Pilot Archive

---

quadpers0n wrote:

---

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.

---

How about adding a system of armor lvls in conjunction with a system of armor piercing weapons. This along with a system that determines the tier lvl of componants usable by ships instead of pilot lvl. That would create a system where the top lvl ships gained at master are the hardest to destroy etc.

I suggest this because I dont like the fact that ship strength and effectivness is really determined be its componants(which are determined by pilot lvl) and not the chassis. Seems to me that ships gained at master should be much better than lower lvl ships regardless of componants...not that componants shouldnt matter but more like the ships chassis could have a set of base stats which are increased as compnants are added, or maybe just apply something like this for armor so that higher lvl ships are harder to destroy because they have a higher base protection no matter what armor componants are loaded. The flip side would be that you cant put a lvl 10 componant in a chassis that is not rated to except lvl 10 componants.

I don't know if this all makes sense because I'm just talking off the top of my head and havent given it much thought but I think you get the idea.

---

Shikkari wrote:
How about adding a system of armor lvls in conjunction with a system of armor piercing weapons. This along with a system that determines the tier lvl of componants usable by ships instead of pilot lvl. That would create a system where the top lvl ships gained at master are the hardest to destroy etc.

I suggest this because I dont like the fact that ship strength and effectivness is really determined be its componants(which are determined by pilot lvl) and not the chassis. Seems to me that ships gained at master should be much better than lower lvl ships regardless of componants...not that componants shouldnt matter but more like the ships chassis could have a set of base stats which are increased as compnants are added, or maybe just apply something like this for armor so that higher lvl ships are harder to destroy because they have a higher base protection no matter what armor componants are loaded. The flip side would be that you cant put a lvl 10 componant in a chassis that is not rated to except lvl 10 componants.

I don't know if this all makes sense because I'm just talking off the top of my head and havent given it much thought but I think you get the idea.

---

Well now that I think of it, my ideas dont just apply to PvP damage as it would be the same for non PvP damage. Also I'm not saying my idea would be the only thing neccessary to solve the current issues. I just like the idea of armor & weapon ratings along with chassis' that have a max componant lvl rating and base armor protection.

I'm gonna try and keep my toes out of the PvP damage pool (waded around that topic enough to be sick of it so ill address other things instead)

1.) WO3, as stated many times, needs to be fixed. I think its a bigger issue than most people give it credit for.

2.) I do agree with the notion that larger, heavier, less manunverable ships should be able to take more damage/punishment. What im woried about however is a "mass is greater than all" scenario developing. (ironically that would the recpicol of what we have now)

3.) In addition to WO3,i think one of the largest problems is the basic fundamentals in how ships are constructed in JTL. Through careful part creation and Re Engineering you can create a monster of a ship. My T/A is sporting at 3600 damage and 3000 damage cannon, without sacraficing much (if any at all) in the way of speed and shield/armor strength, and im sure there are people out there with far better than that. So long as things like this are possible, any semblence of balance will be hard to achieve in relation to ship types.

4.) I think lack of purpose and ship decay disuade more people from space PvP than the damage does. Currently other than bragging rights, theres no reason to fight at all. You don't even get faction points for a PvP kill. In short, the risk might not be worth the reward for most players.

---

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.

---

If the devs are going to take the time to write a filter that goes in and removes shifted shields, then they should also put one in that goes in and fixes pre-nerf droid interfaces. Light Fighters shouldn't be running around with droid interfaces that let them run Cap to Shield Shunt every 15 seconds. There's also the issue of the low-mass pre-nerf space bomb launchers. Oh, and lets not forget the pre-nerf engines. Players with a 96 speed level 6 engine, or those with a 113 speed level 8 engine are also getting a distinct advantage that no one else will ever be able to catch up to.

Message Edited by Imaridril on 02-16-2005 04:56 PM

---

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 had hoped they already did something like this. That is extremely disappointing to hear. Having uber anything in pvp just messes up everything. If this expansion is headed towards being able to recreate huge space battles of the GCW then there needs to be hard limits to each level of component. Mabye even limit how much mass a certain component can take on a particular ship. (IE A-wing is a very small ship and may not be able to mount a weapon that is greater than 30k mass)

I've read a lot of interesting posts thus far, and felt the need to throw in my 2 credits. So, assuming that WO3 and other droid programs get balanced, AND multi-passenger ships are fixed or don't exist, here goes:

I'm not in favor of a damage reduction. Perhaps I haven't PvP'd enough yet, but I don't see the need. If you get caught with your pants your figurative ankles, you're dead, but if you're prepared, scanning for enemies, and ready for combat, then an initial attack will quickly turn into twenty to sixty seconds of knife-fighting furball fun.

That said, I support giving small modifiers to armor/shielding. I think that the ships currently handle just fine, I have no problem with a TIE Bomber or Krayt being able to move very fast in a straight line, because they're going to run into problems when they start turning. However, giving them slightly higher defenses in the form of chassis modifiers seems like a good idea. Given identical equipment, I don't mind if the B-Wing soaks up twice the damage as the A-Wing before it dies. To me, that helps compensate for the fact that the pilot flying the B-Wing is going to take a few more hits in combat than the A-Wing pilot will.

Like others have said, I feel that light fighters should be the dogfight kings, while heavies should be better suited for attacking capital and MP ships. However, if a heavy fighter jock gets a light fighter in his gunsights, it should be close to lights out in one shot. The light fighter pilot has screwed up, and space is not a place for mercy.

---

Raano_Geds wrote:
I've read a lot of interesting posts thus far, and felt the need to throw in my 2 credits. So, assuming that WO3 and other droid programs get balanced, AND multi-passenger ships are fixed or don't exist, here goes:

I'm not in favor of a damage reduction.

---

I'm not in favor of a damage reduction. Perhaps I haven't PvP'd enough yet, but I don't see the need. If you get caught with your pants your figurative ankles, you're dead, but if you're prepared, scanning for enemies, and ready for combat, then an initial attack will quickly turn into twenty to sixty seconds of knife-fighting furball fun.

There wouldn't be any problem with this logic if it were only a Player vs Player zone, IE no npc ships. But in deep space you are constantly surrounded by enemies and a player enemy looks no different on radar than an npc enemy, but one can kill you in 3 shots.

Consider in a huge battle with 30 players involved and 60 npc ships, there are tie fighters everywhere, x-wings are criss-crossing in front of you chasing ties and Tie's are giving pursuit. (Think ROTJ) You're getting attacked left and right, and managing shields and basically having a great time and pow, what happened? A player ship happened upon you and you're dead.

Dogfighting 1 on 1 may be fine but that isn't looking at the big picture. In a large scale battle there needs to be consistency among the forces. I'd rather not identify players differently on the radar as it would take away from the immersion factor but if damage stays as is that may become necessary. You can't manage situational awareness with 30 targets around you, all you can do is focus on the one in front and and hope you can react fast enough if someone comes in behind you.

---

Tumbler2002 wrote:

There wouldn't be any problem with this logic if it were only a Player vs Player zone, IE no npc ships. But in deep space you are constantly surrounded by enemies and a player enemy looks no different on radar than an npc enemy, but one can kill you in 3 shots.

---

I have Target Nearest Enemy Player mapped, and I make an effort to tap it every 30 second at least, whenever I am Overt. Problem solved, no need for dmg reduction if you use the spatial awareness abilities granted to all pilots. Nicer still if it could be macro'd (for the lazy) but personally I prefer the feeling that I am "checking sensors" and "taking up visual scanning", and if I fail to do so, I should lose.

What about when there are 20 players in range and 40 npc ships? See where I'm going with this? If they fix the pvp issues and add content that is what we will have. No pilot can manage SA with that many ships. It doesn't make any sense to have some ships, player ships, able to take out players in 1 second, when you have to spend 5-10 seconds to take out 1 npc ship, and the npc ships have to spend that long (at least) taking you out.

Imagine there was an instanced battle where waves of Imperial Gunboats were being launched from a star destroyer constantly and they were attacking a rebel corvette. The rebel player mission was to shoot down the gunboats. The Imperial pilots mission was to protect the gunboats. Can you guess who has a HUGE advantage? The rebel ships will need to pour fire into the gunboats while avoiding turret fire and player fire, which in either case will cause death in seconds should a few hits land.

We need to stop looking at pvp as a 1v1 dogfighting scenario and start thinking about how to make battles fun for large numbers of players. This is a MMORPG after all. Don't misunderstand me though, I am not saying that there needs to be a pvp damage reduction at this time. First fix the droid commands. WO3 for one is way out of wack and others are probably too. Really need those programs to update the components stats when they are activated so we know what we are dealing with.

---

Tumbler2002 wrote:

I I am not saying that there needs to be a pvp damage reduction at this time. First fix the droid commands. WO3 for one is way out of wack and others are probably too. Really need those programs to update the components stats when they are activated so we know what we are dealing with.

---