The DPS has got silly now, the Ques badly need a once over and the Enemys certainly need to be boosted once more.
To get the Ques buzzing they should pick one Que a week that offers somthing really worth it, this would get even Ques that arent touched at all played once more but Cryptic dont seem bothered so hayho.
Seeing as people absolutely don't want to narrow the dps gap, how about an alternative solution: Team composition!
I had proposed this before: Have the game assign each build a "battle value" (BV). Add up the BV of each team member and compare it to a target BV for a given mission. Then define the difficulty (and thus rewards) of the mission according to that comparison.
(BV numbers can and should be fudged to give highly-geared players a slight edge, so as to encourage sales.)
Then open up the queues to teams of any size and assign player teams according to their chosen BV and desired difficulty level.
That way, I think, everybody could keep their cake and eat it at the same time.
Would this not handicap new characters which are playing queues for marks and elite marks to gather gear?
This also brings forth the question on how to determine the BV
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
Seeing as people absolutely don't want to narrow the dps gap, how about an alternative solution: Team composition!
I had proposed this before: Have the game assign each build a "battle value" (BV). Add up the BV of each team member and compare it to a target BV for a given mission. Then define the difficulty (and thus rewards) of the mission according to that comparison.
(BV numbers can and should be fudged to give highly-geared players a slight edge, so as to encourage sales.)
Then open up the queues to teams of any size and assign player teams according to their chosen BV and desired difficulty level.
That way, I think, everybody could keep their cake and eat it at the same time.
Would this not handicap new characters which are playing queues for marks and elite marks to gather gear?
This also brings forth the question on how to determine the BV
Probably not. You can get in the 30k range easily with gear from mission rewards, no fleet items or rep gear.
No, there may be some issues with that, but the devs should work on several other things first.
Not that easily or the gap would not be this wide. That's a discussion for another time though.
Getting back on track: how would the BV be determined.
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
Not that easily or the gap would not be this wide.
Just saying... it's not a gear issue. If they can't hit "Advanced" levels of power through the new (and pretty good) mission rewards then they probably won't with rep gear either.
As I wrote above, I would favor a performance-based assessment of the BV.
And quite the contrary, new players would find it easier to earn marks, because their gear would matter less than now. Worse gear -> lower BV, so more room for other players with higher BV in the team.
With the daily rewards, players can earn marks pretty easily. To get rep gear though, they need to either double the amount of time they spend getting those marks on Normal, or start running advanced, to get the things like probes, and ancient power cells.
As I wrote above, I would favor a performance-based assessment of the BV.
And quite the contrary, new players would find it easier to earn marks, because their gear would matter less than now. Worse gear -> lower BV, so more room for other players with higher BV in the team.
With the daily rewards, players can earn marks pretty easily. To get rep gear though, they need to either double the amount of time they spend getting those marks on Normal, or start running advanced, to get the things like probes, and ancient power cells.
Not to mention being stuck in a limbo where everything is so easy there is no prospect for learning. Not to mention that separating starting and veteran players will deny those starting players opportunities to learn.
The more i think about using a Battle Value as a way to detmine what queues are available, the more i am convinced it is a bad idea.
E.g. how is performance measured? Solely DPS or is providing team healing and crowd control also factored in. Players who focus on spike damage may be stuck at lower difficulty while they are often those who decide if optionals are met or not.
Edit: met, not meat. Typo deluxe
Post edited by questerius on
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
wouldn't it be fun if you'd have to EARN a place in advanced PvEs? Like you do one ISN and do over 10k damage and get an acco that unlocks advanced...:)
18 characters
KDF: 2 tacs, 2 engs, 3 scis
KDF Roms: 3 tacs, 1 eng, 1 scis
FED: 2 tacs, 1 eng, 2 scis
TOS: 1 tac
all on T5 rep (up to temporal)
all have mastered Intel tree (and some more specs Points)
highest DPS: 60.982
Huh? How is a thread proposing a BV system a duplicate of a poll asking about opinions on wether the DPS gap should be narrowed down?
It's part of this topic and this discussion. We can discuss its details and merits perfectly fine right here. And the devs and CM will see it just fine. No need to worry about it. If it's a great idea it will get the attention of the people who can implement it. So let's just focus on discussing it here, in the proper thread and proper context. That's pretty much the core of the forum activity that the CMs and Volunteer Mods do here. A lot of forum cleanup is designed to streamline discussions to make it easier for the information to get to the people at Cryptic.
Now I don't want to skirt the policy on discussing moderation, so I'm just going to stop there, as the only point I'm trying to make is the overall idea of why the forums work better with less topics is that some CMs have pointed out that their collection of feedback works far better that way. So let's help Cryptic get the feedback you want to give them by trying to do it the way they suggest?
No, this is not important enough to require developer attention
That would be interesting, but since DPS can be significantly impacted by team composition, I think it would difficult to find the "sweet spot" that would qualify you for the next difficulty level. I think this would need to be a solo event to determine what you can bring to the table sans team buffs. Not that this would be the perfect solution, but I think it would be the most realistic. Even if you put some sort of success % requirement, a good team could easily carry a bad player through.
No, there may be some issues with that, but the devs should work on several other things first.
I am against using DPS as a metric for unlocking higher difficulty ratings. I'd prefer a system tied to accolades. That system already exists and can track your accomplishments in the game.
Maybe make it 10 consecutive completions of Normal with all optionals successful to unlock Advanced then 15 consecutive completions with all optionals successful in advanced to unlock Elites. If tracking consecutive completions is not possible then just increase the number of successes before unlocking the next level. I think the accolades system can handle that.
IMO map knowledge should trump DPS. All that DPS would be useless if directed towards the wrong targets. I've had ISAs with people at least 15k fail because they were flying like headless chickens.
I am against using DPS as a metric for unlocking higher difficulty ratings. I'd prefer a system tied to accolades. That system already exists and can track your accomplishments in the game.
Maybe make it 10 consecutive completions of Normal with all optionals successful to unlock Advanced then 15 consecutive completions with all optionals successful in advanced to unlock Elites. If tracking consecutive completions is not possible then just increase the number of successes before unlocking the next level. I think the accolades system can handle that.
IMO map knowledge should trump DPS. All that DPS would be useless if directed towards the wrong targets. I've had ISAs with people at least 15k fail because they were flying like headless chickens.
The accolade system should be able to handle something like this right? I know I just got an accolade for 100 completions of one of the Omega Rep maps. I wasn't really paying attention to it, but this discussion jogged my memory of that.
Maybe make it 10 consecutive completions of Normal with all optionals successful to unlock Advanced then 15 consecutive completions with all optionals successful in advanced to unlock Elites.
The accolade system should be able to handle something like this right? I know I just got an accolade for 100 completions of one of the Omega Rep maps. I wasn't really paying attention to it, but this discussion jogged my memory of that.
The question is: What is that accolade actually saying?
If it is just counting the number of times you completed a mission....I don't think that is what people want in STFs.
Because the knowledge needed is HOW did people finish "Normal" STFs 10 times? Were they actively participating and learning it? Did they lean on the team 10 times? Or AFK 10 times? All of these would still count as finished 10 times for an Accolade count.
"Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
Maybe make it 10 consecutive completions of Normal with all optionals successful to unlock Advanced then 15 consecutive completions with all optionals successful in advanced to unlock Elites.
The accolade system should be able to handle something like this right? I know I just got an accolade for 100 completions of one of the Omega Rep maps. I wasn't really paying attention to it, but this discussion jogged my memory of that.
The question is: What is that accolade actually saying?
If it is just counting the number of times you completed a mission....I don't think that is what people want in STFs.
Because the knowledge needed is HOW did people finish "Normal" STFs 10 times? Were they actively participating and learning it? Did they lean on the team 10 times? Or AFK 10 times? All of these would still count as finished 10 times for an Accolade count.
True. I'll say in the example of me, I've been doing the Omega Rep STFs for ever and ever. I used to do them with a coordinated fleet group that ran them and taught us all how to run them back when they were the ultimate end-game missions. So for me, the accolade caught me off guard as I never even thought about how many times I'd done the individual maps.
But overall I get what you're saying. I still get twitchy on the maps when people pretty much use their super powerful AOE DPS to bully (or faceroll as people call it) the NPCs and don't use the tactics I was trained to use. Heh. That's on me. I get that it's never been a problem in the current state of the game but the voice in my head screams out "Don't aggro the cube" on the cure space map, and "Don't shoot the gateway" even though I just read about gate doping. lol
No, there may be some issues with that, but the devs should work on several other things first.
> Because the knowledge needed is HOW did people finish "Normal" STFs 10 times? Were they actively participating and learning it?
That's why I proposed to make it consecutive if possible. That eliminates lucking out on teams helping you.
If you want to make it even more difficult then maybe make qualifying available only on public queues then add a nice reward package (similar to what you get on completing a rep) when you unlock a new difficulty for that map.
Who knows, maybe that'll breathe new life to the queues.
> That's why I proposed to make it consecutive if possible. That eliminates lucking out on teams helping you.
You can still "be carried" 10 times.
There may even be Fleets who create teams who would do it for their own rewards (as in someone pay us, we will take you through 10 times guarantee a pass)....or just to get their members to the next level.
So, what? Keep adding to the exclusionary criteria? It would take too much oversight. We could be doing this forever trying to figure out ways people could "game" this system.
And they would do it too.
I was reading in the other thread: reason why some rewards were removed from PvP was because people would just let other fleet/team members kill them one after the other to get "the numbers" and then rotate who received the rewards, and run it, again.
If you want to make it even more difficult then maybe make qualifying available only on public queues then add a nice reward package (similar to what you get on completing a rep) when you unlock a new difficulty for that map.
Who knows, maybe that'll breathe new life to the queues.
Of course, a reward package would help the queues. Look at the "Events"....they always attract.
I don't know if they could add it to PUGs and not add it to private runs...etc. I mean, how separated are they?
They just have to place prizes carefully. And these "Events" based on repeating queued mission may be the way they decided to do it.
I don't know if those dilithium-free Upgrade chits or more Specialization points would work for a daily prize to attract people to do queues. After all, upgrading gear and filling up Specialization really helps with getting STFs done, too. Especially, after someone has already "bought" everything in a rep store.
But will it be enough to get people BACK to the queues on a regular basis?
I mean, what happens when : everyone has finished upgrading and all specializations?
"Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
The DPS has got silly now, the Ques badly need a once over and the Enemys certainly need to be boosted once more.
To get the Ques buzzing they should pick one Que a week that offers somthing really worth it, this would get even Ques that arent touched at all played once more but Cryptic dont seem bothered so hayho.
Enemies do not need to be buffed again, we just need true elite level queues for all maps. Buffing advanced level content in response to the power creep they gave us is insane and will just hurt newer and casual level players. I have no doubt that there will be a balance pass done on the skill system, basically nerfing us from the god mode we currently have.
Make the elites hard, the way they are suppose to be. The way HSE was prior to it getting nerfed. They are intended to take an elite team that is prepared for the content, something I think the OP didn't quite realize when he started complaining that HSE was too easy with a team that basically does it for a living. In that run, I am sure he was a spectator and did not understand how OP team play can be. I felt bad for those guys with the HSE nerf, I know they loved the old version and it was always interesting to see different strategies discussed prior to running or in the postmortem.
As many have stated, he needs to get teamed up with like minded individuals and take on challenging content that is a bit above his skill level. At this point I am not sure if he is too lazy to find these people, or if they just refuse to hang out with him and his mentality of always having to be right no matter what the facts and overwhelming opinion say.
@OP Constantly complaining that the queues do not give a perfect experience tailored to your very narrow set of wishes just annoys everyone, especially those crucial few that share some of the same opinions as you. They see you as a poor voice to get their opinions across in any meaningful way. Shooting yourself in the foot by being so insufferable is not the way to get things changed for the better, just the optimal way to be avoided like the plague.
No, this is not important enough to require developer attention
We could add another layer even to the suggestion. Bring back elites. AND then create Nightmare Mode (or whatever they want to call it). Where all the odds are stacked in the NPCs' favor. Rules are broken. And everything is designed to make it nigh impossible for the players.
That might be fun.
(And THEN bring back my favorite map, No Win Scenario ... NIGHTMARE NO WIN! Wow that might be awesome).
the queues need to be gated based on average DPS over, say 90 days. if you are 1-5K then you are grouped with others who are doing 1-5 k and the NPCS adjusted. 5-10 10-35 and 35+ from there
We could add another layer even to the suggestion. Bring back elites. AND then create Nightmare Mode (or whatever they want to call it). Where all the odds are stacked in the NPCs' favor. Rules are broken. And everything is designed to make it nigh impossible for the players.
That might be fun.
(And THEN bring back my favorite map, No Win Scenario ... NIGHTMARE NO WIN! Wow that might be awesome).
While it would certainly be an interesting challenge, I am trying to pick some low hanging fruit here. The Pareto principle seems to apply where you get a disproportionately large benefit by fixing a relatively small number of specific problems. Asking the devs to create an additional set of pve queues above elite would be considered a stretch goal.
Comments
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Or in the interim, fix the lag so that the people who normally run in premades would leave the PUGs at peace.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
To get the Ques buzzing they should pick one Que a week that offers somthing really worth it, this would get even Ques that arent touched at all played once more but Cryptic dont seem bothered so hayho.
Would this not handicap new characters which are playing queues for marks and elite marks to gather gear?
This also brings forth the question on how to determine the BV
Probably not. You can get in the 30k range easily with gear from mission rewards, no fleet items or rep gear.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Getting back on track: how would the BV be determined.
Just saying... it's not a gear issue. If they can't hit "Advanced" levels of power through the new (and pretty good) mission rewards then they probably won't with rep gear either.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
With the daily rewards, players can earn marks pretty easily. To get rep gear though, they need to either double the amount of time they spend getting those marks on Normal, or start running advanced, to get the things like probes, and ancient power cells.
Not to mention being stuck in a limbo where everything is so easy there is no prospect for learning. Not to mention that separating starting and veteran players will deny those starting players opportunities to learn.
The more i think about using a Battle Value as a way to detmine what queues are available, the more i am convinced it is a bad idea.
E.g. how is performance measured? Solely DPS or is providing team healing and crowd control also factored in. Players who focus on spike damage may be stuck at lower difficulty while they are often those who decide if optionals are met or not.
Edit: met, not meat. Typo deluxe
You have already had duplicate threads locked because it violates forum policy.
Now you're trying to circumvent that policy by asking others to do it for you. I took the liberty of pointing this out to the forum mods.
you're welcome.
KDF: 2 tacs, 2 engs, 3 scis
KDF Roms: 3 tacs, 1 eng, 1 scis
FED: 2 tacs, 1 eng, 2 scis
TOS: 1 tac
all on T5 rep (up to temporal)
all have mastered Intel tree (and some more specs Points)
highest DPS: 60.982
It's part of this topic and this discussion. We can discuss its details and merits perfectly fine right here. And the devs and CM will see it just fine. No need to worry about it. If it's a great idea it will get the attention of the people who can implement it. So let's just focus on discussing it here, in the proper thread and proper context. That's pretty much the core of the forum activity that the CMs and Volunteer Mods do here. A lot of forum cleanup is designed to streamline discussions to make it easier for the information to get to the people at Cryptic.
Now I don't want to skirt the policy on discussing moderation, so I'm just going to stop there, as the only point I'm trying to make is the overall idea of why the forums work better with less topics is that some CMs have pointed out that their collection of feedback works far better that way. So let's help Cryptic get the feedback you want to give them by trying to do it the way they suggest?
Maybe make it 10 consecutive completions of Normal with all optionals successful to unlock Advanced then 15 consecutive completions with all optionals successful in advanced to unlock Elites. If tracking consecutive completions is not possible then just increase the number of successes before unlocking the next level. I think the accolades system can handle that.
IMO map knowledge should trump DPS. All that DPS would be useless if directed towards the wrong targets. I've had ISAs with people at least 15k fail because they were flying like headless chickens.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
The accolade system should be able to handle something like this right? I know I just got an accolade for 100 completions of one of the Omega Rep maps. I wasn't really paying attention to it, but this discussion jogged my memory of that.
The question is: What is that accolade actually saying?
If it is just counting the number of times you completed a mission....I don't think that is what people want in STFs.
Because the knowledge needed is HOW did people finish "Normal" STFs 10 times? Were they actively participating and learning it? Did they lean on the team 10 times? Or AFK 10 times? All of these would still count as finished 10 times for an Accolade count.
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
True. I'll say in the example of me, I've been doing the Omega Rep STFs for ever and ever. I used to do them with a coordinated fleet group that ran them and taught us all how to run them back when they were the ultimate end-game missions. So for me, the accolade caught me off guard as I never even thought about how many times I'd done the individual maps.
But overall I get what you're saying. I still get twitchy on the maps when people pretty much use their super powerful AOE DPS to bully (or faceroll as people call it) the NPCs and don't use the tactics I was trained to use. Heh. That's on me. I get that it's never been a problem in the current state of the game but the voice in my head screams out "Don't aggro the cube" on the cure space map, and "Don't shoot the gateway" even though I just read about gate doping. lol
That's why I proposed to make it consecutive if possible. That eliminates lucking out on teams helping you.
If you want to make it even more difficult then maybe make qualifying available only on public queues then add a nice reward package (similar to what you get on completing a rep) when you unlock a new difficulty for that map.
Who knows, maybe that'll breathe new life to the queues.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
You can still "be carried" 10 times.
There may even be Fleets who create teams who would do it for their own rewards (as in someone pay us, we will take you through 10 times guarantee a pass)....or just to get their members to the next level.
So, what? Keep adding to the exclusionary criteria? It would take too much oversight. We could be doing this forever trying to figure out ways people could "game" this system.
And they would do it too.
I was reading in the other thread: reason why some rewards were removed from PvP was because people would just let other fleet/team members kill them one after the other to get "the numbers" and then rotate who received the rewards, and run it, again.
Of course, a reward package would help the queues. Look at the "Events"....they always attract.
I don't know if they could add it to PUGs and not add it to private runs...etc. I mean, how separated are they?
They just have to place prizes carefully. And these "Events" based on repeating queued mission may be the way they decided to do it.
I don't know if those dilithium-free Upgrade chits or more Specialization points would work for a daily prize to attract people to do queues. After all, upgrading gear and filling up Specialization really helps with getting STFs done, too. Especially, after someone has already "bought" everything in a rep store.
But will it be enough to get people BACK to the queues on a regular basis?
I mean, what happens when : everyone has finished upgrading and all specializations?
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
Enemies do not need to be buffed again, we just need true elite level queues for all maps. Buffing advanced level content in response to the power creep they gave us is insane and will just hurt newer and casual level players. I have no doubt that there will be a balance pass done on the skill system, basically nerfing us from the god mode we currently have.
Make the elites hard, the way they are suppose to be. The way HSE was prior to it getting nerfed. They are intended to take an elite team that is prepared for the content, something I think the OP didn't quite realize when he started complaining that HSE was too easy with a team that basically does it for a living. In that run, I am sure he was a spectator and did not understand how OP team play can be. I felt bad for those guys with the HSE nerf, I know they loved the old version and it was always interesting to see different strategies discussed prior to running or in the postmortem.
As many have stated, he needs to get teamed up with like minded individuals and take on challenging content that is a bit above his skill level. At this point I am not sure if he is too lazy to find these people, or if they just refuse to hang out with him and his mentality of always having to be right no matter what the facts and overwhelming opinion say.
@OP Constantly complaining that the queues do not give a perfect experience tailored to your very narrow set of wishes just annoys everyone, especially those crucial few that share some of the same opinions as you. They see you as a poor voice to get their opinions across in any meaningful way. Shooting yourself in the foot by being so insufferable is not the way to get things changed for the better, just the optimal way to be avoided like the plague.
That might be fun.
(And THEN bring back my favorite map, No Win Scenario ... NIGHTMARE NO WIN! Wow that might be awesome).
While it would certainly be an interesting challenge, I am trying to pick some low hanging fruit here. The Pareto principle seems to apply where you get a disproportionately large benefit by fixing a relatively small number of specific problems. Asking the devs to create an additional set of pve queues above elite would be considered a stretch goal.