticed a lot of people (myself included) quit caring after about a half hour or so, though 15 minutes would be good to light a fire under peoples nacelles to focus on the task at hand
Or if a timer isn't the best option how about setting the hold point countdowns so that one side is always counting down. Really just anything to provide an incentive to get people to work on capping points rather than just hovering in the middle of nowhere shooting at each other for an hour.
I really hope the ramifications of how this is going to effect participation has been thought through. Most the people doing PVP don't give me the impression they're doing it because they love the PVP experience and I'll gladly take an AFKer or two over a queue that never fills up. The irony is the very people serious PVPers abhor may be the only ones keeping PVP alive in the game.
Snix can't create new Klingon players out of nothing, nor can he add a ton of PvE players turned PvP Emblem Hunter to the Klingon faction. Don't buy into the "hype", BrooklynKnight! The games mechanical imbalances are found along player and ship class borders and between powers, not between the factions.
---
On the concern that "casual" PvPers will be discouraged - even casual PvPers will get more Emblems thanks to this, since you can win even when casually playing, even if you have a lot of toons. at least that's what is happening to me (unless you call someone that is not in a PvP fleet, doesn't use vent, and isn't part of premades non-casual.)
I cycle regularly between my 5 characters (only 4 at endgame), and I don't complete all my dailies everyday. There is now a new PvE "Daily" that irst requires you to complete several instances of another PvE Daily to qualify for - no one is getting that reward daily.
Don't think of it as n extra emblems per day, but n extra emblems over a week or two.
There are illiterate people arguing over a post on proper grammar and spelling in the Foundry forum. The state of U.S. education is astonishing
With all due respect what does this have to do with AFK players in PvP?
The issue under discussion is people who queue up for PvP matches and then don't participate. That is the real problem.
Especially since they earn more (as been shown by several people in this and other threads) emblems by doing PvE content that just the 3 you get from the PvP daily.
I don't really care if somebody takes the easy way out in PvE. But most players who like PvP want a challenge, not an easy 3 emblems.
The absence of people who opted out escalates the problem. It's simple statistics.
If you only have twenty people queueing at the moment you play and two of them are afkers odds are pretty high that you encounter them more than once. In C&H it is even very possible that you encounter them every time.
If you could bring back forty people to additional queue at the very same time your pvp experience will increase exponentially.
Not only will your wait times decrease, but you might get pleasant games instead of games which are spoiled because player idle at the spawnpoint or after being killed.
This does not fix the issue.
If anything, I'm thinking it will only make it worse, as AFKers will stay in games longer to get the 5 wins needed to get the max Emblems.
From what you have written, AFK players will still "WIN" if the side they are on "WINS".
I had proposed these option in the PVP section, where this thread tends to come up more frequently:
3 feds vs 3 Klinks at Lt Comm level. I was on Klink side (Lt Comm 6.)
Klink side:
2 BoPs
1 Raptor
Fed side:
1 Cruiser
1 Escort (Lt Comm 5)
1 Sci ship
Feds were not in any sort of tight formation and the escort went off to shoot Metrion Gas. Escort got targetted 1st. After that, they were kinda soloing or, at the most, going at us 2 at a time. We were at nine, they had not scored...before 1 by 1 they left. The sci stayed for a bit, I dropped out of the fight after discovering his "teamates" had left, and then he bugged out too.
I sent a PM to the escort and told him that those of us who PvP wait forever to get into a match, and if he was just going to leave, there was no point in queing in the 1st place. His response?
"I'll keep that in mind while I que for an even match."
He went on about how it was uneven, to which I ended the convo with "yes it was uneven, because you were soloing and not working as a team."
Was it uneven? I dunno what equip and BOff powers he had, but here's the breakdown for my side - My character is a joined Trill and an engineer with mostly space stats. She flys the Raptor and this is what it's equipped with:
Covariant Shields MK IV Capx2
Common phaser array forward and aft MK IV
Common phaser dual cannons MK IV
Quantum Torpedo MK III ACCx2
Deflector array MK II
Impulse engines MK IV Full/Turn
Common Shield Emitter Amplifier MK III
Biofucntion monitor MK IV Blue (+18% crew recovery rate)
Zero Point Quantum Chamber MK IV Blue (+13 to quantum torps)
Phaser Relay MK III Blue (+11 to phaser weapons)
BOffs:
Tac 1 has Torp High-yield 1 and Scatter Volly 1
Tac 2 has Beam Overload
Engineer (Klink Borg) has Emergency Power to Shields 1
Sci has Transfer Shield Strength 1
I went over to Fed side after that, got in a match with a PUG, 5 Feds vs 5 Klinks. Klingon players were good and broke up the team about 3 times, BUT....Feds won, I think 15/9. So what does that say about teamwork and PvP?
:rolleyes:
Another thing I would like to emphasize. Because you get less matches this occurances are even more aggravating. If you get to have another match right after this screwed one most people would go 'meh, why bother', but nowadays it just becomes a major issue because you go into the match with the expectation 'darn, i waited like an hour for this one, this better be good'. Which is totally understandable.
On the other hand, if you realize you are totally steamrolling the other team why don't give them some leeway? Drop out of the fight a moment, TELL them to regroup.
In the last month (where I mostly played ground maps) the most asinine players I encountered were a group of obviously voicechat coordinated klinks. regulars. playing the good old overkill every fraking time. even with fairly experienced players you get splitted in arena maps, have to lure someone away from the others and hope to have some lucky crits in the five seconds it takes 'till the rest of the team arrives. in good old shanty town you can expect spawn camping deluxe.
fun times.
the one time I got stranded in a FvF arena just fades in comparision to their behavior. *shrug*
So.. If you split your team up into two.. One part is capping points, the other hunting the opponents to hinder their progress..
Both are contributing
Example:
If I play a match and end up on your team in say a 5v5, proceed to engage 3 opponents for as long as I can youll end up with 4v2 at the actual capture points.
Why shouldnt I be rewarded for securing the field so my team can cap in peace (or atleast with numbers)
Your suggestion will just reduce C&H to two fedballs moving from point to point.
All you players who hate PVP, why don't you private que up togather, set the match to the lowest setting, I think its 5 kills for arena,or 500 pts for a C&H & get it over with by dieing as fast as possible?would that be to hard?You can get your emblems,& the people who enjoy PVP can do their thing.no one loses.
There , Fixed it.
I havn't read all the way through this thread, & apologize if it's already been said.
LOL- and still they continue the "Klinks are OP" rant even when they give up without trying? Its the attitude that some carry about PvP that is hurting pvp, not the game mechanics themselves (only some areas)
I agree with AmIdoingitright, These Old school PvP haters need to get together and create thier own privtae matches. Problem solved as they no longer have to fight them mean ol"klinks anymore.
Snix, please don't do that. The pug matches that I've seen have almost all been ludicrously one-sided, there's no point penalizing the loser more than the geniuses in zone chat already do
- let us /kick players that haven't moved or healed/dealt damage in reasonable time-frame.
- [and/or] pop up a 'are you here?' prompt to the afkee. (repeat abusers ideally get a short ban from pvp if that's practical)
- take a look at the queuing code, especially what happens if you select 'join any game' - there is a suspicion that you can end up inside the game without any yes/no prompt, putting afk players into the match by accident.
- then just give rewards for participation, with a 'lots of wins' reward (e.g. 20 victories as a weekly or whatever).
Lol - or maybe they should just stick to PvE - it's a lot more predictable.
I'm thinking if you went on zone chat in ESD, said "anyone else hate pvp & want to get there emblems? tell me & i'll invite you to a private to get it over with" you would have lots of takers, one side kills the other, while the other doesn't fight back.
Everyone's ego is safe,
Who knows, maybe while one side caps in a C&H, someone could test his new Tetryon beam (to kill shields) + Disruptor turrets( for the defense debuff)( not sure what that means but it sounds good)+ Plasma Torpedo (because they look cool) build against someone else.
You know, validate your Build Theory.
Maybe they might actually start to like it.
And any rank can join a private Que, so you could play "see how many Constellation's it takes to kill a GalX" type games. Even RP'ers could have fun with that.
Go to the RP channel, (or even zone chat) say, RP'ers, there is a small fleet of Terran Empire ships( these would be the VA's needing the emblems) approaching earth, we need your help. We need all the LT's through Captains who are available for an urgent mission. If this is you,& you think you're up to it, send me a /tell & we will meet them in space in a private Que .Your help to defend Peace, Freedom, & Cheesy Poofs is desperately needed.
I'd bet it would work.
you could be UBER spanking n00b feds while getting your emblems.
You know, like the Klingons do.
Make it so.
Great idea. Unfortunately these people are too anti-social/anti-teamwork to get together to make this happen.
Good Idea. I have tried to get PvE friends to PvP more by offering private matches (at lower levels mostly). Like at LtC going 1 v 2 etc.... And since I'm not a smack talker and the matches "didn't count" it was less pressure on them while getting the experiance of what PvP is.
To quote one of them "Wow you are tricker in your BOP than the NCP klingons" This was a 1 Bop vs 1 Cr and 1 Sci. I lost 10-15, The Sci guy picked it up quick and started to use Jam Sensors after I got him once. The Cr said "help me with my biuld". Which I did.
Maybe more of this "boot camp" type training would help the beginners.
Seems that your idea makes for good answer to the problem without the need to becry one's failures on the heads of others instead of where it belongs.
Thats the other thing that needs be done. More helping and more accepting of help.
I've almost given up offering my meager experience to other players in a match due to the horrid responses I sometimes recieve.
after a brutal match;
Me, " Anybody wants tips or help with pvp skills?"
Angry player, " Why? so you can just know what I use and know how to better kill me?"
Me, " I'm just trying to help......"
Its sad when a opponent takes pity and tries to help uplift another players experience only to be shutdown and later see that same player crying "OP" on the forums.
However, most of these AFKers don't seem to care HOW they get their emblems,They don't care if anyone else has fun.Just curbstomp n00b's for pvp emblems & then go back to the Stuff you want to do. Go Diplomacy at each other or whatever. Scan flowers maybe.
Its thier lust for emblems that caused the issue to begin with in pvp. No one forces them to pvp for these emblems, as you can get more without pvp, but the emblems exist and they feel pressured to go after them regardless of whose gameplay they disrupt.
I'm so happy I bought the STO version that doesn't come with a gun to the head thats makes me do things.
I think i got that version also.