- Status
So like every other thread in this forum that mentions PvP, PvE or the barest hint of combat?
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Gap is huge.
Skill gap is bigger and the Illusionary superiority on one side of the fence means they will never get better.
The gap will remain unbridged.
Skill gap is bigger and the Illusionary superiority on one side of the fence means they will never get better.
The gap will remain unbridged.
The skill gap is very real, even a mediocre PvPer is far more experienced at being attacked, they know what to do & don't get so flustered. I favour diminishing returns on stuff like engineering upgrades, so that the best is still better than sub-optimal, but not by as much.
If a novice is interdicted by another player bent on popping their hull a greater TTK gives them more time to think of options (like high waking, or shooting back etc). So the next time (and the time after that) becomes an exciting event rather than just another panicky situation.
It would depend on the other Clippers loadout. You'd go for the headon ram followed by doubleshot frag cannons.
I could see a Cobra being a pain as I run Gimballs on the Clipper and the Cobra has a low profile frontally. With Frag Cannons against a Cobra I'd honestly just jump out. (Providing it was an Engineered Cobra) as any competent Cobra PvPer will keen their nose pointed at you.
(Or go for the Ram as a Cobra doesn't have much mass compared to a hull strengthened Clipper)
Last edited:
So contribute
Pvp vs Pve is always going to be a sore point among, crazily enough, mostly PVP players. It dosen't matter what game you play that has both.
You need to go to the division forum to see it at it's best.
This post is a prime example. PVE should be like PVP because of reasons. We got it harder so pve should too.
It's asinine because how a solo pve player plays dosen't involve another living person. Making it harder for them is a meaningless almost spiteful thing to want.
Of course playing against real people is hard, there are always people who play extremely well, and have optimized ships.
But maybe, just maybe, some players don't want that, and prefer to fly around the galaxy not getting their ship destroyed whenever they meet an NPC, because now they are engineered monsters.
And despite the specific admonitions against that in the OP!
You are badly mistaken if you think they OP had any other intention than provoking a one side against the other mess. The original post was a pure troll post.
I disagree - the "skill" argument is pure and total rubbish, whether any given player "chooses" to play PvP or PvE is not a clear indicator of relative skill despite what some PvPers try to push. That is not to say PvEers in general are necessarily better than PvPers but it is just sheer arrogance to assume or postulate that PvPers in general are better at combat in ED than PvEers in general. The "practice" argument is largely bull - a truly skilled player does not necessarily need practice, or at least not lots of it and choosing to play predominantly or exclusively PvE does not implicitly preclude that.
The nature of the gap is more about general attitudes and approaches to gameplay as a whole, which includes factors involving choices over builds. While I agree that the gap is likely to remain unbridged forever, the issues in play are far from simple or straightforward - at least in the general sense.
Specifically where combat balance in ED is concerned, it is not and should never be PvP focused in nature as that would almost preclude the possibility of ED fulfilling the "play it your way" tag line. Where NPCs are concerned, they are always going to be worse off against human players since in general they lack the spontaneity and adaptability of a human opponent. That is not something that is ever likely to change, and has little or nothing to do with the PvE/PvP gap either. Combat balance in ED is a highly subjective thing and varies a lot between encounters but overall it is balanced. Certainly there are cases where PvE can feel like shooting fish in a barrel but that is a largely unavoidable consequence of ED being targeted at a broad range of players with differing wants and desires.
The only real issues with combat balance (and the PvE/PvP divide) in ED are two fold: (a) expectations on the part of some players (both PvE and PvP); and (b) certain stacking mechanics.
FD seem to be on a path to resolving the latter of these issues, the former is something that I believe is impossible for FD to address.
Last edited:
The OP has some rather strong views about the way combat should be in ED and their interpretation of combat balance does not necessarily mesh with everyone else's.
The key note thing is whenever the topic of PvE v. PvP comes into play, certain debates inevitably surface regardless of the OP's intentions.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Apart from the inevitable refund demands / possible court action from console players, without premium platform access, who would no longer be able to play the game.
Plus complaints from those who chose not to refund when Offline mode was cancelled due to the existence of Solo.
Then there's the fact that every player who bought (or backed) the game did so on the basis of three game modes and a single shared galaxy state - an EVE Online like solution to the "problem" of PvP was never on the table.
The time for Frontier to make that decision passed as soon as the Kickstarter launched - they made their decision over five years ago - and here we all are....
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
The OP is primarily a PVEr.
I have no reason to suspect OP was being anything but straightforward with:
...and it was prescient as well.
The thread immediately devolved into that which was being lamented and lampooned.
Nice job Cmdrs!.
I don't care if he is a PvPr or a PVEr. "Whah Whah Whah.... discussion with any of you is impossible blah blah I'm leaving the forums" isn't an opening for a thought out debate.
Opening a thread with a post advocating buffs to NPCs and then giving the thread the title "The PVP <-> PVE Rift" is the definition of Trolling. He got exactly what he was hoping for.
Indeed. Instead of discussing whether the combat is fun, the difficulty curve tuned right and PvE endpoint difficulty matching PvP difficulty,
we got lousy tribalism. No surprise there is a rift.
IMO that rift sits squarely in peoples head. ED has combat, and the only questions worth a damn are :
- Is it good and exciting fun ?
- Can everyone find a challenge without resorting to PvP ?
- What are the impacts of engineering and what can be done about them ?
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not everyone is of the same opinion - given that not everyone plays the game for combat.
Come on. A thread specificly about combat should not talk about combat because some players don't engage in it ?
For real ?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That's not what I said.
My point is that bringing general NPC difficulty up to the same level as (presumably skilled) PvP is a contentious proposal.
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
I've seen straw arguments and various other fallacies "presented".
Were there any cogent counter-arguments put forward that I missed?
Do you find anything about the actual proposal (not the caricatures) unreasonable?
(edit)
Wait a second...
Last edited:
- Status