It's not like this hasn't already been debated countless times before, but there's a number of reasons why "open" PvP isn't a particularly good idea or likely to happen.
1) PvP has to remain consensual. It's pretty much a given STO won't be turning into Lineage II, Darkfall or Eve Online.
2) Balance would be completely thrown out the window. Not only are situations where you'd have 5-on-1, 10-on-1, or even 20-on-1 quite possible, but we'd also have the issue of level cap'd players rattling sabers with characters still fresh from the tutorial.
3) Small fish; BIG pond. This would fracture the PvP enthusiast segment of the player base and spread them even further apart. Think waiting for queues is bad? Now imagine searching the whole galaxy (including every possible instance) to find opponents.
Honestly, I think the negatives far outweigh the positives, and this is coming from someone (believe it or don't) who enjoys PvP.
2) Balance would be completely thrown out the window. Not only are situations where you'd have 5-on-1, 10-on-1, or even 20-on-1 quite possible, but we'd also have the issue of level cap'd players rattling sabers with characters still fresh from the tutorial.
This is exactly my thought on "Open PVP" too... I was doing a cap n hold map and was routinely ending up in 4-5 v 1 skirmishes and surprisingly I didn't find fighting outnumbered to be a whole lot of fun. I remember when the PVP Queues would spawn matches that were unbalanced there was outrage at having to fight an unbalanced match. Yet "Open PVP" means there's nothing in game to make sure you're fighting a balanced match. How come queueing up and being outmatched 3 to 1 is outrageous yet zoning into a sector and being outnumbered by even more is fun? Sure they can have NPCs and "safe zones" which might help but now you're back to "queuing" up players before you can begin.
I'm quite sure (though I can't find the post atm) that it was said they are looking at creating an area for Open PVP. While I can respect those who would like all sectors to be open pvp and allow a player to flag themselves for participation, one thing that can't be avoided is the inevitable trash talk and zone chat garbage that is going to be spewed out by those who find someone "not flagged" for PVP. The worst thing about PVP in my opinion is the attitudes and behavior of some of those who PVP and I would not want to see that bleed over into the rest of the game. I know you can just "turn zone chat off" but my preference would be to just "Open PVP" in it's own, nice little out of the way place I can safely ignore and avoid dealing with those who are there.
I think you misunderstand. He was not saying you were flaming. You told the masses to "flame away if needed" but he was just saying that flaming was not necessary.
Didn't think you were attacking. I actually thought you articulated your point very well...
Ah, yes, thank you for clarifying that. I was tired when I read the responses and took them completely wrong. Actually it is quite sad that this is the conclusion I jumped to. It is very sad that I expect negativity and expect to be called derogatory and inappropriate names like "carebear".
The funny thing about calling me a carebear is I am an EVE vet. I appreciate open PvP in the right situation and the right environment. STO is not that situation or that environment. STO has been designed to be PvE with instanced and isolated PvP. Even if some things were changed nothing could prep STO for a good open PvP experience. It would be like putting a lift kit and four wheel drive on a Mini. It can be done but the result would not be pretty and it would not be stable.
It's not like this hasn't already been debated countless times before, but there's a number of reasons why "open" PvP isn't a particularly good idea or likely to happen.
1) PvP has to remain consensual. It's pretty much a given STO won't be turning into Lineage II, Darkfall or Eve Online.
2) Balance would be completely thrown out the window. Not only are situations where you'd have 5-on-1, 10-on-1, or even 20-on-1 quite possible, but we'd also have the issue of level cap'd players rattling sabers with characters still fresh from the tutorial.
3) Small fish; BIG pond. This would fracture the PvP enthusiast segment of the player base and spread them even further apart. Think waiting for queues is bad? Now imagine searching the whole galaxy (including every possible instance) to find opponents.
Honestly, I think the negatives far outweigh the positives, and this is coming from someone (believe it or don't) who enjoys PvP.
Well stated!
I think that is the thing the open PvP advocates just refuse to see. STO is, at its core, not a PvP game and really cannot be redesigned to be.
It's not like this hasn't already been debated countless times before, but there's a number of reasons why "open" PvP isn't a particularly good idea or likely to happen.
1) PvP has to remain consensual. It's pretty much a given STO won't be turning into Lineage II, Darkfall or Eve Online.
2) Balance would be completely thrown out the window. Not only are situations where you'd have 5-on-1, 10-on-1, or even 20-on-1 quite possible, but we'd also have the issue of level cap'd players rattling sabers with characters still fresh from the tutorial.
3) Small fish; BIG pond. This would fracture the PvP enthusiast segment of the player base and spread them even further apart. Think waiting for queues is bad? Now imagine searching the whole galaxy (including every possible instance) to find opponents.
Honestly, I think the negatives far outweigh the positives, and this is coming from someone (believe it or don't) who enjoys PvP.
1) Agreed. But this can be done with a system of ''flagging'' that has been mentioned earlier. But yes it does require making it so low lvls or people that just dont want to pvp when they are in that zone then dont have to. (and if people are going to complain about this not being realistic then force cryptic to fix the massive amounts of Admirals flying around first ).
2)Just as there can be a negative (unbalanced team) there can be a plus: socializing. You can have an ability on your ship -that only works when ur being attacked by an enemy faction ship, and says the location of said ship (to avoid spam)- where you send out a distress signal, or just type in zone chat that ''THE BRITISH ARE coming!!!!!''' and people might come and join in the fight. It would add to the sense of war the game is supposed to have, and would encourage more teamplay outside of pvp queues or STF missions. And if the open pvp is maintained only in neutral zone areas, then you could simply avoid that area all together and continue doing missions elsewhere. You would have to do some DSE's or some more exploration missions to level up to continue in the other PVE areas, but hey if you dont want to pvp you also have to make some compromises lol. Not like it takes too long to lvl past Neutral zone missions anyhow.
3) Queues wont be abandoned. closed pvp will still be favored because of its balance and its emphasis on teams and objective-based gameplay. The open pvp area would just complement it when you dont feel like playing those objective modes, or would have some separate benefits (like having huge fleet wars or raids in those systems in that zone)
There are plenty benefits and plenty negatives. But a definitive compromise can be so both sides are relatively happy.
I think that is the thing the open PvP advocates just refuse to see. STO is, at its core, not a PvP game and really cannot be redesigned to be.
Its not that we refuse to see it. We're simply stating our points in favor of open pvp zones, just as you and others are posting their points in opposition of said zones. Both sides have valid arguments. The great thing about video games is that there are many ways to create a ''happy medium''. If you just made neutral zones open pvp zones that would remove the ''omgz klingons at ESD killing my npcs!!'' thing. But there are, obviously, lots of other things to take into account (and that require modifying or redesigning) in order to do this. But STO can have this implemented into it. And remember Star Trek is not all about exploration. It has its areas where fighting has (usually) been the only choice (vs Borg and Undine, and especially now vs Klingons too for example).
How about setting up more war zones throughout Eta and Pi? That way players can go into an open pvp zone by absolute choice. They just need a better goal than kerrat.
One example is: In Pi Canis, have a Federation Starbase. For Feddies coming in, they must defend the station. For Klinks coming in, they must attack the station. Have a section of the station target-able to give the klinks a goal. If the klinks destroy that part, the match is over and it resets. You could do the same in Eta just reverse the situation.
I am certain there are many more ideas floating in heads out there in the STO universe.
How about setting up more war zones throughout Eta and Pi? That way players can go into an open pvp zone by absolute choice. They just need a better goal than kerrat.
One example is: In Pi Canis, have a Federation Starbase. For Feddies coming in, they must defend the station. For Klinks coming in, they must attack the station. Have a section of the station target-able to give the klinks a goal. If the klinks destroy that part, the match is over and it resets. You could do the same in Eta just reverse the situation.
I am certain there are many more ideas floating in heads out there in the STO universe.
Indeed. That is another way of doing it. Or a first step at least. Its up to the devs to decide what is possible.
This is exactly my thought on "Open PVP" too... I was doing a cap n hold map and was routinely ending up in 4-5 v 1 skirmishes and surprisingly I didn't find fighting outnumbered to be a whole lot of fun. I remember when the PVP Queues would spawn matches that were unbalanced there was outrage at having to fight an unbalanced match. Yet "Open PVP" means there's nothing in game to make sure you're fighting a balanced match. How come queueing up and being outmatched 3 to 1 is outrageous yet zoning into a sector and being outnumbered by even more is fun? Sure they can have NPCs and "safe zones" which might help but now you're back to "queuing" up players before you can begin.
I'm quite sure (though I can't find the post atm) that it was said they are looking at creating an area for Open PVP. While I can respect those who would like all sectors to be open pvp and allow a player to flag themselves for participation, one thing that can't be avoided is the inevitable trash talk and zone chat garbage that is going to be spewed out by those who find someone "not flagged" for PVP. The worst thing about PVP in my opinion is the attitudes and behavior of some of those who PVP and I would not want to see that bleed over into the rest of the game. I know you can just "turn zone chat off" but my preference would be to just "Open PVP" in it's own, nice little out of the way place I can safely ignore and avoid dealing with those who are there.
Being attacked by more numbers is going to happen. The only way to counter this is better team management. Not saying you personally but I see alot of people in pvp, especially on fed side who dont know a smuck about pvp. They go off on their own...which you dont want to do as a fed against klingons because you will be preyed on by bop team ups, because your all alone. There is no communication with feds at all. Now on the klingon side.. things are more organized..not all the time but I would say more times then none.
Stahl mentioned the idea of a sector that would or be the test bed for the open pvp element..*crosses fingers*
Trash talk will happen, it happens now in pvp. But this can be fixed by ignoring those. You wouldnt have to give up by disabling zone chat just put the people flaming on ignore..simple. I also want to add that.. in combat, your going to mock the other guy.. lol its just how it goes in pvp battles..not all the time but more or less.. its competitive in the end.
You could avoid open pvp if it was made in all sectors and was a flagging option..by not flagging yourself. You would see klingon ships in our space, and a fed player problably intercepting that ship and going into a zone battle situation, thats about all you would see.
It's not like this hasn't already been debated countless times before, but there's a number of reasons why "open" PvP isn't a particularly good idea or likely to happen.
1) PvP has to remain consensual. It's pretty much a given STO won't be turning into Lineage II, Darkfall or Eve Online.
2) Balance would be completely thrown out the window. Not only are situations where you'd have 5-on-1, 10-on-1, or even 20-on-1 quite possible, but we'd also have the issue of level cap'd players rattling sabers with characters still fresh from the tutorial.
3) Small fish; BIG pond. This would fracture the PvP enthusiast segment of the player base and spread them even further apart. Think waiting for queues is bad? Now imagine searching the whole galaxy (including every possible instance) to find opponents.
Honestly, I think the negatives far outweigh the positives, and this is coming from someone (believe it or don't) who enjoys PvP.
Just a note but with instance caps of around 25 players, the imbalance would be felt in PvP instances unless you cap it off at 12 per side. Imagine being the guy unlucky enogh to wind up in the instance that has 24 of the enemy. You'd be helpless since reinforcements would be impossible. And you might just instance hop until the odds are reversed.
I think what we really need is basically "open dueling". We go around with the ability to duel other players, except instead of getting a dueling invitations, players can just engage eachother in sector space like signal contacts, launching a duel with other flagged players.
Maybe the additional feature to have missions that other PvPers can crash.
So, say I'm flagged and leading a group on a mission. A Klingon player can see that when he passes the planet and can bring an equal number of Klingons to the number I have on my team in the instance.
The problem w/ this is that you will have Klingons killing vendors and mission contacts and those of us who have 0 interest in pvp will not be able to do anything in ESD while The PvPers fight it out. All too often in WoW someone from the opposite faction would get a small group of friends and go on a killing spree, taking out quest givers, vendors, flight masters and auctioneers, leaving the area completely useless.
To aid in that you would make all star fleet security npcs level 55 as well as the warriors on Qo'nos and have one or two specific targets on the station that they would go after. If they try to go around killing everyone they would be swarmed by security. This way no one person can wipe the whole station.
Additionally make this combat at an elite level so if they die they suffer injuries that affect the continued combat. So again this combats the idea of someone running around killing essential personell just to grief other players.
Not too long ago, one of the Dev Team did say that they would like to see all zones open to Klingons so we would indeed have to work out a system.
Right now with ESD, boosting the NPCs levels to 100 would prevent future invasions, as long as the Klingons kept their Ps and Qs (not attacking, unless part of a raiding party).
With Sectors, I would like to see the various Sectors along the Neutral Zone get revamped to where there is an actual Neutral Zone, where Territorial PvP can take place. The fighting is over worlds and players who survive in Space can beam down to a ground warfare and participate in battles that decide the planet's occupation. And the winners of the planet get certain factional bonuses.
This is what I would love to see in the near future. It would make war viable and competitive without silly PvP arenas.
A toggle that allows one to set for agressive or passive in the NZ would go along way to limit griefing in my opinion. Passive marked players are untouchable in the NZ, while agressive choose the consequences of thier actions.
I'm still amazed though at the "sky is falling" attitude that a coupled of bugged Klinks caused at ESD.
A toggle that allows one to set for agressive or passive in the NZ would go along way to limit griefing in my opinion. Passive marked players are untouchable in the NZ, while agressive choose the consequences of thier actions.
I'm still amazed though at the "sky is falling" attitude that a coupled of bugged Klinks caused at ESD.
There ya go. Have a button that sets you as "Neutral" or "Combatant" to where if you chose "Neutral" you show up as ally to all (a la Gamma and Defera) or if you chose "Combatant" you appear as hostile to the other faction.
Being attacked by more numbers is going to happen. The only way to counter this is better team management. Not saying you personally but I see alot of people in pvp, especially on fed side who dont know a smuck about pvp. They go off on their own...which you dont want to do as a fed against klingons because you will be preyed on by bop team ups, because your all alone. There is no communication with feds at all. Now on the klingon side.. things are more organized..not all the time but I would say more times then none.
Stahl mentioned the idea of a sector that would or be the test bed for the open pvp element..*crosses fingers*
Trash talk will happen, it happens now in pvp. But this can be fixed by ignoring those. You wouldnt have to give up by disabling zone chat just put the people flaming on ignore..simple. I also want to add that.. in combat, your going to mock the other guy.. lol its just how it goes in pvp battles..not all the time but more or less.. its competitive in the end.
You could avoid open pvp if it was made in all sectors and was a flagging option..by not flagging yourself. You would see klingon ships in our space, and a fed player problably intercepting that ship and going into a zone battle situation, thats about all you would see.
I estimate that you need perhaps 4 times as many people pvp'ing as you have now just to get the queues to stay full so you don't wait for matches. Of course the queues will be a lot longer if you have an open pvp zone, so they might just die. An open pvp zone will either be held by Klingons if they keep the fights even or will be held by Feds if it's just numbers. At any rate, you need a lot more people to pvp to make it work, and at this point it is unlikely that STO will get a giant influx of new players. Certainly not quadrupling the number of players.
At any rate, my point is that the trash talk turns lots of people off of pvp. We've had years of experience hearing the trash talk and avoiding those who do it by avoiding pvp altogether. But you need everyone in the game who doesn't hate pvp to want to play it if you want enough players for queues and an open pvp zone. And they don't want to be "pwned", they aren't "noobs" and they may or may not want to "l2p" and they certainly don't want to hear some jerk saying all that while they pursue their entertainment. If open pvp or pvp in general is to flourish you need more people and you frankly need a boost in the perception of pvp players.
Open pvp in all sectors as you wish would dilute the pvp community to the point where most of the zones would be empty since the pvp'ers would generally group up to hold where they could. It would also mean the trash talk would be in every zone like it currently is in Kerrat.
I believe pvp zones need to implement faction only chat so the other team does not hear you at all. Or perhaps the pvp community needs a wake-up call by having flamers lose their chat privileges altogether or even have them suspended from the game. If trash talk hurts the pvp community, and it does, then a little discipline might be what they need to install a sense of sportsmanship to the sport. I guarantee more people would pvp if they didn't have to endure the jerks when they do it.
There ya go. Have a button that sets you as "Neutral" or "Combatant" to where if you chose "Neutral" you show up as ally to all (a la Gamma and Defera) or if you chose "Combatant" you appear as hostile to the other faction.
It isn't that easy.
Some of the problems have been mentioned already
Originally Posted by Cryptic_Fan_101 View Post
2) Balance would be completely thrown out the window. Not only are situations where you'd have 5-on-1, 10-on-1, or even 20-on-1 quite possible, but we'd also have the issue of level cap'd players rattling sabers with characters still fresh from the tutorial.
3) Small fish; BIG pond. This would fracture the PvP enthusiast segment of the player base and spread them even further apart. Think waiting for queues is bad? Now imagine searching the whole galaxy (including every possible instance) to find opponents.
There are much larger mechanics to do with as well that no one has seemed to consider.
Would you enjoy PVP in WOW if, at will, anyone could simply "poof" out and vanish. Tucked away in some secret invisible box or move to a different server?
Well, that would be a problem here. So you're flagged combatant, you don't like the odds? well off to your bridge you go. Instant invulnerability. So whats the fix? Lock out bridges to anyone flagged as a combatant? It might be ok for now, but what happens later when more interactive content becomes available? Would PVPers really be happy having to drop their combat status just to do a re-run on a mission? Would they really be happy to be forced to have less content just to be PVP enabled? And even if ALL of that was acceptable. The problem still isn't fixed. Anyone can still poof out by instance switching. And locking that out will instantly fail if your group ends up in different groups on zone in. There is no easy or elegant fix to this, simple single problem
But it gets worse from there. No other open PVP world has a system like sector space, and sector space makes most of this more difficult then it needs to be.
Lets talk movement. Name me an open PVP world that forces folks to move between combats at a speed controlled by level and with all of your abilities and powers locked out and unavailable. Speed in sector space is fixed by level, no amount of skills, equipment, or powers will change that. Lowbies will simply move slower then higher ranked folks. They will be easy bait unable to run (short of poofing, as in my first point)Or even to configure themselves to have any type of chance. It would be a griefers frenzy. So, whats the fix? Limit open PVP to max ranked players only? "Sure you can PVP kiddies, but you dont get the COOL PVP till you level up". Just one more problem, one more compromise.
And then we still haven't even gotten to combat itself. How would that be handled? Cant fight in sector space. So any engagement would have the combatants whisked off to another map to fight it out. Causing more issues, more problems, more questions. When players collide will there be a portal like a DSE encounter? How long will the portal last? How long will entry be allowed. Keep it to long and the home side will always be able to rush in aid making raids pointless. Keep it to short and it would be less about fighting and more about separating groups to divide them into small separate instances. And what happens once you're in combat? Can you leave? If you can will that need a timer? If you cant what happens if someone chooses to hide instead of fight?
All of this would have to be tuned, managed, tested, checked for possible ways to game or exploit the system. Could it work? Perhaps...with enough testing, tuning, and trial. Maybe. But it will never be as simple or elegant as open PVP should. At best the system would be an abomination of compromise that few will be truly happy with. At worst it simply wont work.
The only way open PVP can work and be simple. Is to do it in a place apart from sector space.
I believe pvp zones need to implement faction only chat so the other team does not hear you at all. Or perhaps the pvp community needs a wake-up call by having flamers lose their chat privileges altogether or even have them suspended from the game. If trash talk hurts the pvp community, and it does, then a little discipline might be what they need to install a sense of sportsmanship to the sport. I guarantee more people would pvp if they didn't have to endure the jerks when they do it.
Agreed. The trash talking aspect of PvP can be very distasteful. Preventing cross faction communication is a solution.
Although, In-Character smack talk adds flavor, juvenile Out-Of-Character trash talk is simply inhospitable. Of course, that applies to both the winner and the loser.
Is not verbal harassment already considered an in-game offense? Wouldn't it be a logical extension to apply it to PvP trash talk?
1) Agreed. But this can be done with a system of ''flagging'' that has been mentioned earlier. But yes it does require making it so low lvls or people that just dont want to pvp when they are in that zone then dont have to. (and if people are going to complain about this not being realistic then force cryptic to fix the massive amounts of Admirals flying around first ).
2)Just as there can be a negative (unbalanced team) there can be a plus: socializing. You can have an ability on your ship -that only works when ur being attacked by an enemy faction ship, and says the location of said ship (to avoid spam)- where you send out a distress signal, or just type in zone chat that ''THE BRITISH ARE coming!!!!!''' and people might come and join in the fight. It would add to the sense of war the game is supposed to have, and would encourage more teamplay outside of pvp queues or STF missions. And if the open pvp is maintained only in neutral zone areas, then you could simply avoid that area all together and continue doing missions elsewhere. You would have to do some DSE's or some more exploration missions to level up to continue in the other PVE areas, but hey if you dont want to pvp you also have to make some compromises lol. Not like it takes too long to lvl past Neutral zone missions anyhow.
3) Queues wont be abandoned. closed pvp will still be favored because of its balance and its emphasis on teams and objective-based gameplay. The open pvp area would just complement it when you dont feel like playing those objective modes, or would have some separate benefits (like having huge fleet wars or raids in those systems in that zone)
There are plenty benefits and plenty negatives. But a definitive compromise can be so both sides are relatively happy.
Its not that we refuse to see it. We're simply stating our points in favor of open pvp zones, just as you and others are posting their points in opposition of said zones. Both sides have valid arguments. The great thing about video games is that there are many ways to create a ''happy medium''. If you just made neutral zones open pvp zones that would remove the ''omgz klingons at ESD killing my npcs!!'' thing. But there are, obviously, lots of other things to take into account (and that require modifying or redesigning) in order to do this. But STO can have this implemented into it. And remember Star Trek is not all about exploration. It has its areas where fighting has (usually) been the only choice (vs Borg and Undine, and especially now vs Klingons too for example).
Or you could just go to Ker'rat.
At the end of the day, that's effectively all you're asking for and it already exists in the game.
I estimate that you need perhaps 4 times as many people pvp'ing as you have now just to get the queues to stay full so you don't wait for matches. Of course the queues will be a lot longer if you have an open pvp zone, so they might just die. An open pvp zone will either be held by Klingons if they keep the fights even or will be held by Feds if it's just numbers. At any rate, you need a lot more people to pvp to make it work, and at this point it is unlikely that STO will get a giant influx of new players. Certainly not quadrupling the number of players. You will only be able to keep PvP ques full as long as players of that rank are on at that time together. The only good ques are VA on the weekend.
At any rate, my point is that the trash talk turns lots of people off of pvp. We've had years of experience hearing the trash talk and avoiding those who do it by avoiding pvp altogether. But you need everyone in the game who doesn't hate pvp to want to play it if you want enough players for queues and an open pvp zone. And they don't want to be "pwned", they aren't "noobs" and they may or may not want to "l2p" and they certainly don't want to hear some jerk saying all that while they pursue their entertainment. If open pvp or pvp in general is to flourish you need more people and you frankly need a boost in the perception of pvp players.
Open pvp in all sectors as you wish would dilute the pvp community to the point where most of the zones would be empty since the pvp'ers would generally group up to hold where they could. It would also mean the trash talk would be in every zone like it currently is in Kerrat. First I think the mention of open PvP means that at any moment I could be pulled into combat and have to fight off a group that is griefing in the zone. I'm thinking that open PvP would be a draw between a PvE and PvP server. You should have to flag yourself to engage. You would still have the challenge ability and if I don't want to PvP I can turn down a challenge.
I believe pvp zones need to implement faction only chat so the other team does not hear you at all. Or perhaps the pvp community needs a wake-up call by having flamers lose their chat privileges altogether or even have them suspended from the game. If trash talk hurts the pvp community, and it does, then a little discipline might be what they need to install a sense of sportsmanship to the sport. I guarantee more people would pvp if they didn't have to endure the jerks when they do it.
Comments added to quote
Agreed to the last mentioned there in that when I'm pawning my friend or my brother I'll talk smack cause I know them and thier capabilities but vs strangers who I don't know if it's a brand new player, a 8 yo or a depressed person that needs to be lifted up by the fact they can beat me in a PvP match. My abilities might be too much for them and a final straw for them.
Personally I always post a "gg" whether my team won or not whether it's me vs 5 or if we nuked or got nuked it's a common courtesy to say thanks for playing.
It's sad that people think they are so cool that they have to beat up the little guy to show they are tough. But give them a fair fight and they cry foul.
I don't think open PvP should open griefing and prying but there is supposed to be a war going on and I just don't feel it. I do think that raids on star bases in a PvP zone for control should be something like Ker'rat.
I think there is a return though if you were given the chance to mount a raid against the leader of the faction that groups would form to accomplish it especially if you offered an achievement for beating the boss!
I'm an avid team player whether it is STFs or PvP or what ever I just enjoy working ad part of a team to achieve a goal.
It's not like this hasn't already been debated countless times before, but there's a number of reasons why "open" PvP isn't a particularly good idea or likely to happen.
1) PvP has to remain consensual. It's pretty much a given STO won't be turning into Lineage II, Darkfall or Eve Online.
2) Balance would be completely thrown out the window. Not only are situations where you'd have 5-on-1, 10-on-1, or even 20-on-1 quite possible, but we'd also have the issue of level cap'd players rattling sabers with characters still fresh from the tutorial.
3) Small fish; BIG pond. This would fracture the PvP enthusiast segment of the player base and spread them even further apart. Think waiting for queues is bad? Now imagine searching the whole galaxy (including every possible instance) to find opponents.
Honestly, I think the negatives far outweigh the positives, and this is coming from someone (believe it or don't) who enjoys PvP.
Actually, some form of open pvp is is necessary at some point. The current pvp system is poorly designed, very poorly implemented and much of the time broken. I'm not sure what they were thinking when they designed it but I would hope that genius was fired.
That being said, no pvp does not necessarily have to be consensual. It isn't in games such as EVE and Meridian59 and neither game drove off half the community because of it. It is entirely in how the system is designed and implemented.
Balance would not be 'thrown out the window' using your logic virtually every game out there would be in that situation now. Again, its how its implemented, not to mention it also relies on a particular individual not doing anything stupid enough to land them in such a situation. The ability to gang up on people (ever heard of a fleet...?) does not unbalance the game. Nor would it 'segment the game' as you put it.
At this point the current system needs to be replaced. Put in a sector or two that allows for open pvp (neutral zone perhaps? makes the most sense). That will fix the current problems with the pvp system as it is now and keep the pvpers happy. and on that note allowing the possibility of admins enabling pvp in other areas (such as starbases) for the purposes of events or series related 'raids' (think dominion attack on DS9, in the context of a series that builds up the background for the event, allows the pvp for a limited amount of time, perhaps expanding for awhile to allow for a 'war' feel and then returning to normal following a week long series related to this 'war' - something like the Dominion war was originally envisioned to run in the tv series - and i'm just using that as an example, I don't mean this should be dominion related or anything)
Or you could just go to Ker'rat.
At the end of the day, that's effectively all you're asking for and it already exists in the game.
No it isn't the same thing. Not to mention its broken. Its also located in klingon space. when romulans and whoever else are eventually implemented, should they have to go all the way there to have pvp? no, that would be bad design.
Open PVP would not be fun. I like the idea of opening up sector blocks and letting klingons attack fed targets and vice versa, but they should be specific targets. The first day of open PvP would be entertaining, but the next time I try to take one of my new toons into a disputed area for one of the weekly series would just make me very annoyed.
The current PvP system is fine, they just need make some PvE targets for Klingons in Fed space, and some roaming Fed npcs to jump the Klingons when they go into Fed space and roaming Klingon npcs to jump the Feds in Klingon space. These npc encounters could be just like all the ones that already exist for Fed players all over the map.
That would go a long way to making it feel like a war between feds and klingons. And they really need to make the Klingons missions more aggressive. As a Klingon captain I expected to be conquering planets and attacking outposts. I am really disappointed in the "fight off the Fed fleets" in the Klingon PvE. Why would Klingons sit on their butts in a war and fight off waves of Fed ships? This MUST be changed to make it feel more Star Trek.
I estimate that you need perhaps 4 times as many people pvp'ing as you have now just to get the queues to stay full so you don't wait for matches. Of course the queues will be a lot longer if you have an open pvp zone, so they might just die. An open pvp zone will either be held by Klingons if they keep the fights even or will be held by Feds if it's just numbers. At any rate, you need a lot more people to pvp to make it work, and at this point it is unlikely that STO will get a giant influx of new players. Certainly not quadrupling the number of players.
At any rate, my point is that the trash talk turns lots of people off of pvp. We've had years of experience hearing the trash talk and avoiding those who do it by avoiding pvp altogether. But you need everyone in the game who doesn't hate pvp to want to play it if you want enough players for queues and an open pvp zone. And they don't want to be "pwned", they aren't "noobs" and they may or may not want to "l2p" and they certainly don't want to hear some jerk saying all that while they pursue their entertainment. If open pvp or pvp in general is to flourish you need more people and you frankly need a boost in the perception of pvp players.
Open pvp in all sectors as you wish would dilute the pvp community to the point where most of the zones would be empty since the pvp'ers would generally group up to hold where they could. It would also mean the trash talk would be in every zone like it currently is in Kerrat.
I believe pvp zones need to implement faction only chat so the other team does not hear you at all. Or perhaps the pvp community needs a wake-up call by having flamers lose their chat privileges altogether or even have them suspended from the game. If trash talk hurts the pvp community, and it does, then a little discipline might be what they need to install a sense of sportsmanship to the sport. I guarantee more people would pvp if they didn't have to endure the jerks when they do it.
People have to shrug "trash talk" off their shoulders, if there not that strong about who they are then well pvp isnt there scene obviously. You have to remember, someone yabbering off they are leet or they just pwned you are only typed words to you. Words you can be easily killed by muting said person. I dont see an issue. I get a laff at someone that thinks they are the shizzles in the pvp community because in the end... there is alway someone better then them or I.
Ill agree maybe there should be a new chat channel if open pvp were to be made. allowing zone chat to be free "some what" from the ramblings of pvp combat. But in the end people can always switch channels. Its not a perfect system but maybe there should be some "laws" by the dev's that tell people if they are in open pvp to communicate only in the pvp specified channel. If they are found to be spamming in zone chat or what have you... actions will be taken.
I also want to add is that you lose nothing from being killed by someone else in this game. If someones ego cant handle being beaten by someone.. i see that as poor sportsmanship. Ive seen alot of people in pvp respectfully say, good job to the team who wins or usually in area chat everyone on both sides, say good game. I rarely see people crying or saying HAHHA you guys got pwned...so on. Not saying I havent seen it, but its rare i see it. I think this community we have in this game is more mature then others (WoW). I see alot of honor from people who play pvp, and I myself always give respect to those who kill me or what have yah. If someone goes "dirty" then thats where I may put them in their place.
Jerks will be jerks in the end. And every place has them. You simply have to toss them aside and move on. I believe in the non griefing of players. Especially those who arnt in the pvp scene. I respect their views to what they wish to play. But I want to have options such as open pvp to allow me to play the way I do. I like abit of realism and I can handle be beaten or "ganked". It goes with the turf. Just have to plan that if Iam going somewhere in a open pvp environment..maybe having escorts "fleet members" join me so that dosnt happen. And hey, we wont truely no what will happen if open pvp was implemented till you try it. It can always be improved apon and adjusted. The devs do listen.
i see more and more players coming forward asking for open pvp. I think its a grand idea.
But with the pve community, it has to be implemented so they dont get flagged if they dont want to participate. But I think this is a great idea, and one ive talked about numerous times.
QFT
I am not a huge PVP'er but I do like it sometimes. Open PVP is a great idea for STO. and allowing players to flag themselves if they do not enjoy that style of play is really a win win for everyone. Just like Sector space. Some like astrometrics some don't, so they designed it with everyone in mind. Same can be done with Open PVP.
Having that danger lurking at all times to have someone tag you and drop you out of warp for a fight is pretty exciting if you ask me. And if it is not for you then don't flag yourself for PVP and you are left alone. Don't see how anyone could be against a system like this as long as you're given a choice.
Maybe they could even make it so that if, lets say a Klingon player tags you, and you drop out of warp, and have to fight him, and you win the fight, that kill counts as 1/10 kills toward your defend the sector missions. Or simply have a new PVP defend the sector mission that uses these kills. Lots of fun possibilities with open PVP.
You 'flag' yourself for PvP, are immediately moved to an exclusive PvP instance of whatever map you're in or join (be it Earth Space Dock, Sector Space, etc.), and only people who are likewise flagged can enter/traverse said instances. From that point on, whatever happens is for those avidly looking for 'open' PvP to worry about. Everyone else can remain blissfully unaware of your existence. Open PvP'ers would essentially have their own server.
I am not a huge PVP'er but I do like it sometimes. Open PVP is a great idea for STO. and allowing players to flag themselves if they do not enjoy that style of play is really a win win for everyone. Just like Sector space. Some like astrometrics some don't, so they designed it with everyone in mind. Same can be done with Open PVP.
Having that danger lurking at all times to have someone tag you and drop you out of warp for a fight is pretty exciting if you ask me. And if it is not for you then don't flag yourself for PVP and you are left alone. Don't see how anyone could be against a system like this as long as you're given a choice.
Maybe they could even make it so that if, lets say a Klingon player tags you, and you drop out of warp, and have to fight him, and you win the fight, that kill counts as 1/10 kills toward your defend the sector missions. Or simply have a new PVP defend the sector mission that uses these kills. Lots of fun possibilities with open PVP.
Finally someone who gets it
And quite right, option is the key. I wouldnt want someone who prefers pve to pvp be forced pvp onto them and being "griefed" all the time. Allowing a flag option to players who wish to have the risk of being attacked or not attacked is just the best idea..in my mind.
It would bring a new level of excitement to players who choose to flag themselves and make the war "in my mind" matter. They could establish new accolades, new missions that may bring the pvp community the "happy meal" they have been waiting for
Just a note but with instance caps of around 25 players, the imbalance would be felt in PvP instances unless you cap it off at 12 per side.
And just like there, you might have a nice fix to that problem. Limit it to 10-12 players per side, and it's relatively easy to create a balanced scenario.
I imagine there are two general scenarios for Open PvP:
- Engaging a hostile player directly.
- Engaging hostile players over an objective.
The first might be at least partially a prerequisite to be able to do the second. If you win often enough, you might gain influence that eventually allows you to attack an objective controlled by the other side.
Whenever you start such a fight, emergency signals would be broadcast to all players (across all Open PvP instances), and they could rush to join the fight and avoid their enemy taking hold.
It is unlikely you stay alone for long, since no one wants the opponent to attack the main objective your side controls. Of course, the best idea is always to fly in a full team...
The biggest challenge in the current system for me is that combat is relatively fast paced - how do we "score" a win? The Arena method, goal is n kills total? Or a "one-strike and you're out"?
It might be interesting if these "pseudo-Arenas" had a kill total but an additional requirement - take down each ship at least once. And to avoid griefing, a forced respawn every 45 seconds or so.
People have to shrug "trash talk" off their shoulders, if there not that strong about who they are then well pvp isnt there scene obviously. You have to remember, someone yabbering off they are leet or they just pwned you are only typed words to you. Words you can be easily killed by muting said person. I dont see an issue. I get a laff at someone that thinks they are the shizzles in the pvp community because in the end... there is alway someone better then them or I.
I also want to add is that you lose nothing from being killed by someone else in this game. If someones ego cant handle being beaten by someone.. i see that as poor sportsmanship. Ive seen alot of people in pvp respectfully say, good job to the team who wins or usually in area chat everyone on both sides, say good game. I rarely see people crying or saying HAHHA you guys got pwned...so on. Not saying I havent seen it, but its rare i see it. I think this community we have in this game is more mature then others (WoW). I see alot of honor from people who play pvp, and I myself always give respect to those who kill me or what have yah. If someone goes "dirty" then thats where I may put them in their place.
Jerks will be jerks in the end. And every place has them. You simply have to toss them aside and move on. I believe in the non griefing of players. Especially those who arnt in the pvp scene. I respect their views to what they wish to play. But I want to have options such as open pvp to allow me to play the way I do. I like abit of realism and I can handle be beaten or "ganked". It goes with the turf. Just have to plan that if Iam going somewhere in a open pvp environment..maybe having escorts "fleet members" join me so that dosnt happen. And hey, we wont truely no what will happen if open pvp was implemented till you try it. It can always be improved apon and adjusted. The devs do listen.
Sorry, but I don't "have" to do any of the stuff you just said. I can avoid most of it by simply not engaging in pvp. A lot of us do just that. And so you have long waits for the queues that will only be exacerbated by adding an open pvp zone. You seem set on keeping things this way rather than try to correct the problem. If you continue to insist that people only engage in pvp if they are willing to be insulted by jerks while they are trying to have fun then you aren't helping pvp. It's not like you can join a queue and get a match in a timely manner. You have long waits for a match, which means you don't have enough people doing pvp. Why is that? I maintain at least part of that is because people don't find it fun to be insulted and most of us left junior high recess a long time ago and don't want to return. Now make pvp a faction only chat channel and you might not have to wait so long for a match, and maybe the game gets better for everyone as a consequence. Or we can say "jerks will be jerks" and "get a thick skin" and you can have what you have now.
Regarding the "smack talk" - I suppose there really needs to be a faction chat, and maybe no Open PvP Zone chat? And maybe a chat flag saying "accept tells only from friends if not of your faction."
Sorry, but I don't "have" to do any of the stuff you just said. I can avoid most of it by simply not engaging in pvp. A lot of us do just that. And so you have long waits for the queues that will only be exacerbated by adding an open pvp zone. You seem set on keeping things this way rather than try to correct the problem. If you continue to insist that people only engage in pvp if they are willing to be insulted by jerks while they are trying to have fun then you aren't helping pvp. It's not like you can join a queue and get a match in a timely manner. You have long waits for a match, which means you don't have enough people doing pvp. Why is that? I maintain at least part of that is because people don't find it fun to be insulted and most of us left junior high recess a long time ago and don't want to return. Now make pvp a faction only chat channel and you might not have to wait so long for a match, and maybe the game gets better for everyone as a consequence. Or we can say "jerks will be jerks" and "get a thick skin" and you can have what you have now.
Obviously you skipped alot of what i said earlier.....
If you dont want to do what I had listed then so be it, thats your own decision. But its effective in eliminating peoples "flames" or what have you that you believe happens on a frequent basis in your pvp. Alot of us??? Whos us? I wasnt aware you can speak for other people. When Iam on my fed, i see HUGE numbers waiting for pvp, theres just not enouph klingons hitting up the ques. Do I know the reason why that is.. no, no one really knows. Could be the lack of a klingon population, and most that consume the KDF are mostly fed players rolling klingon toons and doing the exploration missions and or the new pve content missions. Who really knows. When have i stated that people should be insulted in pvp :rolleyes:
I have said the entire opposite of that. I dont support it but it happens here and there. Maybe people instead of taking off their profanity filters but them back on. You cant fixed what people say. Theyll say what ever they wish to in pvp or pve, thats a fact. Could the devs do something to counter the problem. Most likely maybe filtering the words pwned, noob, ect. If it really hurts you and others feelings iam sorry to hear that.
Also another "possible" reason to why pvp isnt that active because its really stale atm. There hasnt been any solid pvp content in sometime... again people may just be bored of it... has that ever crossed your mind?? And ill remain on what I said, people.. have to learn its just words, cant handle words and you get upset about it.. your allowing that person to get under your skin and again.. they win. And if that was happening to you during high school then Iam sorry to hear that.. some people can be cruel.
Like I said earlier, I have laffed on many occasions when someone like that sends a global message, so does most of the rest who were pvp'ing in that round(s). I actually see people going to bat for whom ever was being called out as the newb or the "pwned" individual in the match(s). Again, this community is far better then some other gaming communities.
Comments
1) PvP has to remain consensual. It's pretty much a given STO won't be turning into Lineage II, Darkfall or Eve Online.
2) Balance would be completely thrown out the window. Not only are situations where you'd have 5-on-1, 10-on-1, or even 20-on-1 quite possible, but we'd also have the issue of level cap'd players rattling sabers with characters still fresh from the tutorial.
3) Small fish; BIG pond. This would fracture the PvP enthusiast segment of the player base and spread them even further apart. Think waiting for queues is bad? Now imagine searching the whole galaxy (including every possible instance) to find opponents.
Honestly, I think the negatives far outweigh the positives, and this is coming from someone (believe it or don't) who enjoys PvP.
This is exactly my thought on "Open PVP" too... I was doing a cap n hold map and was routinely ending up in 4-5 v 1 skirmishes and surprisingly I didn't find fighting outnumbered to be a whole lot of fun. I remember when the PVP Queues would spawn matches that were unbalanced there was outrage at having to fight an unbalanced match. Yet "Open PVP" means there's nothing in game to make sure you're fighting a balanced match. How come queueing up and being outmatched 3 to 1 is outrageous yet zoning into a sector and being outnumbered by even more is fun? Sure they can have NPCs and "safe zones" which might help but now you're back to "queuing" up players before you can begin.
I'm quite sure (though I can't find the post atm) that it was said they are looking at creating an area for Open PVP. While I can respect those who would like all sectors to be open pvp and allow a player to flag themselves for participation, one thing that can't be avoided is the inevitable trash talk and zone chat garbage that is going to be spewed out by those who find someone "not flagged" for PVP. The worst thing about PVP in my opinion is the attitudes and behavior of some of those who PVP and I would not want to see that bleed over into the rest of the game. I know you can just "turn zone chat off" but my preference would be to just "Open PVP" in it's own, nice little out of the way place I can safely ignore and avoid dealing with those who are there.
Ah, yes, thank you for clarifying that. I was tired when I read the responses and took them completely wrong. Actually it is quite sad that this is the conclusion I jumped to. It is very sad that I expect negativity and expect to be called derogatory and inappropriate names like "carebear".
The funny thing about calling me a carebear is I am an EVE vet. I appreciate open PvP in the right situation and the right environment. STO is not that situation or that environment. STO has been designed to be PvE with instanced and isolated PvP. Even if some things were changed nothing could prep STO for a good open PvP experience. It would be like putting a lift kit and four wheel drive on a Mini. It can be done but the result would not be pretty and it would not be stable.
Well stated!
I think that is the thing the open PvP advocates just refuse to see. STO is, at its core, not a PvP game and really cannot be redesigned to be.
1) Agreed. But this can be done with a system of ''flagging'' that has been mentioned earlier. But yes it does require making it so low lvls or people that just dont want to pvp when they are in that zone then dont have to. (and if people are going to complain about this not being realistic then force cryptic to fix the massive amounts of Admirals flying around first
2)Just as there can be a negative (unbalanced team) there can be a plus: socializing. You can have an ability on your ship -that only works when ur being attacked by an enemy faction ship, and says the location of said ship (to avoid spam)- where you send out a distress signal, or just type in zone chat that ''THE BRITISH ARE coming!!!!!''' and people might come and join in the fight. It would add to the sense of war the game is supposed to have, and would encourage more teamplay outside of pvp queues or STF missions. And if the open pvp is maintained only in neutral zone areas, then you could simply avoid that area all together and continue doing missions elsewhere. You would have to do some DSE's or some more exploration missions to level up to continue in the other PVE areas, but hey if you dont want to pvp you also have to make some compromises lol. Not like it takes too long to lvl past Neutral zone missions anyhow.
3) Queues wont be abandoned. closed pvp will still be favored because of its balance and its emphasis on teams and objective-based gameplay. The open pvp area would just complement it when you dont feel like playing those objective modes, or would have some separate benefits (like having huge fleet wars or raids in those systems in that zone)
There are plenty benefits and plenty negatives. But a definitive compromise can be so both sides are relatively happy.
Its not that we refuse to see it. We're simply stating our points in favor of open pvp zones, just as you and others are posting their points in opposition of said zones. Both sides have valid arguments. The great thing about video games is that there are many ways to create a ''happy medium''. If you just made neutral zones open pvp zones that would remove the ''omgz klingons at ESD killing my npcs!!'' thing. But there are, obviously, lots of other things to take into account (and that require modifying or redesigning) in order to do this. But STO can have this implemented into it. And remember Star Trek is not all about exploration. It has its areas where fighting has (usually) been the only choice (vs Borg and Undine, and especially now vs Klingons too for example).
One example is: In Pi Canis, have a Federation Starbase. For Feddies coming in, they must defend the station. For Klinks coming in, they must attack the station. Have a section of the station target-able to give the klinks a goal. If the klinks destroy that part, the match is over and it resets. You could do the same in Eta just reverse the situation.
I am certain there are many more ideas floating in heads out there in the STO universe.
Indeed. That is another way of doing it. Or a first step at least. Its up to the devs to decide what is possible.
Being attacked by more numbers is going to happen. The only way to counter this is better team management. Not saying you personally but I see alot of people in pvp, especially on fed side who dont know a smuck about pvp. They go off on their own...which you dont want to do as a fed against klingons because you will be preyed on by bop team ups, because your all alone. There is no communication with feds at all. Now on the klingon side.. things are more organized..not all the time but I would say more times then none.
Stahl mentioned the idea of a sector that would or be the test bed for the open pvp element..*crosses fingers*
Trash talk will happen, it happens now in pvp. But this can be fixed by ignoring those. You wouldnt have to give up by disabling zone chat just put the people flaming on ignore..simple. I also want to add that.. in combat, your going to mock the other guy.. lol its just how it goes in pvp battles..not all the time but more or less.. its competitive in the end.
You could avoid open pvp if it was made in all sectors and was a flagging option..by not flagging yourself. You would see klingon ships in our space, and a fed player problably intercepting that ship and going into a zone battle situation, thats about all you would see.
Would it, indeed?
Just a note but with instance caps of around 25 players, the imbalance would be felt in PvP instances unless you cap it off at 12 per side. Imagine being the guy unlucky enogh to wind up in the instance that has 24 of the enemy. You'd be helpless since reinforcements would be impossible. And you might just instance hop until the odds are reversed.
I think what we really need is basically "open dueling". We go around with the ability to duel other players, except instead of getting a dueling invitations, players can just engage eachother in sector space like signal contacts, launching a duel with other flagged players.
Maybe the additional feature to have missions that other PvPers can crash.
So, say I'm flagged and leading a group on a mission. A Klingon player can see that when he passes the planet and can bring an equal number of Klingons to the number I have on my team in the instance.
To aid in that you would make all star fleet security npcs level 55 as well as the warriors on Qo'nos and have one or two specific targets on the station that they would go after. If they try to go around killing everyone they would be swarmed by security. This way no one person can wipe the whole station.
Additionally make this combat at an elite level so if they die they suffer injuries that affect the continued combat. So again this combats the idea of someone running around killing essential personell just to grief other players.
Right now with ESD, boosting the NPCs levels to 100 would prevent future invasions, as long as the Klingons kept their Ps and Qs (not attacking, unless part of a raiding party).
With Sectors, I would like to see the various Sectors along the Neutral Zone get revamped to where there is an actual Neutral Zone, where Territorial PvP can take place. The fighting is over worlds and players who survive in Space can beam down to a ground warfare and participate in battles that decide the planet's occupation. And the winners of the planet get certain factional bonuses.
This is what I would love to see in the near future. It would make war viable and competitive without silly PvP arenas.
I'm still amazed though at the "sky is falling" attitude that a coupled of bugged Klinks caused at ESD.
There ya go. Have a button that sets you as "Neutral" or "Combatant" to where if you chose "Neutral" you show up as ally to all (a la Gamma and Defera) or if you chose "Combatant" you appear as hostile to the other faction.
Ugh, no thanks.
I estimate that you need perhaps 4 times as many people pvp'ing as you have now just to get the queues to stay full so you don't wait for matches. Of course the queues will be a lot longer if you have an open pvp zone, so they might just die. An open pvp zone will either be held by Klingons if they keep the fights even or will be held by Feds if it's just numbers. At any rate, you need a lot more people to pvp to make it work, and at this point it is unlikely that STO will get a giant influx of new players. Certainly not quadrupling the number of players.
At any rate, my point is that the trash talk turns lots of people off of pvp. We've had years of experience hearing the trash talk and avoiding those who do it by avoiding pvp altogether. But you need everyone in the game who doesn't hate pvp to want to play it if you want enough players for queues and an open pvp zone. And they don't want to be "pwned", they aren't "noobs" and they may or may not want to "l2p" and they certainly don't want to hear some jerk saying all that while they pursue their entertainment. If open pvp or pvp in general is to flourish you need more people and you frankly need a boost in the perception of pvp players.
Open pvp in all sectors as you wish would dilute the pvp community to the point where most of the zones would be empty since the pvp'ers would generally group up to hold where they could. It would also mean the trash talk would be in every zone like it currently is in Kerrat.
I believe pvp zones need to implement faction only chat so the other team does not hear you at all. Or perhaps the pvp community needs a wake-up call by having flamers lose their chat privileges altogether or even have them suspended from the game. If trash talk hurts the pvp community, and it does, then a little discipline might be what they need to install a sense of sportsmanship to the sport. I guarantee more people would pvp if they didn't have to endure the jerks when they do it.
It isn't that easy.
Some of the problems have been mentioned already
There are much larger mechanics to do with as well that no one has seemed to consider.
Would you enjoy PVP in WOW if, at will, anyone could simply "poof" out and vanish. Tucked away in some secret invisible box or move to a different server?
Well, that would be a problem here. So you're flagged combatant, you don't like the odds? well off to your bridge you go. Instant invulnerability. So whats the fix? Lock out bridges to anyone flagged as a combatant? It might be ok for now, but what happens later when more interactive content becomes available? Would PVPers really be happy having to drop their combat status just to do a re-run on a mission? Would they really be happy to be forced to have less content just to be PVP enabled? And even if ALL of that was acceptable. The problem still isn't fixed. Anyone can still poof out by instance switching. And locking that out will instantly fail if your group ends up in different groups on zone in. There is no easy or elegant fix to this, simple single problem
But it gets worse from there. No other open PVP world has a system like sector space, and sector space makes most of this more difficult then it needs to be.
Lets talk movement. Name me an open PVP world that forces folks to move between combats at a speed controlled by level and with all of your abilities and powers locked out and unavailable. Speed in sector space is fixed by level, no amount of skills, equipment, or powers will change that. Lowbies will simply move slower then higher ranked folks. They will be easy bait unable to run (short of poofing, as in my first point)Or even to configure themselves to have any type of chance. It would be a griefers frenzy. So, whats the fix? Limit open PVP to max ranked players only? "Sure you can PVP kiddies, but you dont get the COOL PVP till you level up". Just one more problem, one more compromise.
And then we still haven't even gotten to combat itself. How would that be handled? Cant fight in sector space. So any engagement would have the combatants whisked off to another map to fight it out. Causing more issues, more problems, more questions. When players collide will there be a portal like a DSE encounter? How long will the portal last? How long will entry be allowed. Keep it to long and the home side will always be able to rush in aid making raids pointless. Keep it to short and it would be less about fighting and more about separating groups to divide them into small separate instances. And what happens once you're in combat? Can you leave? If you can will that need a timer? If you cant what happens if someone chooses to hide instead of fight?
All of this would have to be tuned, managed, tested, checked for possible ways to game or exploit the system. Could it work? Perhaps...with enough testing, tuning, and trial. Maybe. But it will never be as simple or elegant as open PVP should. At best the system would be an abomination of compromise that few will be truly happy with. At worst it simply wont work.
The only way open PVP can work and be simple. Is to do it in a place apart from sector space.
Although, In-Character smack talk adds flavor, juvenile Out-Of-Character trash talk is simply inhospitable. Of course, that applies to both the winner and the loser.
Is not verbal harassment already considered an in-game offense? Wouldn't it be a logical extension to apply it to PvP trash talk?
Or you could just go to Ker'rat.
At the end of the day, that's effectively all you're asking for and it already exists in the game.
Agreed to the last mentioned there in that when I'm pawning my friend or my brother I'll talk smack cause I know them and thier capabilities but vs strangers who I don't know if it's a brand new player, a 8 yo or a depressed person that needs to be lifted up by the fact they can beat me in a PvP match. My abilities might be too much for them and a final straw for them.
Personally I always post a "gg" whether my team won or not whether it's me vs 5 or if we nuked or got nuked it's a common courtesy to say thanks for playing.
It's sad that people think they are so cool that they have to beat up the little guy to show they are tough. But give them a fair fight and they cry foul.
I don't think open PvP should open griefing and prying but there is supposed to be a war going on and I just don't feel it. I do think that raids on star bases in a PvP zone for control should be something like Ker'rat.
I think there is a return though if you were given the chance to mount a raid against the leader of the faction that groups would form to accomplish it especially if you offered an achievement for beating the boss!
I'm an avid team player whether it is STFs or PvP or what ever I just enjoy working ad part of a team to achieve a goal.
Actually, some form of open pvp is is necessary at some point. The current pvp system is poorly designed, very poorly implemented and much of the time broken. I'm not sure what they were thinking when they designed it but I would hope that genius was fired.
That being said, no pvp does not necessarily have to be consensual. It isn't in games such as EVE and Meridian59 and neither game drove off half the community because of it. It is entirely in how the system is designed and implemented.
Balance would not be 'thrown out the window' using your logic virtually every game out there would be in that situation now. Again, its how its implemented, not to mention it also relies on a particular individual not doing anything stupid enough to land them in such a situation. The ability to gang up on people (ever heard of a fleet...?) does not unbalance the game. Nor would it 'segment the game' as you put it.
At this point the current system needs to be replaced. Put in a sector or two that allows for open pvp (neutral zone perhaps? makes the most sense). That will fix the current problems with the pvp system as it is now and keep the pvpers happy. and on that note allowing the possibility of admins enabling pvp in other areas (such as starbases) for the purposes of events or series related 'raids' (think dominion attack on DS9, in the context of a series that builds up the background for the event, allows the pvp for a limited amount of time, perhaps expanding for awhile to allow for a 'war' feel and then returning to normal following a week long series related to this 'war' - something like the Dominion war was originally envisioned to run in the tv series - and i'm just using that as an example, I don't mean this should be dominion related or anything)
No it isn't the same thing. Not to mention its broken. Its also located in klingon space. when romulans and whoever else are eventually implemented, should they have to go all the way there to have pvp? no, that would be bad design.
The current PvP system is fine, they just need make some PvE targets for Klingons in Fed space, and some roaming Fed npcs to jump the Klingons when they go into Fed space and roaming Klingon npcs to jump the Feds in Klingon space. These npc encounters could be just like all the ones that already exist for Fed players all over the map.
That would go a long way to making it feel like a war between feds and klingons. And they really need to make the Klingons missions more aggressive. As a Klingon captain I expected to be conquering planets and attacking outposts. I am really disappointed in the "fight off the Fed fleets" in the Klingon PvE. Why would Klingons sit on their butts in a war and fight off waves of Fed ships? This MUST be changed to make it feel more Star Trek.
People have to shrug "trash talk" off their shoulders, if there not that strong about who they are then well pvp isnt there scene obviously. You have to remember, someone yabbering off they are leet or they just pwned you are only typed words to you. Words you can be easily killed by muting said person. I dont see an issue. I get a laff at someone that thinks they are the shizzles in the pvp community because in the end... there is alway someone better then them or I.
Ill agree maybe there should be a new chat channel if open pvp were to be made. allowing zone chat to be free "some what" from the ramblings of pvp combat. But in the end people can always switch channels. Its not a perfect system but maybe there should be some "laws" by the dev's that tell people if they are in open pvp to communicate only in the pvp specified channel. If they are found to be spamming in zone chat or what have you... actions will be taken.
I also want to add is that you lose nothing from being killed by someone else in this game. If someones ego cant handle being beaten by someone.. i see that as poor sportsmanship. Ive seen alot of people in pvp respectfully say, good job to the team who wins or usually in area chat everyone on both sides, say good game. I rarely see people crying or saying HAHHA you guys got pwned...so on. Not saying I havent seen it, but its rare i see it. I think this community we have in this game is more mature then others (WoW). I see alot of honor from people who play pvp, and I myself always give respect to those who kill me or what have yah. If someone goes "dirty" then thats where I may put them in their place.
Jerks will be jerks in the end. And every place has them. You simply have to toss them aside and move on. I believe in the non griefing of players. Especially those who arnt in the pvp scene. I respect their views to what they wish to play. But I want to have options such as open pvp to allow me to play the way I do. I like abit of realism and I can handle be beaten or "ganked". It goes with the turf. Just have to plan that if Iam going somewhere in a open pvp environment..maybe having escorts "fleet members" join me so that dosnt happen. And hey, we wont truely no what will happen if open pvp was implemented till you try it. It can always be improved apon and adjusted. The devs do listen.
QFT
I am not a huge PVP'er but I do like it sometimes. Open PVP is a great idea for STO. and allowing players to flag themselves if they do not enjoy that style of play is really a win win for everyone. Just like Sector space. Some like astrometrics some don't, so they designed it with everyone in mind. Same can be done with Open PVP.
Having that danger lurking at all times to have someone tag you and drop you out of warp for a fight is pretty exciting if you ask me. And if it is not for you then don't flag yourself for PVP and you are left alone. Don't see how anyone could be against a system like this as long as you're given a choice.
Maybe they could even make it so that if, lets say a Klingon player tags you, and you drop out of warp, and have to fight him, and you win the fight, that kill counts as 1/10 kills toward your defend the sector missions. Or simply have a new PVP defend the sector mission that uses these kills. Lots of fun possibilities with open PVP.
You 'flag' yourself for PvP, are immediately moved to an exclusive PvP instance of whatever map you're in or join (be it Earth Space Dock, Sector Space, etc.), and only people who are likewise flagged can enter/traverse said instances. From that point on, whatever happens is for those avidly looking for 'open' PvP to worry about. Everyone else can remain blissfully unaware of your existence. Open PvP'ers would essentially have their own server.
Finally someone who gets it
And quite right, option is the key. I wouldnt want someone who prefers pve to pvp be forced pvp onto them and being "griefed" all the time. Allowing a flag option to players who wish to have the risk of being attacked or not attacked is just the best idea..in my mind.
It would bring a new level of excitement to players who choose to flag themselves and make the war "in my mind" matter. They could establish new accolades, new missions that may bring the pvp community the "happy meal" they have been waiting for
I imagine there are two general scenarios for Open PvP:
- Engaging a hostile player directly.
- Engaging hostile players over an objective.
The first might be at least partially a prerequisite to be able to do the second. If you win often enough, you might gain influence that eventually allows you to attack an objective controlled by the other side.
Whenever you start such a fight, emergency signals would be broadcast to all players (across all Open PvP instances), and they could rush to join the fight and avoid their enemy taking hold.
It is unlikely you stay alone for long, since no one wants the opponent to attack the main objective your side controls. Of course, the best idea is always to fly in a full team...
The biggest challenge in the current system for me is that combat is relatively fast paced - how do we "score" a win? The Arena method, goal is n kills total? Or a "one-strike and you're out"?
It might be interesting if these "pseudo-Arenas" had a kill total but an additional requirement - take down each ship at least once. And to avoid griefing, a forced respawn every 45 seconds or so.
Sorry, but I don't "have" to do any of the stuff you just said. I can avoid most of it by simply not engaging in pvp. A lot of us do just that. And so you have long waits for the queues that will only be exacerbated by adding an open pvp zone. You seem set on keeping things this way rather than try to correct the problem. If you continue to insist that people only engage in pvp if they are willing to be insulted by jerks while they are trying to have fun then you aren't helping pvp. It's not like you can join a queue and get a match in a timely manner. You have long waits for a match, which means you don't have enough people doing pvp. Why is that? I maintain at least part of that is because people don't find it fun to be insulted and most of us left junior high recess a long time ago and don't want to return. Now make pvp a faction only chat channel and you might not have to wait so long for a match, and maybe the game gets better for everyone as a consequence. Or we can say "jerks will be jerks" and "get a thick skin" and you can have what you have now.
Obviously you skipped alot of what i said earlier.....
If you dont want to do what I had listed then so be it, thats your own decision. But its effective in eliminating peoples "flames" or what have you that you believe happens on a frequent basis in your pvp. Alot of us??? Whos us? I wasnt aware you can speak for other people. When Iam on my fed, i see HUGE numbers waiting for pvp, theres just not enouph klingons hitting up the ques. Do I know the reason why that is.. no, no one really knows. Could be the lack of a klingon population, and most that consume the KDF are mostly fed players rolling klingon toons and doing the exploration missions and or the new pve content missions. Who really knows. When have i stated that people should be insulted in pvp :rolleyes:
I have said the entire opposite of that. I dont support it but it happens here and there. Maybe people instead of taking off their profanity filters but them back on. You cant fixed what people say. Theyll say what ever they wish to in pvp or pve, thats a fact. Could the devs do something to counter the problem. Most likely maybe filtering the words pwned, noob, ect. If it really hurts you and others feelings iam sorry to hear that.
Also another "possible" reason to why pvp isnt that active because its really stale atm. There hasnt been any solid pvp content in sometime... again people may just be bored of it... has that ever crossed your mind?? And ill remain on what I said, people.. have to learn its just words, cant handle words and you get upset about it.. your allowing that person to get under your skin and again.. they win. And if that was happening to you during high school then Iam sorry to hear that.. some people can be cruel.
Like I said earlier, I have laffed on many occasions when someone like that sends a global message, so does most of the rest who were pvp'ing in that round(s). I actually see people going to bat for whom ever was being called out as the newb or the "pwned" individual in the match(s). Again, this community is far better then some other gaming communities.