Pilot Archive
Thread: Focus Thread: PvP Damage
quadpers0n
Wed Feb 16, 2005 8:41 am
#53
i don't disagree with heavy fighters havinga bonus, but the problem is that heavy fighters don't always lose to light fighters. i've beaten plenty of a-wings with my oppressor which shouldn't happen apparently. like vidius said, there's exceptions, but when it's happening frequently when does it stop being an exception?
and i don't mean winningby sneaking up and pummelling them either. i meana loop de loop dogfight. heck, i've even been hit a few times by them and recovered to win. what happens in that scenario when i get a bonus in my oppressor? does a corresponding speed increase for the a-wing negate whatever bonus i recieved in the heavy fighter? does it make it too easy for me to win? perhaps the heavy fighters role shouldn't be that of a dogfighter?
honestly alot of things seem really speculative and many more people would PVP if MP ships were fixed and there was a point to all of it. an incentive. but after people are PVPing (which would happen when incentive was introduced, one shot or no) you'd start seeing more trends. hey or you might hear more people complaining too. in any case, it goes back to fixing things that don't work first.
quadpers0n
Wed Feb 16, 2005 8:53 am
#54
1st_Viduus wrote:
you said "One shot kills are a myth".... and now you just posted that you got 1 shot killed twice from one hit.
I chose to be one shotted. I'm flying a ship with parts I bought off the bazaar. Was PVP one shot for the 6 people I killed that night? No. It was a 4-5 shot affair.
Don't try to twist words, because let's be honest, you knew what I meant. Anyone can have the ship I fly and I fly it expressly because I want people to be aware of what can be done. Think you are hot stuff in your advanced or oppressor using 4k guns? Wrong. I just beat you with a bazaar ship. Anyone else can too.
Reduce damage and the weekend warrior you supposedly are standing up for suffers.
edit: i also want to state, there does need to be incentive to fly big ships too. there can't just be incentive on the other side of the spectrum and the way to do that is to bring MP ships back into the equation. imagine a 15-30k shield (or armor, whatever) on a MP ship. you gonna take that sucker down in a bazaar kihraxz? it takes me 10-14 to take one down now.
fix mp ships and you'll need a team of light fighters to do one in. or.... drum roll.... a ship with massive guns.
Message Edited by quadpers0n on 02-16-2005 08:05 AM
ajag
Wed Feb 16, 2005 9:31 am
#55
Just for the record, when I talk about big ships having a defence bonus I don't mean the bonus should make them the same as light fighters in PvP. On the contrary, light ships should always have te upper hand in dogfighting because that is what their purpose is. Heavier craft however should be better for taking down capital ships like MP ships (when they get fixed), corvettes, GBs, Star Destroyers, etc (you get the idea). However, with the current system that is not the case and that is something we need to change. So basically what I am asking is not only PvP related but also for PvE so people have a reason to use the diversity of ships we have. But I guess this would be too much of a topic alone, let alone make it a priority for PvP issues.
But whatever happens, let damage as it is 
MonsofoLexius
Wed Feb 16, 2005 9:53 am
#56
Good thoughts everyone lets keep it up. Lets assume that FOB Ships (YT, Dec, Nova) DON'T Exsist. Yes they need change, but that looks to be a seperate issue IMHO. And I would rather push for a change to FOB ships after we as a community decide on what we would like to see changed, if anything, in PvP damage. That way we can hope to get a good balance across the board. So lets keep it to the non-FOB ships for now.
The Weapon Overload 3 issue, while still needing to be fixed, does not seem to be a major factor. In my Dunelizard I have a single RE'd Lvl 10 gun that hits for about 4500 per shot. Now take an X-wing for example and you could have 3 Lvl 6 or 7's, or an Advanced with 2 Lvl 8's. All would be about the same damage output or more. At a 25% reduction level (for 75% damage inPvP) thats 3375 per hit, so 1 shot for reward shield and any armor and 1 shot to kill in .8 of a second. So even if WO3 were nerfed to oblivion, to the point of being unsable, we are still at about the same point.
It looks like the big trade-off seems to be:
- The ability for a lower level pilot to be viable in PvP.
- The viability of lower tierd ships in PvP
VS - The role of heavy craft (Krayt, B-wing, {Opressor but that does not truely fit here})
- Equipment having a factor
Should lower level pilots be on par with masters? (The getting more pilots in space agument aside for now)
Should both equipment and skill play a role? (75% skill 25% equipment??)
1st_Viduus
Wed Feb 16, 2005 10:11 am
#57
A pilot truly doesn't become PvP viable until 3-3-2-3.
I understand that because it's a pay-to-play game the skilltree needs to be there, and though I dislike it, it's a necessary evil.
That being said if a pilot can't get that far in fairly short order then they'd lose in PvP anyhow.
That being said if a pilot can't get that far in fairly short order then they'd lose in PvP anyhow.
Lower Tiered Ships... wish you would have defined that a little better.
Since the ships at tiers are not balanced between the trees, it's completely possible for a rebel or neutral to become PvP viable at 2-3-2-2, but not for an imperial. Taking a ship lower than Cert 5 for an imperial would mean certain death, even if he were an ace, since there is simply no way to fit defenses that could stand up to even a player's Cert 6 weapon. Barely can at master with 171k mass allowance.
Since the ships at tiers are not balanced between the trees, it's completely possible for a rebel or neutral to become PvP viable at 2-3-2-2, but not for an imperial. Taking a ship lower than Cert 5 for an imperial would mean certain death, even if he were an ace, since there is simply no way to fit defenses that could stand up to even a player's Cert 6 weapon. Barely can at master with 171k mass allowance.
The other two pointsI believe I've stated my opinions and ideas in previous posts.
Should lower level pilots be on par with masters?
Define master... mastered the skill tree by going up with groups of 3-6 pilots and having an ace do the 'vette for them? That hardly counts as an Ace pilot imo; whereas someone who can solo it up the whole tree, or need only minor assistance (1 wingman) for those more difficult squadrons/missions, should be able, at any viable equipment level be able to come out on top.
Define master... mastered the skill tree by going up with groups of 3-6 pilots and having an ace do the 'vette for them? That hardly counts as an Ace pilot imo; whereas someone who can solo it up the whole tree, or need only minor assistance (1 wingman) for those more difficult squadrons/missions, should be able, at any viable equipment level be able to come out on top.
Should equipment and skill play a role..?
Unfair question.
Unfair question.
It should not be one versus the other.
Where equipment and mechanics are balanced, skill becomes the deciding factor. Period.
Since, as it stands, this is not the case, there exists no basis for comparison at any rate.
Where equipment and mechanics are balanced, skill becomes the deciding factor. Period.
Since, as it stands, this is not the case, there exists no basis for comparison at any rate.
MonsofoLexius
Wed Feb 16, 2005 10:24 am
#58
First of, Vid, Eye Strain, paragraphs, please, lol
One thing to add to the consideration. In space PvE it looks like the Dev's upped the shield and armor levels on NPC ships (man I want to loot some of THOSE) to about 10x player levels. (Just speculation, no dev "secret info" involved). So they are running around at about 10-20K shields to allow for high looking damage numbers on weapons for players. So its tough to use the ground game PvE vs PvP in our conversation. Because we are not on the same level in space in regards to PvE vs PvP.
1st_Viduus wrote:
We here on the forums tend to forget that we are a minority, and generally the most vocal of us tend to fall into either extreme.
Where the "average pilot" falls now is under the 1-shot kill category, or the "game breaking experience" category...
Where the "average pilot" falls now is under the 1-shot kill category, or the "game breaking experience" category...
QFE (Quoted for Emphasis) Because I think this is an excellent point for us ALL to remember
1st_Viduus wrote:
Lower Tiered Ships... wish you would have defined that a little better.
Wanted to be vauge, aka discussion provoking
Wanted to be vauge, aka discussion provoking
Should lower level pilots be on par with masters? Masters not the elite pilot aces, they will almost always win. Lets say Master Pilot and 3333 Ace Player skill level
Should equipment and skill play a role..?
It should not be one versus the other.
Where equipment and mechanics are balanced, skill becomes the deciding factor. Period.
Since, as it stands, this is not the case, there exists no basis for comparison at any rate.
Where equipment and mechanics are balanced, skill becomes the deciding factor. Period.
Since, as it stands, this is not the case, there exists no basis for comparison at any rate.
Was not going for one vs the other, but rather what combination of the 2 should be. Because I agree that other then the true "Aces" there is almost a 0 equipment factor for the masses
Message Edited by MonsofoLexius on 02-16-2005 09:35 AM
Tumbler2002
Wed Feb 16, 2005 10:34 am
#59
MonsofoLexius wrote:Good thoughts everyone lets keep it up. Lets assume that FOB Ships (YT, Dec, Nova) DON'T Exsist. Yes they need change, but that looks to be a seperate issue IMHO. And I would rather push for a change to FOB ships after we as a community decide on what we would like to see changed, if anything, in PvP damage. That way we can hope to get a good balance across the board. So lets keep it to the non-FOB ships for now.The Weapon Overload 3 issue, while still needing to be fixed, does not seem to be a major factor. In my Dunelizard I have a single RE'd Lvl 10 gun that hits for about 4500 per shot. Now take an X-wing for example and you could have 3 Lvl 6 or 7's, or an Advanced with 2 Lvl 8's. All would be about the same damage output or more. At a 25% reduction level (for 75% damage inPvP) thats 3375 per hit, so 1 shot for reward shield and any armor and 1 shot to kill in .8 of a second. So even if WO3 were nerfed to oblivion, to the point of being unsable, we are still at about the same point.It looks like the big trade-off seems to be:
- The ability for a lower level pilot to be viable in PvP.
- The viability of lower tierd ships in PvP
VS- The role of heavy craft (Krayt, B-wing, {Opressor but that does not truely fit here})
- Equipment having a factor
Should lower level pilots be on par with masters? (The getting more pilots in space agument aside for now)
Should both equipment and skill play a role? (75% skill 25% equipment??)
I think equipment needs to have a bigger role. Shields and armor are supposed to counters blasters. (And missles as well but countermeasers are more effective at that) And the best hope you can have for your shields and armor TOGETHER is to absorb 1 shot. Considering all the mass spent on shields and armor they should take a lot more punishment before being taken down, especially on larger mass ships.
My last PvP experience was in kessel, I was overt, and I saw three contacts on my screen. I hit tab went for the closest one and then I took a hit, (screen went red) looked down and my shields and armor were gone in the back, then I exploded. A 2 shot kill but there was just no chance. I didn't even know there was a player around, let alone attacking me. It's too fast, especially considering I was using one of the best shields available. Would have been nice to at least know what ship he was in, or what his name was.
I think reducing pvp damage is the simplist and fastest way to apply a temporary fix to this problem. It affects 2 systems, Missles and Blasters which are imbalanced in comparison to the other components. Blasters are tuned to take out NPC ships that are 5x-20x more powerful in the shield and armor department. So when you take those same weapons and use them on players you get vaporized in seconds. Dropping that damage 5x-20x is appropriate to counterattack that huge imbalance. (I think pvp damage should be down at 25%)
Infestus
Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:05 am
#60
There are 2 kinds of PVP encounters that I have noticed.
1) Pilot A spots Pilot B who doesnt have a clue. Pilot B is destroyed in 1 pass not knowing what hit him.
2) Pilot A and B spot each other. They "joust" one of the pilots is destroyed partially due to luck, skill and the equipment of the other.
There are are cases when a dog fight ensues... almost always when each pilot has a wingman or 2. say you start out on a 3 v 3 joust and end up in a 2 v 2 after the joust... This usually leads into a dog fight because now you are all within close range and likely scattered in random directions.
The problem with a lot of "random chance encounters" of aggro players is it is only a 1 on 1 situation. And the result is one of the encounters above.
Where I see conflict in the issue of PVP damage is what does one define as a "dog fight"? I think the general consensus is that skill plays the role in the dog fight. In neither of the encounters I outlined does skill play much a part... or if at all. Skill starts playing a role in multi ship flights.
What I am getting at is that it is not the offensive or deffensive capability of the players involved but the situation in which they are involved. So the question, I think, is not how to manage the components but manage the situations... how do we get players to consistently come together in large groups?
What discourages PVP? (feel free to add ideas)
Decay
lack of diversity... 1v1 encounters
Lack of content (only masters can participate in the 1 and only PVP zone... nothing for other players)
What encourages PVP (or what could)
Faction points (the only reason I ever go Overt)
its fun + skill involved, (wo)man to (wo)man (how much is the question we are pondering)
A ranking system (showem who is king by being a Top Ace)
universal Content (give us a purpose... like the stardestroyer but available to everyone)
just hit a writers block... i'll try to continue the thought later
Eaca
Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:41 am
#61
What is going to be done about exploited shields? We have pilots out there running around in a-wings with 20k mass shields 3800 front and back. Not just reward shields either, but other, lighter, shields that have been beefed up disproprtionately. Devs need to decide what the max shielding should be for each equipment level, and cap any shield that exceeds that down to that level. Maybe cap any shield that exceeds that down to that level -20% to -30% (cheaters shouldn't prosper). The only exception to this case should be shields that are exactly reward shield + 57.5%. These shields should be straight up deleted with no reimbursment.
Coran_Sienar
Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:56 am
#62
Eaca wrote:
What is going to be done about exploited shields? We have pilots out there running around in a-wings with 20k mass shields 3800 front and back. Not just reward shields either, but other, lighter, shields that have been beefed up disproprtionately. Devs need to decide what the max shielding should be for each equipment level, and cap any shield that exceeds that down to that level. Maybe cap any shield that exceeds that down to that level -20% to -30% (cheaters shouldn't prosper). The only exception to this case should be shields that are exactly reward shield + 57.5%. These shields should be straight up deleted with no reimbursment.
I couldn't agree with her more. Sure, you can still blow through 3800 energy shields in PvP, but theyMAJORLY unbalance the PVE game. The only way those things could be worse is if /eshield recharge rates also stuck when you landed.
Eaca
Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:03 pm
#63
Coran_Sienar wrote:
Eaca wrote:
What is going to be done about exploited shields? We have pilots out there running around in a-wings with 20k mass shields 3800 front and back. Not just reward shields either, but other, lighter, shields that have been beefed up disproprtionately. Devs need to decide what the max shielding should be for each equipment level, and cap any shield that exceeds that down to that level. Maybe cap any shield that exceeds that down to that level -20% to -30% (cheaters shouldn't prosper). The only exception to this case should be shields that are exactly reward shield + 57.5%. These shields should be straight up deleted with no reimbursment.
I couldn't agree with her more. Sure, you can still blow through 3800 energy shields in PvP, but theyMAJORLY unbalance the PVE game. The only way those things could be worse is if /eshield recharge rates also stuck when you landed.
They're still unbalancing for PvP. Esp if they add an additional damage reduction people with these shields will be at an EXTREME advantage over those without. Even as it is now it's effectively like they have a self granted 33% shield damage reduction.
MonsofoLexius
Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:16 pm
#64
Eaca wrote:
What is going to be done about exploited shields? We have pilots out there running around in a-wings with 20k mass shields 3800 front and back. Not just reward shields either, but other, lighter, shields that have been beefed up disproprtionately. Devs need to decide what the max shielding should be for each equipment level, and cap any shield that exceeds that down to that level. Maybe cap any shield that exceeds that down to that level -20% to -30% (cheaters shouldn't prosper). The only exception to this case should be shields that are exactly reward shield + 57.5%. These shields should be straight up deleted with no reimbursment.
Add it to the issues thread for me
Helps me keep stuff like that organized, but also a good point to raise here.
Message Edited by MonsofoLexius on 02-16-2005 11:16 AM
quadpers0n
Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:57 pm
#65
Infestus wrote:
There are 2 kinds of PVP encounters that I have noticed.
1) Pilot A spots Pilot B who doesnt have a clue. Pilot B is destroyed in 1 pass not knowing what hit him.
2) Pilot A and B spot each other. They "joust" one of the pilots is destroyed partially due to luck, skill and the equipment of the other.
There are are cases when a dog fight ensues... almost always when each pilot has a wingman or 2. say you start out on a 3 v 3 joust and end up in a 2 v 2 after the joust... This usually leads into a dog fight because now you are all within close range and likely scattered in random directions.
The problem with a lot of "random chance encounters" of aggro players is it is only a 1 on 1 situation. And the result is one of the encounters above.
Where I see conflict in the issue of PVP damage is what does one define as a "dog fight"? I think the general consensus is that skill plays the role in the dog fight. In neither of the encounters I outlined does skill play much a part... or if at all. Skill starts playing a role in multi ship flights.
What I am getting at is that it is not the offensive or deffensive capability of the players involved but the situation in which they are involved. So the question, I think, is not how to manage the components but manage the situations... how do we get players to consistently come together in large groups?
What discourages PVP? (feel free to add ideas)
Decay
lack of diversity... 1v1 encounters
Lack of content (only masters can participate in the 1 and only PVP zone... nothing for other players)
What encourages PVP (or what could)
Faction points (the only reason I ever go Overt)
its fun + skill involved, (wo)man to (wo)man (how much is the question we are pondering)
A ranking system (showem who is king by being a Top Ace)
universal Content (give us a purpose... like the stardestroyer but available to everyone)
just hit a writers block... i'll try to continue the thought later
I'm not sure how long I want to continue beating this dead horse, especially if our correspondant already has made up his mind. I still haven't seen anyone discount how people will PVP in lighter ships post a damage reduction but I think this post above is a FANTASTIC point, and essentially what i'd like to go on the record for saying PVP needs.
i personally think we know far too little about PVP right now to decide if PVP needs an additional reduction or not. I think it's a mistake to forget about MP ships, as the correspondant is advising, and I think it's a mistake to dismiss bugs that should be fixed first.
people don't quit PVP in masse because they die in one shot. start a thread on your server forums and see how many people say they expressly stay away from PVP because of damage and how many people say they stay away from PVP because it has no reward. I started one, go check it out. hey if I'm wrong I'm wrong.
people want to compete for something, and if they want to compete they PVP anyway and either circumvent the "problem" of one shot kills or live with it. PVP on my server has steadily been picking up in the past weeks, partly due to player pressure, partly due to people realizing the benefits of deep space, partly due to new masters coming into the system. i believe if MP ships were made viable, if there was a point to PVP that it would *explode* on gorath. especially with the important of FP coming up in the next patch and the ease at which it's obtained in space.
when things are fixed, and there's a reason to pvp so more and more people are trying it, regardless of whether or not it's limited or too fast paced, then weshould come and revisit the issue.
the game is going to gain absolutly nothing from haste in this matter. it WILL lose something when dependency on equipment is further entrenched in the form of light ships. nobody is going to lose anything if pvp is given a point first and tweaked later. nobody is going to lose anything if bugs are fixed first and PVP is fixed later. nobody is going to lose anything if players are up having fun in their MP ships with the shields they deserve and PVP damage is tweaked later.
priorities.