test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
I'd like to see PvP rethought from a fundamental standpoint
mattingly1
Member Posts: 206 Arc User
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that this is the only Star Trek MMORPG we're going to see for the next... decade-ish; that the game has the legs to carry on solidly for a good, long time (and this isn't me wishing ill against the product. Rather, I'm just acknowledging that there will definitely come a point when STO either requires an extremely costly [and complete] refresh, or a successor. It's the nature of the video game beast, and I think we can all agree on that).
If this is the case, I'd like to see Cryptic not sit on their collective hands regarding the sorry state of PvP for that full duration. Rather, I'd like to see something done about it - something tangible.
As things stand, PvP is a bit of a joke. I see people occasionally ask in starbase chat about it, and the responses are almost universally a collective scoff: "this isn't a PvP game," or "do you like dying in 5 seconds?" And, frankly, I don't disagree, because PvP in STO is a meme-build, one-shot, inactive mess dominated by a tiny huddle of players to the exclusion of everyone else.
To an extent, I understand why it got like this: a) Cryptic has neither the time, resources, nor (it can be assumed) patience to reconcile the hundreds of different potential rearrangements of modules, skills and ships against one another to achieve some form of balance. Then there's b): Star Trek was never a universe where such balance existed - the Enterprise-A, B, C, D, etc. were often pitted against foes either dramatically stronger or weaker than they were; there were no grand scales that required evening out. Finally, one must consider that c) the PvP that we have is a result of the game simply being the way it is - governed by battles where overpowered player-controlled ships blitz through the content as fast as possible to move onto whatever is next. So of course the PvP would look like that.
And I accept that - all of it. But I do think that PvP could be rectified by approaching it in a wholly different fashion than has been done. What I mean by that is: Star Trek was really never about combat to begin with - it was about brinksmanship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIFjFF_BzY8
&
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAGGEw4TcFY
So, SO many of the hostile encounters that define Trek over the years weren't dominated by phaser fire, but rather veiled threats, wit, and the very real risk of sparking a war that would endanger whole empires, and billions upon billions of lives. Yet almost none of the content we see in this game even attempts to mirror this - nearly all diplomatic gestures prove futile; either we or the other side always draw first, shoot, and ask questions later.
I think, if Cryptic approached it properly, an RvR layer could be added to the game that reflected Trek's non-open-warfare legacy far better than does current PvP. Competitive scenarios where sides race to accomplish tasks, acquire resources, colonize planets, etc. - all potentially culminating in some kind of a set piece space engagement (not even necessarily a pitched battle) - might not only get a lot more of the playerbase engaged, but would also add some kind of focus to the present endgame (which, I think we can all agree, is a bit barren).
I don't believe people should be forced to fight, but I do think if there was a system developed where they could contribute meaningfully without being one-shotted, and potentially even experience the occasional Trek-like stare-down with an opposing player, it might significantly revitalize not only PvP, but the game experience as a whole. And such a system probably could be developed over the course of, say, a year, provided we were willing to give up on them adding yet another ubiquitous TFO, or time-traveling story arc.
Just food for thought/discussion.
If this is the case, I'd like to see Cryptic not sit on their collective hands regarding the sorry state of PvP for that full duration. Rather, I'd like to see something done about it - something tangible.
As things stand, PvP is a bit of a joke. I see people occasionally ask in starbase chat about it, and the responses are almost universally a collective scoff: "this isn't a PvP game," or "do you like dying in 5 seconds?" And, frankly, I don't disagree, because PvP in STO is a meme-build, one-shot, inactive mess dominated by a tiny huddle of players to the exclusion of everyone else.
To an extent, I understand why it got like this: a) Cryptic has neither the time, resources, nor (it can be assumed) patience to reconcile the hundreds of different potential rearrangements of modules, skills and ships against one another to achieve some form of balance. Then there's b): Star Trek was never a universe where such balance existed - the Enterprise-A, B, C, D, etc. were often pitted against foes either dramatically stronger or weaker than they were; there were no grand scales that required evening out. Finally, one must consider that c) the PvP that we have is a result of the game simply being the way it is - governed by battles where overpowered player-controlled ships blitz through the content as fast as possible to move onto whatever is next. So of course the PvP would look like that.
And I accept that - all of it. But I do think that PvP could be rectified by approaching it in a wholly different fashion than has been done. What I mean by that is: Star Trek was really never about combat to begin with - it was about brinksmanship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIFjFF_BzY8&
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAGGEw4TcFYSo, SO many of the hostile encounters that define Trek over the years weren't dominated by phaser fire, but rather veiled threats, wit, and the very real risk of sparking a war that would endanger whole empires, and billions upon billions of lives. Yet almost none of the content we see in this game even attempts to mirror this - nearly all diplomatic gestures prove futile; either we or the other side always draw first, shoot, and ask questions later.
I think, if Cryptic approached it properly, an RvR layer could be added to the game that reflected Trek's non-open-warfare legacy far better than does current PvP. Competitive scenarios where sides race to accomplish tasks, acquire resources, colonize planets, etc. - all potentially culminating in some kind of a set piece space engagement (not even necessarily a pitched battle) - might not only get a lot more of the playerbase engaged, but would also add some kind of focus to the present endgame (which, I think we can all agree, is a bit barren).
I don't believe people should be forced to fight, but I do think if there was a system developed where they could contribute meaningfully without being one-shotted, and potentially even experience the occasional Trek-like stare-down with an opposing player, it might significantly revitalize not only PvP, but the game experience as a whole. And such a system probably could be developed over the course of, say, a year, provided we were willing to give up on them adding yet another ubiquitous TFO, or time-traveling story arc.
Just food for thought/discussion.
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
That's one of the reasons, but not the main one. The main reason is that most of us do not want to PVP, not as-is and not new and improved. Not at all.
Cryptic is a business and caters the most to those of us who put money into the game. PVE sells, PVP does not. They tried twice, and the majority of us said no thanks, we want PVE content instead.
Note that I said "most of us" not something like "everyone but you": there certainly are people who want better PVP, just like there are people who want a new Exploration system, or the ability to play a merchant, or to fly their ship from the bridge, etc. it's just that there are not enough of them.
It's also not wrong to ask for anything that you want to be done to the game. Don't let my naysaying keep you from making suggestions
Two things (and I am not intending offense, so please don't take it that way): I'm not talking about forcing people into PvP. Rather, the game adopting an RvR system (or something like it) that encourages faction-wide participation in a system that ultimately culminates in some kind of PvP (which, is itself, revamped). In that way, players could participate in a... something - a group objective - that advances the ball, but never forces anyone to pull the trigger against others.
Second, my concern is simply adding a wider array of content to the game that is both a) more reflective of encounters seen in Star Trek (and which we are all a fan of), and b) different from an endless succession of very samey TFOs. I don't hate TFOs - I run like 10-12 daily. But they aren't even remotely dynamic... or particularly challenging/thought provoking. It would be nice to see something done that was different, and rethinking arena-style PvP into something that was less pew-pew, and more chin-cupping and 'hrming' like Trek would be along those lines.
-a narrow choice of a viable builds, that are competitive - you're forced into meta or you may just quit.
-ridiculously high cost of (almost) everything performance related in this game - you have to spend months/years or spend a ton of money, which is hard to justify for a game (and we're talking about hundreds of dollars here, multiple factors over what a full game costs)
-endeavor system - you can fork out all the money and you will still be heavly underpowered, if you happen to just start playing the game. And endeavor system is not something you can backtrack in a few months, you literaly need YEARS to catch up to the veterans and by that time they will still be ahead, because the endeavor system keeps expanding.
So how about they make it like something DOTA used to be - you start a match with standard ships, gear and skills, then you slowly upgrade during the match, based on your combat performance and lucky loot drops. Basicaly just copy the concept and we can start having fun with PVP.
No offense taken. As PVP goes, this idea is much better than ones saying that if things only were balanced better than large numbers of players would suddenly decide that PVP ship combat is fun after all. I think all of the MMOs I've played have had some form of PVP so many people already know whether they like it or not, just like they know whether they like sports games, racing games, fighting games, etc.
One problem I can see is from what Cryptic has said in the past, around 70% of players only want to play some flavor of Starfleet / Federation. Unless that has changed, it can't be Fed vs KDF unless KDF is given a huge handicap.
Another problem is that for the other 30% which includes me (I have several KDF and Romulan captains plus a Jem'Hadar) I don't feel like I belong to only one side or the other. It would feel odd to play one of my Fed captains to increase the Fed influence/control/whatever, then switch to one of my KDF captains and undo all that work. If it isn't Fed vs KDF then how are the teams organized?
To me the idea would work better as PVE -- all players and factions together pushing back some NPC enemy like the Iconians. Some kind of season where half the galaxy is taken over and we return control system by system.
Definitely. In a game like this; in a fandom like this, 'raw' PvP is always going to be of low appeal - even if it's done well (and this isn't). I mean, just for starters, there's a huge cut of fans of Trek who think that the goal should be pacifism. Even if the game isn't about pacifist values; even if the PvE is essentially space world war 8 x 1000, that's the vision we should all be striving for. Then there's another bunch that don't want to be emasculated (or whatever the female equivalent might be?), or simply dislike the tension or personal stakes involved in PvP.
I understand, appreciate, and even partly agree with all those positions - I PvPed a ton in World of Warcraft a long time ago. But as time passed, and the leeway for experimental or fun or unique builds was increasingly restricted (and, frankly, as I aged), I enjoyed it less and less. I'm in my early 40s now, and I'll be the first to admit that the edge has come off a little - I'm going to get dunked on sometimes; more often than I used to. And while I would argue that I fret over simple emasculation less than I once did, I find players boasting or being bad sports simply exhausting. So I am definitely not a member of the PVP AWWWWW YEAAAAAAAAAH faction by any means.
But, for me, the inherent goal of a multiplayer experience is to test myself against the ultimate opposition: the player. Otherwise, I might as well be playing a single-player game. And, to a great deal, I also think that's what a big part of Star Trek is about: personal duels against skilled foes - Kirk vs. Khan; Kirk vs. Chang; Picard vs. Tomalak; Picard vs. the Borg Queen; McCoy vs. Spock; Chekov vs. the USN Police; Scotty vs. the buffet table; everyone vs. the Prime Directive. And those things are completely lacking in STO... which is why I continuously get yanked (mostly unwillingly) back into environments like EVE Online - because I want some form of endgame that isn't a theme park ride.
I'm not by any means speaking for anyone but myself. But I do also believe that I'm not alone in thinking this way. I want more STO hooks in me - not less. And, sadly, whenever I play this game, I start to feel flighty after a few months. Because vs. the computer isn't a test... it's just a chore. And I need more than chores to keep me invested: I need a goal. RvR is one way that games have solved that need for a goal. It might not be the best way, but I'd argue it's better than no way.
So a MOBA.
Yeeeaaa... no. I don't see that working. I've heard horror stories of how toxic LoL can be. Their servers RUN on salt. I admit I've played some Heroes of the Storm, but it was a few years ago.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
Something like that is incredibly hard to add to a game because it depends on a big turnout from the start in order to get enough people to populate two teams within a reasonable timeframe, but as an add-on players tend to take a wait-and-see stance because it is not something they originally came to the game for and frankly does not sound particularly appealing to those who do not care for PvP.
Since there is not that big initial response those TFOs would rarely start and so there was little incentive to even try them, and around and around as it spiraled into obscurity, so even if it is well done and fun (they generally were not great btw) the timing means it never gets a chance to prove itself.
On top of that, STO is a game that attracts a lot of casuals, and they are generally lukewarm about PvP at most, according to studies on gaming and gamers.
Show-based games like STO are a huge draw for roleplayers and others who are interested in it for the emersion and lore along with some combat, tinkering, and puzzle-solving, and not so much simply testing of themselves against other people in an arena (which can be done perfectly well with little or no story content in games that cater to that part of the playerbase).
I don't come to STO to fight other players. Nor any other game.
I played Galaxy Online 2 for years, a dedicate PvP Alliance-based tactical game, and that had always the same nasty, salty, brainless "thugs" (as I eluded too earlier) that literally killed the game, with 16 servers, within 2 years of launch, and those folks would do anything to steal your account, it was that bad. The game ended any chance I will ever had of ever playing PvP again. The drama alone was enough to turn you gray. I don't even play Halo PvP anymore
The response to the Competitive TFO's was overwhelmingly positive. I did literally hundreds and hundreds of them and most people I know did as well. For quite a few players a little challenge provides them with the sort of pleasant immersion that others might get from a successful operation in the tailor. I guess we're looking at the game through different coloured glasses. Each to their own.
The larger question for me is what is this thread really about ? The OP is all over the place. No idea if it's some strange exercise in role playing or what.
Why did you find it necessary to take a personal swipe against me? Everyone else is being civil - is it too much to ask that you not demean my suggestions by framing them as lunatic ravings? Thanks.
Our recollections of the response to Competitive TFOs are quite different. I recall it as: people tried it, the majority decided it wasn't fun.
Both our views are subjective and anecdotal of course, so neither is "proof."
That wasn't a personal swipe. I stated an honest opinion.
I'll try again..
It's certainly makes me wince to see yet another (potentially inaccurate) rehash of all the usual issues made by those who have no interest in them to the point of active dislike, all triggered by an OP who is difficult to understand.
Sorry if you got caught in the middle. Certain aspects of gameplay are just as important to some as the tailor and pew pew is to others.
The reason I wasn't more concrete in the OP is simply because I'm not being paid to be. Game design - inventing and implementing rulesets - is challenging stuff. As a player, the most I can do 'off the clock' is say something to the effect of "the current system is not great, and doesn't even reflect what conflict in Star Trek looks like most of the time." I can't do better than that without knowing the ins and outs of the code, and spending weeks or even months hacking away at the idea of what a replacement system could look like.
But I guess, so some extent, even that's a cop-out. Certainly, other people in other games have written up veritable essays or even dissertations in their proposals to fix certain systems (all of which usually go ignored by the powers that be). I'm just not that guy - I don't have the time or patience, and I'm frankly not physically well enough to contemplate such a task. All I can say is: I'm not a hardcore PvPer; I like some PvP; I like systems that encourage wider participation; and, lastly, the PvP we've got doesn't really look like the cerebral chess-matches that Trek is famous for. If the game is going to be around a lot longer, I'd like to see them try again.
IMO Competitive had one major problem. Core Assault had DIRECT PvP involved. I enjoyed Twin Tribulations just fine. But Core Assault was more popular apparently. And I had a BAD experience in that one where the other team decided to just gank my team repeatedly without us even having a chance to get out into that area. It was dang near spawn camping.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
I appreciate the clarification. Thank you. I'm also a player who looks for additional challenge at times, just for fun.
I've always tried to be an advocate for the game appealing to as diverse an audience as possible. Things that encourage wider participation from a variety of players certainly have my vote.
In most games, generally speaking, the lazy and the unwilling-to-learn players die in few seconds, lets be honest. I think it makes sense to first learn a thing or two about pvp before making strange complains about the state of the game which ain't even true.
While it is true that PvP can use some love and little balancing/tweaks, miraculously for the most it ts very balanced while offering great dept, great learning curve and the best part is, starting from absolute zero, if rightly guided you can build a very respectable and capable ship on a F2P account, for about 6-10 months (its an MMO and it takes some grinding).
If you really wanted to PvP, you should have asked whoever was offering help instead of ridiculing him, actually i know who that is and he is a friend of mine, together with few others he has build quite the community on discord (fed side) and helped manyplayers build good PvP ships with some progressing very fast to the top in no time.
But if people are uninterested, lazy and unwilling-to-learn, no system change will help them not die in 5 seconds, they will be the food in every system. Suppose Cryptic pull out the resources and creates an entirely new pvp systems, don't you think the same people who have advantage over you now, wouldn't find what work and what not, use the system in a way the devs never imagined AND AGAIN have the advantage over you in that new system ? You are not fixing the problem, only moving it a forward a step just to face it again, not to mention its going to be expensive and unrealistic thing to do.
Seriously? The old egocentric "lazy and unwilling to learn" fallacy?
People play games for many reasons, not all of them go to MMOs to compete with others. Some mainly come to roleplay (and Space Barbie is a form of roleplay, text RP is not the only way), to do creative things like character modeling and costuming and like to show off their creations (while Second Life is the ultimate for that, most games have at least a little of it, and STO is one of the better ones in that regard), some come for the teamwork aspect (which can be done PvP or PvE just as well), some for economic challenges (marketplace etc.), and some actually use gaming as a kind of relaxation (like blowing off steam), and there are a lot more reasons.
The fact that a lot of players focus on things other than DPS does not make them "lazy and unwilling to learn", it just means that they are interested in a different aspect of the game. In fact, industry trend analysis has shown that casual players are the fastest expanding category and have considerably outnumbered the more hardcore players (which serious PvPers typically are) since around 2016.
Also, a lot of players are tired of PvP from too long exposure to exceptionally toxic PvP environments, and those players tend to migrate to storyline-based games like STO.
In my case, I used to play APB:Reloaded back when it was at its worst, and it was common for immature self-absorbed players to shoot their own teammates in the back to improve their kill/death ratio and other, similar BS. Even the forum for the game was toxic, with the community managers and devs replying to proposals to fix the backstabbing and rampant pay-to-win problems in the game with things like "git gud or git out loser!" and other useless nonsense.
I have heard that it is not that bad anymore, but I have no interest in it anymore and so have not bothered going back, and it just soured PvP for me in general. Just start talking about PvP in ESD and you will hear a lot of those kinds of experiences, and people saying they came to STO to get away from that kind of toxicity in various games and immerse themselves in Star Trek lore and (mostly) good story -based adventures instead.
Everyone for darn close to 12 years that PvPs has been asking for Cryptic to make changes. Early on that did happen. The game has Hazard emitters, and team debuff clears because one dev ages ago now did make some fundamental system changes to benefit PvP. (and they improved the entire game)
The only real fix is to remove the PvE systems from PvP completely. Many people have been asking for a Guild Wars style PvP in STO For years. Yes we should have a PvP ship doll... that only accepts PvP gear which everyone should have free = access too. Skills should be limited to a specific number by ship type... ship/personal/reputation traits should have a hard limit of 50% or so, and a few of those traits should have a PvP * added to them that reduces effectiveness or in some cases actually on PvP maps does something completely different and less game breaking.
This game could be esport worthy if they did all of that.
However even if that was implemented... understand that the 5s to death, and PvP is unfair don't bother stuff would still exist. The truth is to do well in PvP you need to think about a PvP build you have to work as a team and frankly you need to have reflexes and fast thinking. As someone who has PvPed since launch... I can tell you that way way back when everyone did have = gear, ship and weapon sets didn't exist yet, no lockboxes, no promo ships, no hundreds of dollars of P2W traits and clicks... and Green weapons did almost the exact same DPS as purples. Some of us would PvP in low tier ships with white gear as the tears where sweeter. My only point is the most skilled PvPers are still going to wipe the floor with a STO new(ish) player (or new to PvP). They will however have the same chance to succeed... and if they take the time to learn the game can compete. If they where to make a PvE P2W free PvP mode... at least new players could jump in without being told in order to compete you have $600 worth of gear and traits to purchase on top of actually learning how to play. (The most painful thing for PvE players that have been around for years is to be told... no no all those traits you bought to own the NPCs suck in PvP you need X Y and Z lockbox ship for traits and you want X Y and Z personal traits ya they are pointless in PvE but are Uber in PvP)
i agree, it's reached the point where the gap is just too large to be closed normally. there needs to be free options (or at least very, very cheap) for newer pvpers, and for all pvpers just to try out new stuff. i know making money is the main goal for the company here though, so i think the best way to go is to have free versions that are slightly less powerful of all the ships and traits when they come out, for pvp. this will allow newer pvpers to compete with the pros more, and allow pros to have fun trying out new builds. and when a player finds something they really like, they can start putting resources into the slightly better versions of those skills and ships in order to maximize their potential. maybe even just take out the whole endeavor bonuses for pvp too. when you're starting out and vs ppl that have near maxed all their space endeavors, well the bonuses are so large that this alone makes a huge imbalance between the new players and the pros. they need to focus on helping the newer pvpers more, not making the pros that have everything even stronger and widening the gap even more.
My suggestion would be to just make the ships we fly skins. Have ship classes. Escort, Destroyer, Science ship, Science Dread, Raider, Scout, Cruiser, Dreadnaught Cruiser, Carrier, Escort Carrier.
That is is.
Take every ship in game and create a PvP doll for it that has that skin but the traits/seating/stats from those classes while on a PvP map. Yes it would mean every science ship was exactly the same in PvP. But it is also the only way to balance things properly. You can't have 100 different ship layouts. You can make a dread version that has less turn perhaps a bit more engi seating and more hull. You can take the Scout class and make it the zipper sci ship version with the stat trade off to go with that.
This would allow new players to jump in... old players to enjoy all their cool ship skins. Also would still give people that mainly love PvP reasons to buy the latest greatest ship even if its just a skin in PvP.
As for making money... Crytpic would be surprised how much more money they would make if they managed a Esport worthy title within STO. The PvP players that would be attracted would stick around for the rest and spend money there. Having said that there are plenty of ways to monotonize PvP without selling power. PvP vanity shields would be one way... make a PvP ship doll vanity shield slot. Early in the game we got a space fire work device. I know it sounds silly but add PvP usable firework devices that pop thumbs up, thumbs down in space and the like. In other PvP games plenty of people buy such things... gotta love getting killed and having someone plant a cow flag on your corpse. lol
On the idea of visuals... PvP gear can also be monotonized. Just give everyone standard white grade Red Phasers by default. Then add a PvP Weapon visual slot. Sell the entire games weapon color selection as sortable PvP visual devices. Shotting the same guns as everyone else but if you want purple you spend 2-5 bucks and buy the visual device.
EA tried to focus on E-Sports with C&C4. It didn't go so well.
Seems the more successful games in E-Sports... are the ones that just kinda fall into it on their own. Not ones that try and force it. Games like StarCraft never built for E-Sports. They just kinda fell into it and were successful. It was not a primary focus.
normal text = me speaking as fellow formite
colored text = mod mode
STO would never fit the bill for Esports as there is extreme little skill involved.
You clearly never PvPed back when the game was in its early years. Yes there are 1001 save yourself clicks and worse auto procs at this point. There are synergies with traits and gear that make specific PvP builds unkillable by your standard PvE build.
There was a time however when that was not the case... it was almost two years into the game before we even got the first gear set. PvP in the early days ended up having a very solid team dynamic that got lost along the way with all the gear traits reputation grinds doffs bridge officer traits and all the rest of the PvE shlock.
Starcraft also had strong competitive PvP element via the multiplayer "melee" maps, that use essentially the same mechanics as the PvE story campaign, so there was no major conflict with PvE and PvP mechanics.
I've been playing since 2011, and I PvP'd a few times back then. Still little skill was involved as all you need to do, even back then, was google.