Why I think FD should stop trying to cater to the PvPers
- Thread starter Agony_Aunt
- Start date
- Status
If you are going bring up meaning then there is a lack of meaning in any of the three main play styles, CGs excepted and I'm not so sure about those either. The thing is you bring your own meaning. FDev haven't added much meaning to the game so that the players can do it themselves. Some do it via role-play, other by setting themselves targets like reaching Beagle Point or Sagittarius A*. So I'd counter by saying that if the combat PvP players don't find any meaning in what they are doing it is because they haven't given any meaning to their play. FDev have provided a framework and some content. It's up to the players to add the meaning for their play.
In my opinion, of course.
The "meaning" part relates to "something to do" other than interdicting people at CG's for example. I would guess that if we as players could pledge to a minor faction and the BGS was slightly less indirect, we would have a great game. Everything you do currently in ED is filling buckets or shooting bots.
I agree with you. Personally I have not run into any PvPers but that is probably because I play in Mobius when I am in the Bubble.
From what I have read on the forums. There are two types of PvPers. The Pirates that play by rules and seal clubbers who get their kicks by spoiling other people's game.
Recently there has been a couple of threads asking for a PvE session.
How about having a PvP group they can use and get banned to when enough people report then for seal clubbing.
From what I have read on the forums. There are two types of PvPers. The Pirates that play by rules and seal clubbers who get their kicks by spoiling other people's game.
Recently there has been a couple of threads asking for a PvE session.
How about having a PvP group they can use and get banned to when enough people report then for seal clubbing.
Fair enough, but i beleive the thrust of my post was largely aimed at FD's apparently inability to actually make changes to PvP that work towards its betterment. Almost every change to combat seems to have made PvP less worthwhile in engaging. Back around 1.0 i still had some interest in PvP. By 1.2 that had waned a lot, and after 1.3, i had my last PvP in the game, and swore off it for good.
Its an approporiate topic from anyone. Or you think moderators shouldn't have opinions?
As a purely PvE player is disagree. My position is as a proPvP PvE player. I just don't enjoy PvP and dislike some of the attitudes that go with it but I see the value in having it in the game.
I think FD has been fairly evenhanded in resourcing different aspects of the game. At times they haven't perhaps produced the end result they (or we) hoped for. Nor expended resources to make the mistakes right.
The problem as I see it is that ED is massive in scope, area, desire and potential, but with only a finite resource to spread around it's very easy to fall into the thinking that all the resources should be used for the things personally desired. This would however diminish the game in the long run.
That's not to say we shouldn't keep FD 'honest' by demanding that they look at our desires over those of others. Also I suspect that many players are in the middle of the PvE - PvP dichotomy and so want many of the things being developed/improved/fixed(hopefully
).
There's another trap here as well: It's very easy to think of PvE players as a homogeneous group (same for PvPers). We are however a very diverse group - I suspect many PvEers would hate my ideal of PvE more than they hate PvP, as it would be much harder and very unforgiving
I think FD has been fairly evenhanded in resourcing different aspects of the game. At times they haven't perhaps produced the end result they (or we) hoped for. Nor expended resources to make the mistakes right.
The problem as I see it is that ED is massive in scope, area, desire and potential, but with only a finite resource to spread around it's very easy to fall into the thinking that all the resources should be used for the things personally desired. This would however diminish the game in the long run.
That's not to say we shouldn't keep FD 'honest' by demanding that they look at our desires over those of others. Also I suspect that many players are in the middle of the PvE - PvP dichotomy and so want many of the things being developed/improved/fixed(hopefully
). There's another trap here as well: It's very easy to think of PvE players as a homogeneous group (same for PvPers). We are however a very diverse group - I suspect many PvEers would hate my ideal of PvE more than they hate PvP, as it would be much harder and very unforgiving
Last edited:
Have to agree with the OP, I play PVP games and par take in PVP but ED is not a PVP game, it has PVP in it. But then I'm a pve player, brought the game with the intention of being just that, so yeah I'm going to agree that more should be done towards fixing those parts of the game over those to do with PVP.
Not saying FD should ignore the PVP players that are hanging on, and if there was any meaning to anything PVP related in this game I might have done some. Power Play to me at least is a huge disappointment such a missed opportunity to give some meaning to PVP.
Not saying FD should ignore the PVP players that are hanging on, and if there was any meaning to anything PVP related in this game I might have done some. Power Play to me at least is a huge disappointment such a missed opportunity to give some meaning to PVP.
Last edited:
Your premise is false.
The 2.2.03 patch is not a "PVP" patch. It's a combat patch, and almost all of the changes they've made were necessary to keep PVE from being dominated by single types of weapons classes and engineer builds.
The fact that some PVP issues were addressed is almost beside the point. Other PVP issues were created as well! But the net result is that there are about 10 times as many viable and competitive builds available for PVE usage as there were prior to the current Beta.
That being said, I will wholeheartedly agree that the Devs have focused entirely too much on Combat and have almost completely neglected development of what many people believe should be the heart of a 400 Billion star system game: Exploration. Frontier should immediately switch the main focus away from combat and quintuple their efforts to provide meaningful interactions with the galaxy itself. We need more things like Neutron Star jets and supercharging, and we need more reasons to try it! Perhaps Hell Planets where landing and surviving on the surface is a truly dangerous affair, but with rich rewards for those who can use skill, experience, and cunning to survive and locate the goods.
Alien stonehedge is very peaceful and fine, but it is far too sleepy to rouse my explorers blood.
Last edited:
CQC doesn't work because PvPers want PvP as part of the main game, using their own ships in the full game environment, getting interesting stuff to do.
If you work for 100 hours to get your beloved Missy ready for combat, you want to use the ship, not a tiny arcade fighter in an arcade scenarion. To me this was the biggest "surprise" when I started CQC for the first time. I was like, ... and how do I get my ship in there?
As I mentioned already, FDev is not experienced in multiplayer gameplay. A shame as the game has so much potential. And it's possible to cater PvE and PvP alike. But it must be done in a clever way. But as I also mentioned a few times, I think the game engine and the complexity of the game itself is hindering FDev to achieve what we want.
Like e.g. interesting missions / DREAM ON:
You could combine PvE people who like to trade and PvP people. Imagine a mission (or a CG) that is spread along a line of systems/stations. Goal is to get gold or cargo from A to B (part for the PvE lovers). You have to make it through like e.g. 7 systems. Killer commandos or better said, groups of the background story that have an interest in not letting this happen (NPCs and/or other PvP players) await the traders in each system and a groupd of players (PvP lovers) has to insure that the CMDRs with their cargo ships make it through. A great harmony between PvE and PvP players and interesting missions that give PvE more a thrill and PvP the combat they love.
But this would require a game system which Elite does not have (at the moment). FDev can't achieve these things at the moment, it's way to complicated. Working Instancing, scripts, event handling etc.. The game engine does not support that.
/DREAM ON 2:
And now imagine these CGs and cool missions would be part of the overall storyline, visibly changing it after success or failure, making the story feel alive and finally give our gameplay a purpose, a visible impact on the game and the story. That would be a dream of a game.
I always hear from the people who think that Blaze Your Own Trail works: We don't need an implemented storyline. But we already have a storyline (a BGS) and I'm absolutely sure that FDev would love to make it more visible ingame, integrate it in the game and the game mechanics etc. But it's simply way to time and cost intensive. That's the only reason IMHO. So, in the end, the scenario(s) I describe (also in many other threads) are not working against what FDev has or had in mind, but they absolutely fit to the goal. Maybe we never will get that as it might need the gameengine to be changed dramatically, but it's not that a storyline etc. is something absurd, it's a non integral/external part of the game already. But only real "nerds" and people with too much time on their hand follow it. So, making it accessible to all of us would make this game ready for a 10 year cycle.
I can imagine that integrating scripted missions in an open world is super complicated. But it is possible. The station terminals could be used to register CMDRs for an upcoming mission, missions must be available for the people in each instance, if you don't participate, you have to make space for other people who want to take part, there's a mission timer, indicating when it starts (it must be like 3 to 5 minutes max otherwise CMDRs exit), balancing these missions is hard to achieve but possible, what about griefers who will lurk along the road trying to sabotage the entire CG/mission etc. etc. Lot's of difficulties but it's not impossible. One solution that could be adapted from Battlefield 1 are the new game modes or the new game mode where you have 3 to 5 territories / sections that have to be conquered. Lot's of stuff out there already. But just to repeat it, it's a hell of work and very complicated. But the result would be superb. PvE only players could play the game they want to, PvP / PvE lovers could take part in the story, everyone is happy.
If you work for 100 hours to get your beloved Missy ready for combat, you want to use the ship, not a tiny arcade fighter in an arcade scenarion. To me this was the biggest "surprise" when I started CQC for the first time. I was like, ... and how do I get my ship in there?
As I mentioned already, FDev is not experienced in multiplayer gameplay. A shame as the game has so much potential. And it's possible to cater PvE and PvP alike. But it must be done in a clever way. But as I also mentioned a few times, I think the game engine and the complexity of the game itself is hindering FDev to achieve what we want.
Like e.g. interesting missions / DREAM ON:
You could combine PvE people who like to trade and PvP people. Imagine a mission (or a CG) that is spread along a line of systems/stations. Goal is to get gold or cargo from A to B (part for the PvE lovers). You have to make it through like e.g. 7 systems. Killer commandos or better said, groups of the background story that have an interest in not letting this happen (NPCs and/or other PvP players) await the traders in each system and a groupd of players (PvP lovers) has to insure that the CMDRs with their cargo ships make it through. A great harmony between PvE and PvP players and interesting missions that give PvE more a thrill and PvP the combat they love.
But this would require a game system which Elite does not have (at the moment). FDev can't achieve these things at the moment, it's way to complicated. Working Instancing, scripts, event handling etc.. The game engine does not support that.
/DREAM ON 2:
And now imagine these CGs and cool missions would be part of the overall storyline, visibly changing it after success or failure, making the story feel alive and finally give our gameplay a purpose, a visible impact on the game and the story. That would be a dream of a game.
I always hear from the people who think that Blaze Your Own Trail works: We don't need an implemented storyline. But we already have a storyline (a BGS) and I'm absolutely sure that FDev would love to make it more visible ingame, integrate it in the game and the game mechanics etc. But it's simply way to time and cost intensive. That's the only reason IMHO. So, in the end, the scenario(s) I describe (also in many other threads) are not working against what FDev has or had in mind, but they absolutely fit to the goal. Maybe we never will get that as it might need the gameengine to be changed dramatically, but it's not that a storyline etc. is something absurd, it's a non integral/external part of the game already. But only real "nerds" and people with too much time on their hand follow it. So, making it accessible to all of us would make this game ready for a 10 year cycle.
I can imagine that integrating scripted missions in an open world is super complicated. But it is possible. The station terminals could be used to register CMDRs for an upcoming mission, missions must be available for the people in each instance, if you don't participate, you have to make space for other people who want to take part, there's a mission timer, indicating when it starts (it must be like 3 to 5 minutes max otherwise CMDRs exit), balancing these missions is hard to achieve but possible, what about griefers who will lurk along the road trying to sabotage the entire CG/mission etc. etc. Lot's of difficulties but it's not impossible. One solution that could be adapted from Battlefield 1 are the new game modes or the new game mode where you have 3 to 5 territories / sections that have to be conquered. Lot's of stuff out there already. But just to repeat it, it's a hell of work and very complicated. But the result would be superb. PvE only players could play the game they want to, PvP / PvE lovers could take part in the story, everyone is happy.
Last edited:
i don't pvp. i want to leave my support for OP here. some changes in 2.2.03 are way to pvp oriented. in my 30 cmdr wing there are 2 cmdrs pvp'ing others do pve things.
while the 2 pvp'er try to catch up 2.2.03 best use of mechanics for pvp others just say: seriously?
please do not focus on balancing things for pvp. you gave us mods with engineers and now you nerf all over again to have lesser gain of it in overalll. unfair
while the 2 pvp'er try to catch up 2.2.03 best use of mechanics for pvp others just say: seriously?
please do not focus on balancing things for pvp. you gave us mods with engineers and now you nerf all over again to have lesser gain of it in overalll. unfair
Last edited:
1a) I don't think Powerplay is necessarily a PVP feature. I think its a PVE feature that supports PVP.
1b) There's always going to be a meta
2) No one expects to PVP without having to ever PVE. This isn't an arena game or FPS. There's CQC for that, but obviously not many PVPers are interested in a pure PVP game like that.
3) PVP shouldn't be rewarded. PVP should be its own reward for those that enjoy it.
4) Time is spent balancing the ships. I don't think a great preponderance of time is spent specifically addressing PVP-only issues. Any tweaks that affect player ships also affect NPC ships, so there's a PVE element to it too.
5) I really don't care, as a PVEer, if PVPers 'complain' about my gameplay
6) There's no imbalance. Everyone has access to the same everything (unless a Cobra Mk IV is some PVP beast I don't know about). There's always going to be a dichotomy in PVP between hardcores and not-quite-as-hardcores, that's inherent to PVP and not endemic only to ED.
7) That's fatalistic, and assuming that SC wont have the same inherent problems that ED has, which they will. If FD believes they cant put out a good product that's worth playing, then they should just shut the servers down right now.
.
However, I do agree with your primary tenet - devs shouldn't cater overly specifically to PVPers, because PVP balance should naturally evolve out of good PVE balance. PVP can be a touchstone for balance, because its more sensitive to extremes than PVE. But tweaking PVP directly to fix systemic problems with the game is like putting a candle under your thermostat instead of fixing your furnace. I just think you're right for the wrong reasons
Well I have not given up on open yet. The problem to me is not so much the griefers anf gankers, but the lack of reason to actually be in open - coupled with the griefers and gankers. If I was focussed on trading (hate trading by the way, only done it as a quick influence gain with T-9s and Anaconda wing .. for about an hour) I wold not be in open, risk/reward does not meet the task.
I am the exact opposite in opinion to your good self and Mr AA. I think we need to add open only content that takes advantage of the mode.
I'd like to see frameworks for racing on ground, competing wing missions and a lot more co-opertive multi-play as well while we are at it. Not unbalanced rewards, but a reason to be in open other than to do the same tasks you could do in group or solo, something to showcase the mode. Some tweaks to the C & P are needed, but in itself it will not eliminate idiots, they just come with multi-player sandboxes. Improved PvP bounty hunting needs to be part of the C & P along with clears terms of use so the ban or shadown ban can be encacted by FD. Griefing is a social problem, give the community the tools to deal with it first - hell even dynamically generated missions, if that does not work for an individual - ban hammer.
If Open had its own unique content - would we really be worried or arguing about open-pve splitting the community further than it is already?
Simon
As a purely PvE player is disagree. My position is as a proPvP PvE player. I just don't enjoy PvP and dislike some of the attitudes that go with it but I see the value in having it in the game.
I think FD has been fairly evenhanded in resourcing different aspects of the game. At times they haven't perhaps produced the end result they (or we) hoped for. Nor expended resources to make the mistakes right.
The problem as I see it is that ED is massive in scope, area, desire and potential, but with only a finite resource to spread around it's very easy to fall into the thinking that all the resources should be used for the things personally desired. This would however diminish the game in the long run.
That's not to say we shouldn't keep FD 'honest' by demanding that they look at our desires over those of others. Also I suspect that many players are in the middle of the PvE - PvP dichotomy and so want many of the things being developed/improved/fixed(hopefully
There's another trap here as well: It's very easy to think of PvE players as a homogeneous group (same for PvPers). We are however a very diverse group - I suspect many PvEers would hate my ideal of PvE more than they hate PvP, as it would be much harder and very unforgiving
+1 rep - spot on.
1) CQC would be good (for both PvE and PvP) if they added bots and tie the whole system to the main game as gladiator arenas. I don't see PP as a PvP feature (you can play it most effectively by not participating in PvP at all), it's just a very boring table top game that (again) fails to be connected to the main game. PP should be influenced by the BGS, not the other homeopathic way around like they are doing it currently, and they should make heavy use of the mission system.
Last edited:
Opinions =/= bias.
Do what you will, but I would never take such a stance in one of the places I moderate.
I've seen a post on reddit a few days ago. A guy was complaining because FDev spends time making useless cosmetics items. What he didn't understand probably was that the game needs them, any bussiness needs money for further development, also was requested many times by players. Your post is in the same category, you don't want what's best for the game and you are ignorant towards a part of the community.
This balance pass was much needed. And Fdev is hardly prioritizing PvP, the changes affect PvE also and it's the first time in my 1 year or so of play since there is a balance pass. It's not like they are working on implementing a PvP system.
Let them work on all aspects of the game, as it should be.
They're catering to the pvp community because of how badly they messed up... engineers threw the fairly stable balance off and caused major problems for pve and pvp players with heat, then they fixed that and then gave more power to certain other things... they're currently attempting to fix the problems they started that's all.
Your argument that PvP players will leave for SC -- a game with objectively inferior flight mechanics and unknown amounts of PvE grind to get ships/modules -- seems specious. There is no one persona that exemplifies the type of player who will leave for another competitor. Some may leave for PvP. Some may leave for a more story-driven PvE experience. Some may leave because a smaller, hand made set of 60 or 70 solar systems (or whatever it will have) feels better than a galaxy with billions of stars and the same list of things to do in every one. I suspect there will be more PvEers that will leave than PvPers because PvE has little holding them here in ED right now. No engaging story of any kind and mediocre NPC and mission mechanics have led to countless threads discussing and begging for improvements to both. Not to mention the lack of depth to any career path (they're all shallow).
Further, your position that therefore FDev should simply stop paying attention to PvPers is actually pretty offensive. Nothing PvPers are trying to improve upon (weapons balance, ship balance, module balance) actually has a negative impact on anyone only playing PvE. Against NPCs, you're still god. All the weapons you used to enjoy still kill shiftless NPCs with ease. You're still killing thousands of enemy ships for every one ship you lose.
Next, keep in mind that not everyone advocating for more challenge and the greater rewarding of skill (fixed, fa off) is a PvPer. Some of us simply want there to be a higher level of play where improving my skill can mean a more rewarding experience for my efforts. Something more challenging than pointing the nose in the general direction and holding down the trigger. That opinion won't go away even if you wished all the PvPers gone tomorrow, because the ideas and opinions about these weapons and ships aren't held solely by them. Lots of us want a challenge and we want to be rewarded for it by being stronger and better than your average player if we make the sacrifice to take on said challenge.
Lastly, your diatribe does nothing to outline exactly what PvPers are recommending that is so bad it prompted this thread to pop out of your head. PvPers didn't ask for Power Play. They didn't ask for CQC. PvPers didn't ask for Engineers with poorly designed loot/craft mechanics (looting and crafting is inherently a PvE creation, btw). So why even bring those up? They asked for a variety of ships to be viable for combat, with weapons tweaked to fill roles better. If you don't like CQC or PowerPlay, get in line with the PvPers and PvErs alike who complained that resources were used for those expansion features, both of which can be fairly considered half-baked at best. If you don't like Engineers, get in line with the PvPers and PvErs alike who are perpetually frustrated with the flavor of the month OP weapon that would have never been a problem had Engineer modifications (the ones that FDev came up on their own, I remind you) been tested by their in house testers in the first place. Might I once again remind you that the reason Heat got nerfed to a proper level is because of the PvPers who you are whining about. Heat that wouldn't have been so broken in the first place had FDev listened to the PvPers and concerned PvErs in the first place. It's the PvPers trying to make sure pack hounds with certain mods are not the next OP weapon to reach the live game. It's the PvPers doing much of the testing in the Beta to help improve the experience for all of us.
Blaming PvPers for CQC, Engineers and PowerPlay is embryonic at best, and totally intellectually dishonest. I'm trying to decide if I should be more disappointed in you or the people who +1'd your sad and disingenuous post. I'd recommend spending more time concerned about how slowly FDev has been lately with proper patches and updates. Exquisite Focus Crystals (a critical component of a critical upgrade) has been simply missing from the game for going on 4 months. That's something that should have been hotfixed in October. It's these little things that typify what's going wrong with ED. Put your energy there and less into trying your hardest to further divide the community.
Last edited:
They're catering to the pvp community because of how badly they messed up... engineers threw the fairly stable balance off and caused major problems for pve and pvp players with heat, then they fixed that and then gave more power to certain other things... they're currently attempting to fix the problems they started.
This really is utter garbage. They have in fact bent over backwards to discourage or prevent PvP and there are countless examples that I really can't be bothered explaining (if in doubt feel free to trawl the 9000 posts I've made on this board). CQC is a seperate game, suggesting we play that is the same as suggesting we go play Overwatch. Powerplay was not intended for PvP gameplay since solo and private group makes that impossible and all of the things which make a difference are through merits, and you get those by grinding PvE.
It strikes me you are a little blinkered when it comes to the reality on this one.
At this point the forum has turned into a fanboi PvE circle jerk. You speak about toxicity and bickering but your views on 'meaningless and mindless' PvP are well known. I'd take a sober look at the forum posting, its generally one side of this miserable argument where the moaning and the toxicity actually comes from.
Last edited:
- Status