CQC Real men PvP in CQC, only carebears PvP in the main game

[MUSKETEER]

I managed to make Elite in CQC before my 'enforced' wipe.

That fact should show everyone how bad it is as a metric for PvP skill

This discussion is a bit like about COD players being better than BF players when playing COD, and BF players being better than COD players when playing BF.
CQC and main game PvP are two different games, similar concept (like between BF and COD), but different.

 

[Morbad]

I still think the best mods were the original overcharged/cool/efficient

Overcharged, focused/high-impact, and low heat.

 

[MUSKETEER]

A vast majority of the CQC modules require a fair amount of play time to unlock, which is difficult because of lack of interest/matchmaking issues. In Open, you have immediate access to everything, assuming you have a handful of credits..

On PC assuming you play every day you can unlock everything in a week. But there is no need. Starter ship is competitive enough.

In the main game to earn credits for ships, unlock engineers and materials takes ages.

 

[MUSKETEER]

~4.1 KDR just by trying to be the last one in the line of people shooting the ones in front of them in the !

You only have 213 kills though. Must have been one evening with your mates

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

This discussion is a bit like about COD players being better than BF players when playing COD, and BF players being better than COD players when playing BF.

COD players being better than BF players
Who like BF players to be COD players
Who do BF players like they're COD players
Who do COD players like they're BF players
....
Always should be someone you really love

 

[Ca$hback]

Tried CQC for the first time today. Other than the controls I found it fun. If you saw me out there today, please understand I use KB/KB and I had to spend the first 5 rounds figuring out the controls. I know I'm setting [TAB] to target ahead for CQC next time. It's too tough to keep pressing T with both hands busy. I'm too stubborn to use a controller after 4+ years. Good fun. Good enough approximation of Open to grasp the fundamentals. I didn't feel hopelessly outclassed by the more capable.

 

[MUSKETEER]

I believe there is one cqc elite player that uses only keyboard. Some elite players use keyboard + mouse, some use hotas, there are some that use (or used) a game pad apparently.

There is no winning rig. It's down to each person's ability and preference.

 

[Morbad]

You only have 213 kills though. Must have been one evening with your mates

A few matches here and there, declining rapidly in frequency since it was launched. Probably had more play during the beta than since as I mostly only liked CTF, but could only get into DM/TDM, which are not really my style.

I want that CQC system permit (only attainable one I'm missing), but even if I could find matches nowadays, I don't know if I'd have the patience to grind out the permit in deathmatch.

Don't think I've ever seen anyone in CQC that I recognize from live.

 

[CMDR Cknarf]

On PC assuming you play every day you can unlock everything in a week. But there is no need. Starter ship is competitive enough.

In the main game to earn credits for ships, unlock engineers and materials takes ages.

For top-level PvP in engineered ships? Sure, it takes time. But I'm talking plain ships, here. No engineers, level field. Fixed weapons, if you choose. No power ups or watered down handling. Proper fights that last minutes instead of seconds.

Anyone who's been a regular player can have an Eagle built in no time. As easy as credits are to come by, even a new player could have an Eagle or Sidewinder ready in their first day, as well as a pile of rebuys.

The biggest disadvantage would be consistency, I guess.

I still like CQC, but it's not quite the PvP replacement that people seem to think it is.

 

[MUSKETEER]

For top-level PvP in engineered ships? Sure, it takes time. But I'm talking plain ships, here. No engineers, level field. Fixed weapons, if you choose. No power ups or watered down handling. Proper fights that last minutes instead of seconds.

Anyone who's been a regular player can have an Eagle built in no time. As easy as credits are to come by, even a new player could have an Eagle or Sidewinder ready in their first day, as well as a pile of rebuys.

The biggest disadvantage would be consistency, I guess.

I still like CQC, but it's not quite the PvP replacement that people seem to think it is.

Unengineered ship is a PvE ship. It doesn't stand a chance against engineered one and that means it's not for PvP.

Just saying.

Unless you are talking about PvP with your mates, not in Open with strangers.

 

[StevieG]

I concur. The CQC hall of fame are the only PVP trophies of any worth.

 

[SushiCW]

My issue is when people try to make the claim that it's somehow a replacement for main game PvP, and/or a better test of skill. CQC severely cuts down on the skills you are able to gain with regard to the main game, but introduces others such as map knowledge that aren't a thing in the main game anywhere.

FWIW this drives me crazy too. People who claim that CQC can in any way "replace" main-game PvP are very wrong. So are people who claim the inverse. Despite considerable overlap, they're still very different beasts. Even fighting with in-game SLFs feels massively different than fighting with CQC ships.

Yeah, i'd prefer CQC without the power ups as well. Too gimicky. Having said that, its cool when you grab them

IMO there's a reason why powerups are a staple of deathmatch-oriented games. They allow for sudden reversals in fortune, make some parts of the map matter more than others, and mean things like area control and timing matter much more than they would otherwise.

They're unbalanced when you've got one pilot using them and the rest ignoring them. (Which is why vets will often go easy on them or ignore them altogether if they're in a lobby with a bunch of noobs they don't want to scare away). In my experience, though, the powerups add a ton of spice to matches when there are multiple vets fighting over them.

 

[MUSKETEER]

IMO there's a reason why powerups are a staple of deathmatch-oriented games. They allow for sudden reversals in fortune, make some parts of the map matter more than others, and mean things like area control and timing matter much more than they would otherwise.

Lack of power ups would make the gameplay like combat zone where one meta ship is used. Also power ups make small ships with paper thin shields and no hull viable option. They are a balancing factor.

Take power ups away and people will just fly tanky Eagles making CQC really boring.

 

[Morbad]

IMO there's a reason why powerups are a staple of deathmatch-oriented games. They allow for sudden reversals in fortune, make some parts of the map matter more than others, and mean things like area control and timing matter much more than they would otherwise.

They're unbalanced when you've got one pilot using them and the rest ignoring them. (Which is why vets will often go easy on them or ignore them altogether if they're in a lobby with a bunch of noobs they don't want to scare away). In my experience, though, the powerups add a ton of spice to matches when there are multiple vets fighting over them.

I almost completely abandoned deathmatch style shooters once titles like Tribes and Counter-Strike gave rise to the tactical-shooter era. Powerups and the like are abstractions that aren't necessary in a more fleshed out setting.

 

[SushiCW]

I almost completely abandoned deathmatch style shooters once titles like Tribes and Counter-Strike gave rise to the tactical-shooter era. Powerups and the like are abstractions that aren't necessary in a more fleshed out setting.

Sure, those games have other ways to add flavor and depth. I'm not saying every game would benefit from powerups, but I think CQC (as it stands now) is one of them. If you removed powerups, you'd need to find other ways to spice up the game flow.

 

[Rinzler o7o7o7]

Nobody would though. Even reading this thread, the PvP in Main Game types want to do CQC with their own (engineered through the roof, meta) ships. Mention combat on an equal footing and we get enough salt to grit the roads round Cambridge Science Park for the rest of this winter and next.

PvPers' issue with CQC isn't that it's an equal fight. No idea where you get that assumption from. We fight each other all the time with equally powerful ships at CG's and in PvP Leagues, and would all wholeheartedly welcome a mode of CQC where we could mix and match engineered modules with all of the main game ships.

Try again

 

[Zeeman]

Overcharged, focused/high-impact, and low heat.

Yup - those be them. That's what Engineers should have been - a place to buy weapons that are modified to work with your ship and style, whilst only being sidegrade, not an upgrade to A grade weapons and shields., rather than giving you many multiples of the damage that A grade stuff does.

Something near the size of an aircraft carrier shouldn't be able to be taken out in 5 seconds, even if it's a paper exploration build.

Z...

 

[Zeeman]

Lack of power ups would make the gameplay like combat zone where one meta ship is used. Also power ups make small ships with paper thin shields and no hull viable option. They are a balancing factor.

Take power ups away and people will just fly tanky Eagles making CQC really boring.

Disagree. I always take agile and small over beefy and tanky. I know I'm not the only one.

In the same way, in the main game last last longer, and get more kills in a Vulture than an FdL. PvP or PvE. The FdL feels like it's constantly stalling, where the Vulture feels like it's always ready to change direction on a dime. My survival strategy is to not get hit, also why I like fighting in asteroid fields, or where there is cover.

Now, if I ever come upon an SDC member in my Vulture, chances are I'll still lose. I don't put in the hours of PvP to be any good - but I'll last longer in my Vulture than my equally engineered FdL.

On another note, if one ship is always favoured over all others, it means the devs failed to balance them out.

Z...

 

[Zeeman]

PvPers' issue with CQC isn't that it's an equal fight. No idea where you get that assumption from. We fight each other all the time with equally powerful ships at CG's and in PvP Leagues, and would all wholeheartedly welcome a mode of CQC where we could mix and match engineered modules with all of the main game ships.

Try again

There are enough PvP vids on YT to prove this is truth.

To be honest, I see the "griefing" and "seal clubbing" to be more akin to the Samurai of old testing out their swords on slaves lined up for slaughter.

Z...

 

[Morbad]

Sure, those games have other ways to add flavor and depth. I'm not saying every game would benefit from powerups, but I think CQC (as it stands now) is one of them. If you removed powerups, you'd need to find other ways to spice up the game flow.

Agreed.

PvPers' issue with CQC isn't that it's an equal fight.

CQC doesn't imply and equal fight either.

A fair portion of the DMs I played were effectively TDM where I couldn't see the teams some of the other players had organized themselves into with 3rd party comms. Proper TDM's matchmaking has always been a little iffy, even if players were trying for a clean game, and a clean game wasn't always a given. These things were generally outliers, but the presumption that everyone being in ships of vaguely similar performance meaning that there is going to be balanced is flawed.

Something near the size of an aircraft carrier shouldn't be able to be taken out in 5 seconds, even if it's a paper exploration build.

Depends on where it's hit and with what.

A single fighter with one anti-ship missile could knock out a Nimitz class carrier that's two-thousand times it's size, crew, and cost...which is why carriers never operate alone and have craploads of sensors and countermeasures. I don't have a problem with similar dynamics in games like this...as long as there actually are counters.