Pilot Archive
Thread: PvP Zone, The Way It Should Be.
1st_Viduus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:59 am
#14
Innkeepertsys wrote:
Fix it so that it isn't 2-3 shot kills.
I'm sure mine is a minority opinion, but ...
Reducing damage may improve game play, but it will also reduce realism. I always supported realism over game play. Although, I wish we could have both. Rather than nerf space combat, I'd like to see some realistic damage in the ground game too.
So, I'm against nerfing space damage. Keep it realistic.
Which Realism do you mean?
The one where all the ships in the movies die in 2-3 shots except "the heroes", or the one where the heroes can take 4 shots in the back end when they have all shields forward, and all the firepower from the HUGE surface guns on the deathstar couldn't penetrate those very shields that were absent in the rear?
I'd settle for a happy medium.
1st_Viduus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:36 am
#15
Innkeepertsys wrote:
I thought of an example last night. You know how you "Land" your ship at Theed.If you buy a ticket to Bestine, and then try to use the terminal to "Launch" your ship into space, it tells you that your ship is in Theed where you left it. It doesn't magically follow you in the shuttle to Bestine. That's realistic. Unlike the way our speeders function. Park it in Mos Eisley, shuttle to Lok, and pull the speeder out of your *cough* datapad. I've got a Bantha in my datapad. Where exactly does that Bantha go when I store it? That's a reality breaker.
It may be more playable to be able to launchyour ship into space from any port anywhere anytime. But it isn't as realistic. This is my idea of how realism would trump playability.
Good post, but I think it fell into the wrong thread....
Duy
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:55 am
#16
It seemsno one is better than the equipment, which doesn't sound right for the first person shooter style of jtl.
The tier system of pilot is the same as the role playing of the ground game. Why? There is not aiming bonus for tiers, no defense bonus for tiers, no damage mitigation or blocking ability. Why is there still never ending gains in weapon strength?
What would2 lvls of weapons do to pvp?
1. Make you out fly someone with the safety net of mass bonuses (shields and armor)
2. Number of cannons. 4 vs 2
DragonSnack
Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:05 am
#17
Great idae!
This would give me a chance to learn to fly and to compete or not whlile I am learning.
NightGun
Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:26 am
#18
I think yet SOE may be acting to quickly to favor a damage reduction personally I would rather just see them balance the PVE and PVP to be about the same. Of course piolts in PVP will be better but come on the weapons and shield damage should all be the same. If currently the weapons for PVE are dumbed down then they should just plain dumb down all the numbers on all weapons (I think this is not the correct answers since I think that would be overkill but I am not sure currently it seems like it would take darn near forever for me to die from some of the low teired fighters). They need to anylaze the data and balance the weapons and armor/shields so that they can get the effect they want.
Maybe allow heavier shileds (But increase the mass so they only fit on heavier chaisis) Don't actually limit them hey if you want to fly a fighter with great shields and nothing else your choice just make the mass differnce enough that not all ships can be equiped equally.
Make the equipment balance out better as well allow SW's to create equipment with three different focuses (Light = low mass and manuverable, Medium = Balnce wieght and effective ness, Heavy = don't worry about the weight just make it strong)
The biggest problem I hear about right now is the ships seem to have no class differnce even though it is clearly stated their should be. Light fighters may need to have Mass lowered while some of the Heavy fighters have it increased. And I would say that MP ships should have very high mass but a lot less manuverablity by default (This should be able to be adjusted greatly by the engine and components used). MP ships may even have the ability to equip multiple enginges reactors and shields to although mass should be rated such that they are limited in what they do.
Theonlyfox
Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:38 am
#19
I agree that load ganking needs to be fixed and the damage in PvP needs to be slightly adjusted. However, I like the idea of NPC's in the PvP area as it confuses the battlefield somewhat and adds a rouge element to any strategy you come up with. Can you imagine a group of 10 imps flying into a group of 12 rebels.... what better strategy to call in a bomber strike and increase your numbers from 10 to 30. The rebs counter with eshields and make a B line to the nearest group of rebel NPC's and hopefully a gunboat to help counter the extra numbers. NPC's still play a role in PvP.
I like the idea of the safezone that you can re-enter once youve left.... but Im not sure how practical it would be for the devs to program this. It was asked for numberous times in Beta and now that JTL is live they appear to have shifted their focus fully to the combat balance. Sadly it will be atleast 5 weeks before we see any changes of this sort. For the time being we can expect bandaids like Kessle now going only PvE, and across the board PvP reduction of 75% and things of this nature.
Duy
Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:46 am
#20
The current tier system works well to reward duration of play, but has not created a place PVP location for the "little people".
It seemsno one is better than the equipment, which doesn't sound right for the first person shooter style of jtl.
This may be that the devs want to keep the skill in the toon and strip it from the player; keep the mmorpg status of the expansion alive for those who don't like fps. But in scrapping the attack command, we now have a hybrid of the 2 styles. It seems this is a root of many complaints, but may be the key to setting up 2 zones that work for PVP.
The tier systemdoes well toreward those whoplay longer. Better ships, more missle hits, more special computer commands because of ship knowledge, but a mmorpg style ofweaopon strenghtthat is extremly unrealistic because it is not toon based. It has been said that rational people live in the margines. That would qualify weapon lvl rewards as unrational since the toons are not firing. If it were them, then these levels would make sense to augment the hit/miss ratio of the ground game system. Yet this ratio is taken out of the game in jtl for PVP and PVE (emphasis on P, not E).
Built into the ship styles are advantages thatcan be used to win against lower tiers, whereas the ground game says if your toon sucks, all you can do about it is grind.Example,tie fighters have lower mass, so load them withyour big gun, fast engines, and dodge, whereasx-wings are slower, but are meant totake a few hits as you deal with 3 tie (if your good). This may be too complicated for the architecutre of the jtl progamming, but the theory holds a solution.
What would2 lvls of weapons do to pvp?
Solutions
1. Make you out fly someone.
2. Number of cannons (4 vs 2) becomes important
So the devs don't want to make a game accurate enough to distiguish between 4 shots and 1. Let the difference lie in the
levels, one for ships with 2 guns, and twice the firepower for ships with 4 guns.
3. Shields and armor based on ship mass playsa major role in how long you can survive.
Since this is based on tier, Masters now have the threat of getting hit by noobs, but should be able to outpilot them any day
oftheweek, save the noob wholoves to fly in other games (iex-wing vs tiefighter). This will make them go get repairs after a
few engagements that do not go so well further bringing they're money making ability back into the economy.
Problems
1. Master ships with 2 cannons fire at the same strenght as beginner ships. But this shouldn't be a problem since masters have
better pilot skills right?
2. What is the chance of 4 tier 1 taking a master right now? This would change, making master contiually earn they're wings in PVP.
Sure you have the ship, but can you fly it.
So it would close the gap in the playing field to player abilty and further remove it from toon ability making 2 PVP zones more feasable. One for lvl 1-3 and one for anyone who wants to attempt it. Keeping a lower lvl zone ensures their ability to survive for a while, and making the other zone accesible to anyone lets you respect master pilots as you test your steel (bring a few buds).
1st_Viduus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:49 am
#21
AI combattants are more than bountiful in Deep Space, so a counter for that IMO would be as I posted above.
I could also see AI being used as an exploit, where there are say 24 AI per side already present and 6 Imperials decide to call a Bomber Strike, loading the server down even more *suddenly* in a localised system... causing play lag and giving the Imperials the upper hand since the AI's will be free to attack the players while they stutter around trying to get adjusted to the new ping.
I could also see AI being used as an exploit, where there are say 24 AI per side already present and 6 Imperials decide to call a Bomber Strike, loading the server down even more *suddenly* in a localised system... causing play lag and giving the Imperials the upper hand since the AI's will be free to attack the players while they stutter around trying to get adjusted to the new ping.
While Bomber Strike would still be possible, hopefully it would be restricted to MP ships, e.g. not able to call it on a B-Wing.
Without an existing AI presence, it shouldn't pose enough of an issue to be exploitable.
Without an existing AI presence, it shouldn't pose enough of an issue to be exploitable.
Heck I was the only person in DS when I went, and the lag was attrocious from the hundreds of AI in there.
Another bunch of players would have really made it bad.
Illok
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:47 pm
#22
Love the sound of this. I'd have to say that when nuetrals go in, they're fair game to anyone. If they don't want to choose a side, they're on their own =).
/sign
/sign
Tyyylowyspetily
Sat Nov 13, 2004 6:38 am
#23
I play near exclusive PVE, but if there were a zone such as this available, where a few random faction members might show up and create a group on the fly before entering the fray- I'd be interested in PVP. Once buffs and armor get the mighty nerf strike of doom, I'll probably enter PVP on the ground too. It isn't the idea of PVP that many hate per se, it's the imbalances, and poor sportsmanship that are experienced all too often. Adding in areas that are entered AFTER loading makes for what seems like a much more enjoyable time to be had by all. It'd be even nicer if the damage to your hull were made to be reduced while in PVP combat. A half million may mean nothing to some players, but the idea of tossing out that investment for no real gain may be another reason so many are not interested. The GCW tei in would be a nice touch, but I think even then, reducing wear and tear on hulls would be a good way to get more involved. Some very nice ideas here.
Skeeter62
Sat Nov 13, 2004 6:55 am
#24
How about this.....
Freelance or privateers that are nuetral on ground, meaning no faction affiliation. Those players who choose to fly as smugglers and mercenaries can fly for a side.... for a price. Thats what mercenaries or smugglers do, they hire out to the highest bidder. Maybe they get paid so much per kill depending on status or leevel of the players they kill.
1st_Viduus
Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:18 am
#25
Skeeter62 wrote:
How about this.....
Freelance or privateers that are nuetral on ground, meaning no faction affiliation. Those players who choose to fly as smugglers and mercenaries can fly for a side.... for a price. Thats what mercenaries or smugglers do, they hire out to the highest bidder. Maybe they get paid so much per kill depending on status or leevel of the players they kill.
For balance purposes you'd have to offer something similar to the factions too...