test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Would you support a PvP balance pass if it help the PvE meta?

123457

Comments

  • farmallmfarmallm Member Posts: 4,630 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    No.

    1:
    Players will still fuss about imbalance and not fair. Until they gimp the ships or characters to a point you won't really die. Unless your gear is just TRIBBLE.

    2:
    Past experience, trying to balance PVP usually hurts PVE. Saw this lots of time on WoW where they constantly make adjustments and nerfs/buffs.

    3:
    I don't do PVP and you can't pay me to do it.

    Real fix for it:
    You need to fix it where players are competing against ones of similar level/gearing. So you take out being a cannon fodder until you get better gear. You need to solve the issue of grave yard camping. And you need a whole new set up builds, skills, and gear just for PVP. So you won't involve messing up PVE.
    Enterprise%20C_zpsrdrf3v8d.jpg

    USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
    Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
  • ednathepimpednathepimp Member Posts: 50 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    farmallm wrote: »
    No.

    1:
    Players will still fuss about imbalance and not fair. Until they gimp the ships or characters to a point you won't really die. Unless your gear is just TRIBBLE.

    2:
    Past experience, trying to balance PVP usually hurts PVE. Saw this lots of time on WoW where they constantly make adjustments and nerfs/buffs.

    3:
    I don't do PVP and you can't pay me to do it.

    Real fix for it:
    You need to fix it where players are competing against ones of similar level/gearing. So you take out being a cannon fodder until you get better gear. You need to solve the issue of grave yard camping. And you need a whole new set up builds, skills, and gear just for PVP. So you won't involve messing up PVE.

    1.Pve players will fuss .

    2. WoW is a game ...sto is a joke .

    3.I dont play PvE and you can't pay me to do it.
  • farmallmfarmallm Member Posts: 4,630 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    1.Pve players will fuss .

    2. WoW is a game ...sto is a joke .

    3.I dont play PvE and you can't pay me to do it.

    Players will fuss regardless. Even now they fuss about stuff. Grind, too hard, not hard enough, PVP needs this or that.

    STO is still a game. If you don't like it, why your still playing? I enjoy it, I still play.

    PVP is a small portion on this game. Since you have more Feds and KDF to play with.
    Enterprise%20C_zpsrdrf3v8d.jpg

    USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
    Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
  • ednathepimpednathepimp Member Posts: 50 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    farmallm wrote: »
    Players will fuss regardless. Even now they fuss about stuff. Grind, too hard, not hard enough, PVP needs this or that.

    STO is still a game. If you don't like it, why your still playing? I enjoy it, I still play.

    PVP is a small portion on this game. Since you have more Feds and KDF to play with.

    They fuss now and you think the game is great.

    If you show me a star trek mmo Ill go play it.Iirc you havent bought the IP.

    PvP is a larger portion than pve if you consider how much support it got...thats zero support in over 5 years.So bang for the buck PvP makes more money .
  • farmallmfarmallm Member Posts: 4,630 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    PvP is a larger portion than pve if you consider how much support it got...thats zero support in over 5 years.So bang for the buck PvP makes more money .

    And the polls is saying PVP is in 3rd for choices. Goes to show where the majority wants in the game. They want episodes or exploration. Not PVP.
    Enterprise%20C_zpsrdrf3v8d.jpg

    USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
    Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
  • edited February 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • ednathepimpednathepimp Member Posts: 50 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    farmallm wrote: »
    And the polls is saying PVP is in 3rd for choices. Goes to show where the majority wants in the game. They want episodes or exploration. Not PVP.

    the majority that left wants pvp....I have enough friends who left the game that would top the whole pve poll.

    alsot pvp has more players per $ invested in game than pve....its not hard ....zero $ put in it ,but money from pvp players are good.Also bug reports and testing for free is also good.
  • rgzarcherrgzarcher Member Posts: 320 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    sharxtreme wrote: »
    Wow.

    So it's OK that there is broken stuff in game?
    You know stuff like plasma doping which PvPers dont even care about; that most need 26k DPS from broken plasma burn to get to 30k?
    Or stuff that even completely disconnected people from server before fix?
    Fixing broken stuff can't hurt PvE at all, it can only make it better and more variants will be viable.
    3 full seasons of BFAW PvE is great right?

    To play devils advocate, yeah actually since in PVE all the enemies have a ton of health. Anything that reduces your output is a negative impact. We know they aren't going to really update the AI by much in terms of difficulty, just 'tougher' enemies.

    And given the number of people who want nothing to do with PvP, further reductions would be a ifficult pill to swallow.

    At the current numbers PvP might be in 3rd place, but its only 17% of the total vote. That's not even 1/5th of the voters.
    "Why all the sales"?

    And a merry freaking Christmas to you too, Ebenezer.
    -jonsills, 'Cryptic Why the sales..instead of Fixing XP leveling and this game?'
  • kiralynkiralyn Member Posts: 1,576 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    Separate the two, so they don't effect each other.

    Best option, besides the real one that they'd never do: rip PvP out of the game entirely.

    PvE and PvP games need to be entirely separate, so they can concentrate on their strengths instead of getting the watered-down, imbalanced PvP minigames that keep being duct-taped onto the side of PvE MMOs (followed by the minority who plays them bragging about how they're incredibly important and should get more dev time).
  • edited February 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • sharxtremesharxtreme Member Posts: 850 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    skollulfr wrote:
    and what magic hole is cryptic going to pull the resources to maintain 2x the code, when they already run out of time maintaining one set?

    Why are you worrying about that? Are you a share holder? or a carebear?

    Making that code and fixing bugs is just that. A programmers work.
    You are defending bugs in game, disconnects all sorts of stuff by apologizing Cryptic.

    It's waaaaay more expensive to make one featured episode, STF or grinding patrol missions with new enemies and stuff.
    Were you in those threads to ask same question?
  • sharxtremesharxtreme Member Posts: 850 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    rgzarcher wrote: »

    At the current numbers PvP might be in 3rd place, but its only 17% of the total vote. That's not even 1/5th of the voters.

    uh-uh. OK so using that logic that 17% of the votes is enough to disregard PvP or remove it from from game, what should we do about Fleet and Foundry which combined don't have 10%?
    Remove that as well?
    You know how much people spent on ships and equipment for PvP in 5 years?
    How many bug reports submitted?
    "Yeah, **** them" "Let's bring back exploration we removed in 1st place because it was most boring part of any game ever" "Q'apla"
  • ednathepimpednathepimp Member Posts: 50 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    rgzarcher wrote: »
    To play devils advocate, yeah actually since in PVE all the enemies have a ton of health. Anything that reduces your output is a negative impact. We know they aren't going to really update the AI by much in terms of difficulty, just 'tougher' enemies.

    And given the number of people who want nothing to do with PvP, further reductions would be a ifficult pill to swallow.

    At the current numbers PvP might be in 3rd place, but its only 17% of the total vote. That's not even 1/5th of the voters.

    zero money invested in pvp and still has over 400 votes .....how much money was invested in pve and how many votes per $ it got?

    yep thats right ...major pve fail
  • rgzarcherrgzarcher Member Posts: 320 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    sharxtreme wrote: »
    uh-uh. OK so using that logic that 17% of the votes is enough to disregard PvP or remove it from from game, what should we do about Fleet and Foundry which combined don't have 10%?
    Remove that as well?
    You know how much people spent on ships and equipment for PvP in 5 years?
    How many bug reports submitted?
    "Yeah, **** them" "Let's bring back exploration we removed in 1st place because it was most boring part of any game ever" "Q'apla"

    I never said that, what I said is you have to take into account the percentage of votes compared to the number of people in total. You don't outright ignore the wishes of the majority in favor of the minority. Quite a few people find PvP to be the most boring thing in the game ever since you don't actually get anything for it. Its not part of the storyline, it doesn't progress the plot, all it gives is a challenge to those who enjoy that kind of thing and bragging rights.

    If you want to bring into question people who have spent money on this game and why they did, what about all the people who spent money on ships simply because they were canon and they just wanted to have every ship that ever appeared in an episode or movie? The last year or two hasn't seen much in the way of canon ships released in favor of Cryptic created ships.

    And yes, there are people out there who only buy ships that are canon from the shows and movies, and there are people out there plenty POed that while there are tons of ships out there that could be released they aren't, in favor of original creations of Cryptic. There are actually people who play this game for no other reason than to enjoy flying their favorite ships around in missions. These are the same people who reported and have been complaining for years about the Galaxy X Spine Lance being off center, something that hasn't changed for the last what, four years?
    "Why all the sales"?

    And a merry freaking Christmas to you too, Ebenezer.
    -jonsills, 'Cryptic Why the sales..instead of Fixing XP leveling and this game?'
  • rgzarcherrgzarcher Member Posts: 320 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    zero money invested in pvp and still has over 400 votes .....how much money was invested in pve and how many votes per $ it got?

    yep thats right ...major pve fail

    Given that Exploration, Episodes and Foundry have 73.07% of the votes, and none of them have *anything* to do with PvP, I wouldn't call it a PvE fail.
    "Why all the sales"?

    And a merry freaking Christmas to you too, Ebenezer.
    -jonsills, 'Cryptic Why the sales..instead of Fixing XP leveling and this game?'
  • annahannah Member Posts: 201 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    I've never liked PvP, not so much for the concept of it, just that it tends to bring out the worst in people.

    I also don't like PvP when it bleeds into PvE content, a "balance" in pvp almost always tends to affect PvE in some way with a skill being changed.
    Theres been a few games where PvP and PvE was treated completly diffrently. in PvP skill A did X, but in PvE skill A did Y instead.

    PvP is the sole reason that science captains in PvE are next to useless atm, all the "balances" pretty much destroyed it.
  • antoniosalieriantoniosalieri Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    annah wrote: »
    I've never liked PvP, not so much for the concept of it, just that it tends to bring out the worst in people.

    I also don't like PvP when it bleeds into PvE content, a "balance" in pvp almost always tends to affect PvE in some way with a skill being changed.
    Theres been a few games where PvP and PvE was treated completly diffrently. in PvP skill A did X, but in PvE skill A did Y instead.

    PvP is the sole reason that science captains in PvE are next to useless atm, all the "balances" pretty much destroyed it.

    Ummm science is one of the best classes in both PvP and PvE... not sure what game you are playing.

    I mean what balances are you talking about exactly that made science worse... you mean Sensor Ann being added to science ships ? or Particle Manipulator being added to the game ? Or perhaps having things like 20+% increased exotic dmg stuck onto things like Lockbox Universal consoles ?

    Don't make me laugh science has never gotten anything but buffs... really when was Science ever "nerfed" least of all in the name of pvp ?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Dignity and an empty sack is worth the sack.
  • captaintrueheartcaptaintrueheart Member Posts: 296 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    If the Devs sat down and gave PvP a good overhaul by changing mechanics/abilities/balance, would you support it if it helped the PvE meta?

    I wouldn't vote for it in a poll...

    At this point I'm thinking it would benefit everyone if they simply removed PvP from the game. PvP has been laying dead on the table for years, time to bag the body and put it in the ground and move on.

    PvE and PvP mix like oil and water... the player personality types, the abilities, the game systems, none of it seem to go well together. They'd be better off simply making a dedicated PvP game rather than try to shoehorn PvP into this one.
    =/\= ================================= =/\=
    Captain Ariel Trueheart Department of Temporal Investigations
    U.S.S. Valkyrie - NCC 991701
    =/\= ================================= =/\=
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    annah wrote: »
    PvP is the sole reason that science captains in PvE are next to useless atm, all the "balances" pretty much destroyed it.

    Wut?

    Sci is awesome in PvE - Sensor Scan is a huge force multiplier, Scattering Field is great for tanking and support, SciFleet is, again, great for tanking and support, and Photonic Fleet does more damage than some pugs. SNB is admittedly situational.
  • thetaninethetanine Member Posts: 1,367 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    I wouldn't do PvP if you paid me.
    STAR TREK
    lD8xc9e.png
  • annahannah Member Posts: 201 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    Wut?

    Sci is awesome in PvE - Sensor Scan is a huge force multiplier, Scattering Field is great for tanking and support, SciFleet is, again, great for tanking and support, and Photonic Fleet does more damage than some pugs. SNB is admittedly situational.


    Actually.
    SubNucleonic Beam was the only skill Science had going for them, but now anyone can do that with Intel Boff seating.


    There is a mantra. "Anything a Sci can do, a Tact can do better".
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    annah wrote: »
    Actually.
    SubNucleonic Beam was the only skill Science had going for them, but now anyone can do that with Intel Boff seating.


    There is a mantra. "Anything a Sci can do, a Tact can do better".

    What about Sensor Scan/Scatter Field/SciFleet/Photonic Fleet?

    All of those are quite valuable, PvE or PvP.

    Tac is awesome in PvE no doubt. But to say that Sci is useless is incorrect.
  • edited February 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    patrickngo wrote: »
    Two options are better than one. Three options are better than two.

    More options are not necessarily better. Adding the choice of a urinal cake to a fine dining menu does not make the menu better.

    Too many options and you have the paradox of choice, the more choices there are the less you like the one you make.
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • kayajaykayajay Member Posts: 1,990 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    Personally, I use my same build...shields, weapons, consoles etc, on every ship I fly. The only time I change, is when I'm on a ship that can't support cannons. I don't really have the inclination for PvP...because you're almost always up against someone overpowered who just wants to slaughter you, not have an actual battle of wits and skill, which is what I play the game for. I don't just want to blast someone, I want a real game!
  • edited February 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    Isn't the script of PvP either zone in, get vaped, rage quit or wait for noob to zone in, vape noob, laugh?
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • thetaninethetanine Member Posts: 1,367 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    patrickngo I like very much your attitude in the posts here. I hope that STO will make the Trek you like.

    I have to say though, I am a very very very casual player. I have never learned the STF's and I don't even participate in PvE queues much at all. I pretty much follow the story episodes, and do Space combat, that I like. Tau Dewa was my happy hunting ground until I started fighting the Vaadwaar on the ground.

    Long story short...I buy the game packs like LoR and DR...but I don't grind out gear. I love blowing up ships. I can do that all day long, on Normal difficulty, with my fleet gear and story won gear.
    STAR TREK
    lD8xc9e.png
  • notrealednanotrealedna Member Posts: 1,028
    edited February 2015
    thetanine wrote: »
    I wouldn't do PvP if you paid me.


    its funny because the devs are paid and also don't do it.You could be a dev.
    Isn't the script of PvP either zone in, get vaped, rage quit or wait for noob to zone in, vape noob, laugh?


    We asked about 40 billions time for them to nerf that.

    what we got?

    Pve players complaining about nerfs and Geko saying in a podcast "you get vaped because you suck and there are better players outthere" .
  • j0hn41j0hn41 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2015
    I'm not a PvP player so maybe I'm biased, but I'm more in favor of completely separating PvP from PvE.

    I've read posts where people in favor of "balanced" pvp had a big list of conditions. I know PvP balance doesn't mean that to everyone, (or maybe even most players), but there are some who will never be satisfied unless ridiculous conditions are imposed on PvP, (e.g. no traits, blue mk x gear only, etc).

    If players want more restrictions on PvP, then make it totally separate so it doesn't affect PvE at all. Then let the players define what they want to allow and not allow before the match. You know, like switch off traits or auto set gear quality.

    It's what some PvP players seem to have been trying to do on their own, and maybe if Cryptic gave players the ability to customize the matches in this way it would entice people to try it out. Maybe a new meta would arise around various match types. Seems like it would be a lot of work to implement though.

    I'm not sure imposing limitations/adjustments equally to PvP and PvE would at all benefit the PvE meta.
Sign In or Register to comment.