Forums » Suggestions
me points out the fact that a valk is able to roam serco space freely and able to pirate moths within it... (so far for it being solely targette towards grey :D). Even although it is rare, it can be done if people wanted to.
Still shape, I don't mind that I am only fighting AI as long as the story behind it and the reason why we are doing it is fun. That and that alone is the reason why you ar eplaying a game. I'm really not playing a game just to be frustrated every time. Which at times vendetta can be (especially for newbies). I can at least score a kill here and there :D. Newbies are rarely able to do that. And that exactly is the problem with an fps - rpg hybrid game. If you cater for the rpg fanatics then PvE is from primordial importance. pvp is then just there to keep it interesting, but pve is the goal. And seeing the announcement as a MMORPG pve should be primordial. Otherwise they should just change it to a MMOFPS and add some minor hints of rpg to it (very minor). Just like warcraft 3 or spellforce were rts with a hint of rpg. but in essence it was still an rts not an rpg. (just there fro comparison)
PS: actually we can't avoid you since to invrease our licences we need to attack harder bots which by chance are in grey area. Not to mention that trademissions send us off into grey area to reach a pve oriented goal. And prospecting needs to be done in grey space as well.
PS terk: I know that very well, my point was just that even with rules into place this can not be avoided. And that the social ladder within the game needs to keep it accepted as non fair and non fun and whatever. once people go from its lame shooting people hanging around to we don't care and will shoot you whenever we damn please, at that time I will want that rule even if it limits my freedoms.
Still shape, I don't mind that I am only fighting AI as long as the story behind it and the reason why we are doing it is fun. That and that alone is the reason why you ar eplaying a game. I'm really not playing a game just to be frustrated every time. Which at times vendetta can be (especially for newbies). I can at least score a kill here and there :D. Newbies are rarely able to do that. And that exactly is the problem with an fps - rpg hybrid game. If you cater for the rpg fanatics then PvE is from primordial importance. pvp is then just there to keep it interesting, but pve is the goal. And seeing the announcement as a MMORPG pve should be primordial. Otherwise they should just change it to a MMOFPS and add some minor hints of rpg to it (very minor). Just like warcraft 3 or spellforce were rts with a hint of rpg. but in essence it was still an rts not an rpg. (just there fro comparison)
PS: actually we can't avoid you since to invrease our licences we need to attack harder bots which by chance are in grey area. Not to mention that trademissions send us off into grey area to reach a pve oriented goal. And prospecting needs to be done in grey space as well.
PS terk: I know that very well, my point was just that even with rules into place this can not be avoided. And that the social ladder within the game needs to keep it accepted as non fair and non fun and whatever. once people go from its lame shooting people hanging around to we don't care and will shoot you whenever we damn please, at that time I will want that rule even if it limits my freedoms.
MMORPG or MMOFPS, why classify it as either? Why can't this be a new, fun, hybrid of the 2?
This game is built around a war, and the progression of that war requires PvP, unless they want to turn this into a "Battle against AI" but if that's the case, why have 3 nations to begin with?
As far as the harder bots being in grey, I'll agree that they're harder, but who on EARTH bots arklans for xp?
Seems like everyone does Tycorp, or occasionally prosus, neither of which require you to go to an unguarded wormhole.
Trade missions, if taken inside Itani or Serco space, rarely take one into grey. The UIT ones occasionally do, but this problem could be rectified by adding a disclaimer in the mission text and offering a few more benefits because of the danger.
As far as prospecting, I don't think I, or anyone else I know has actually KILLED a prospector, I mean, people that are trying to scout out certain kinds of roids can easily do that from a Centurion mk II, and there's NO way to pirate those.
However, I totally agree that the PvP is a bit too inclusive. It's VERY hard for new players to break in, especially since botting gives them very little practice.
So perhaps we should deal with that problem, and give newer players more PvP opportunities.
Have contests which are limited by duel rating and # of pk's (when I say contests, these could be a number of things, but would require an active mission system), might alleviate this problem.
The skill side of this is very open-ended, there's a lot of room to grow, and I love that. I can't play WoW, its just too point and click.
Sadly this game has ruined me for all those, All I see in them now is City of Heroes(TM)... fancy costumes and a skill-tree etched in stone.
This game is built around a war, and the progression of that war requires PvP, unless they want to turn this into a "Battle against AI" but if that's the case, why have 3 nations to begin with?
As far as the harder bots being in grey, I'll agree that they're harder, but who on EARTH bots arklans for xp?
Seems like everyone does Tycorp, or occasionally prosus, neither of which require you to go to an unguarded wormhole.
Trade missions, if taken inside Itani or Serco space, rarely take one into grey. The UIT ones occasionally do, but this problem could be rectified by adding a disclaimer in the mission text and offering a few more benefits because of the danger.
As far as prospecting, I don't think I, or anyone else I know has actually KILLED a prospector, I mean, people that are trying to scout out certain kinds of roids can easily do that from a Centurion mk II, and there's NO way to pirate those.
However, I totally agree that the PvP is a bit too inclusive. It's VERY hard for new players to break in, especially since botting gives them very little practice.
So perhaps we should deal with that problem, and give newer players more PvP opportunities.
Have contests which are limited by duel rating and # of pk's (when I say contests, these could be a number of things, but would require an active mission system), might alleviate this problem.
The skill side of this is very open-ended, there's a lot of room to grow, and I love that. I can't play WoW, its just too point and click.
Sadly this game has ruined me for all those, All I see in them now is City of Heroes(TM)... fancy costumes and a skill-tree etched in stone.
A while back... earlier this month... someone suggested adding a PK requirement for combat leveling. Like maybe 1 pk for 0>1, 2pk for 1>2, 4pk for 2>3, 8pk for 3>4, 16pk for 4>5, 32pk for 5>6, 64pk for 6>7, 128pk for 7>8, 256pk for 8>9, 512pk for 9>10, etc.
This has a couple side effects. One is that players get better at PvP as they level, so hopefully their PvP skills rise at the same rate as their levels. Also, it restricts the higher level fighters, like Valks, Proms, and the like, to players who are already experienced in PvP. This keeps noobs from botcracking to level 9 and starting PvP in an SCP.
This has a couple side effects. One is that players get better at PvP as they level, so hopefully their PvP skills rise at the same rate as their levels. Also, it restricts the higher level fighters, like Valks, Proms, and the like, to players who are already experienced in PvP. This keeps noobs from botcracking to level 9 and starting PvP in an SCP.
I like that, although, forcing a level 0 to have to get a pk to reach level 1 is a bit harsh.
I'd say start the pk req at level 4->5 when they actually have access to decent ships. (They can get rev C's/IBG's and Neut 3's).
then go
level 5: 3 pk's
level 6: 9 pk's
level 7: 27 pk's
level 8: 81 pk's
level 9: 243 pk's
etc..
hence, a skycommand would require one to be halfway to their third pk medal. Only incredibly experienced fighters would get to fly one.
As far as traders, they could still get their hands on the Marauders (which would also make them useful again, as a non pk combat model)
I'd say start the pk req at level 4->5 when they actually have access to decent ships. (They can get rev C's/IBG's and Neut 3's).
then go
level 5: 3 pk's
level 6: 9 pk's
level 7: 27 pk's
level 8: 81 pk's
level 9: 243 pk's
etc..
hence, a skycommand would require one to be halfway to their third pk medal. Only incredibly experienced fighters would get to fly one.
As far as traders, they could still get their hands on the Marauders (which would also make them useful again, as a non pk combat model)
i like your ideas shape and cp
I swear I saw a loading screen message that said you cannot damage someone from your nationality. Though I have to admit that those screens go by so fast it's hard to read the full message. But the earlier posts in this thread indicate otherwise. So which is it?
You CAN damage someone of your nationality, but you have to have bad standing with your original nation to do so. Hence, most of the pirates(but not all) have bad standing with their nation.
@DarkWater, as you say it goes by fast but
"You cannot damage members from your own nation, unless one of them falls into bad standing"
I'm -1000 Serco, I can attack Serco, and they can attack me, I have even had a Serco bounty placed upon my head.
@Rene, yes, I did bring my valk into Serco space and pirate your moth, but its HARD to do, its hard to get a moth to 50% in grey space, but while swarmed with aerna seekers, and strikeforces, you either have to have your mojo working, or a UFO...
@Shape & CP
Nice ideas.
"You cannot damage members from your own nation, unless one of them falls into bad standing"
I'm -1000 Serco, I can attack Serco, and they can attack me, I have even had a Serco bounty placed upon my head.
@Rene, yes, I did bring my valk into Serco space and pirate your moth, but its HARD to do, its hard to get a moth to 50% in grey space, but while swarmed with aerna seekers, and strikeforces, you either have to have your mojo working, or a UFO...
@Shape & CP
Nice ideas.
Re: Shapenaji
> [comment deleted]
>
> I'd say start the pk req at level 4->5 when they actually have access to decent
> ships. (They can get rev C's/IBG's and Neut 3's).
>
> then go
>
> level 5: 3 pk's
> level 6: 9 pk's
> level 7: 27 pk's
> level 8: 81 pk's
> level 9: 243 pk's
> etc..
>
> hence, a skycommand would require one to be halfway to their third pk medal.
> Only incredibly experienced fighters would get to fly one.
>
> As far as traders, they could still get their hands on the Marauders (which would
> also make them useful again, as a non pk combat model)
Hm. I'm not sure I would like that idea by itself. That would entail giving a decided advantage in ships to players who focus on PvP, without giving any balancing advantage in other ships to players who focus on PvE.
Anytime you tilt the scale toward PvP, you need to balance the scale with a simultaneous tilt toward PvE as well, to keep VO equally interesting for PvE-focused players.
Specifically, if you're going to put in PvP requirements for PvP-focused ships, you should simultaneously put in PvE requirements for PvE-focused ships, to avoid giving a unilateral advantage to PvP-focused players. Otherwise, the PvE-focused players feel left out.
If you're going to introduce your suggestion, then I shall recommend the following simultaneous change:
Divide all ships primarily into three categories: PvP-focused, PvE-focused, and PvP & PvE Dual-focused. Create a new PvE mission requirement, based on the number of challenging missions completed and credits acquired, for access to all ships that are PvE-focused. These would primarily be Behemoths, Marauders, Centaurs (especially the Aggresso, which, IMHO, is the ultimate botting ship), Hornets, Atlases, and Wraiths. The categories would be divided as follows:
PvP-focused:
* Centurion
* Vulture
* Warthog
* Ragnarok
* Valkyrie
* Prometheus
PvE-focused:
* Wraith
* Atlas
* Hornet
* Centaur
* Marauder
* Behemoth
PvP & PvE Dual-focused:
* EC
Add a new Trading and Commerce License requirement for the Hornet, and designate it as a Queen Hive botting and Capital Ship bombing ship. Make it require, say, Trading and Commerce License Level 5.
Add a combined PvE mission number and credit requirement for access to the PvE-focused ships, as follows:
Level 5: 10 missions, 250000 credits
Level 6: 30 missions, 750000 credits
Level 7: 90 missions, 2250000 credits
Level 8: 270 missions, 6750000 credits
Level 9: 810 missions, 20250000 credits
Level 10: 2430 missions, 60750000 credits
Increase the Trading and Commerce License requirement for the basic Centaur to Level 5, and for the Tunguska Centaur Aggresso to Level 7, while retaining the current Tunguska faction standing requirement. Increase the license requirement for the Behemoth to Level 9. Reduce the same requirement for the Valent Marauder Rev B to Level 10.
Hence, a Behemoth would require one to be quite dedicated to trading and commerce. A Valent Marauder Rev B would require one to be extremely so. Only incredibly dedicated traders would ever get to fly one.
The Behemoth and Valent Marauder Rev B requirements would then balance out your Prometheus Skycommand requirement (as well as your implied IDF Valkyrie Vigilant requirement, since it also requires Combat Piloting License Level 9). Players focused on PvE would have something to boast about against players focused on PvP. Neither type would have any overall advantage in ships.
-- DekuDekuplex Ornitier
> [comment deleted]
>
> I'd say start the pk req at level 4->5 when they actually have access to decent
> ships. (They can get rev C's/IBG's and Neut 3's).
>
> then go
>
> level 5: 3 pk's
> level 6: 9 pk's
> level 7: 27 pk's
> level 8: 81 pk's
> level 9: 243 pk's
> etc..
>
> hence, a skycommand would require one to be halfway to their third pk medal.
> Only incredibly experienced fighters would get to fly one.
>
> As far as traders, they could still get their hands on the Marauders (which would
> also make them useful again, as a non pk combat model)
Hm. I'm not sure I would like that idea by itself. That would entail giving a decided advantage in ships to players who focus on PvP, without giving any balancing advantage in other ships to players who focus on PvE.
Anytime you tilt the scale toward PvP, you need to balance the scale with a simultaneous tilt toward PvE as well, to keep VO equally interesting for PvE-focused players.
Specifically, if you're going to put in PvP requirements for PvP-focused ships, you should simultaneously put in PvE requirements for PvE-focused ships, to avoid giving a unilateral advantage to PvP-focused players. Otherwise, the PvE-focused players feel left out.
If you're going to introduce your suggestion, then I shall recommend the following simultaneous change:
Divide all ships primarily into three categories: PvP-focused, PvE-focused, and PvP & PvE Dual-focused. Create a new PvE mission requirement, based on the number of challenging missions completed and credits acquired, for access to all ships that are PvE-focused. These would primarily be Behemoths, Marauders, Centaurs (especially the Aggresso, which, IMHO, is the ultimate botting ship), Hornets, Atlases, and Wraiths. The categories would be divided as follows:
PvP-focused:
* Centurion
* Vulture
* Warthog
* Ragnarok
* Valkyrie
* Prometheus
PvE-focused:
* Wraith
* Atlas
* Hornet
* Centaur
* Marauder
* Behemoth
PvP & PvE Dual-focused:
* EC
Add a new Trading and Commerce License requirement for the Hornet, and designate it as a Queen Hive botting and Capital Ship bombing ship. Make it require, say, Trading and Commerce License Level 5.
Add a combined PvE mission number and credit requirement for access to the PvE-focused ships, as follows:
Level 5: 10 missions, 250000 credits
Level 6: 30 missions, 750000 credits
Level 7: 90 missions, 2250000 credits
Level 8: 270 missions, 6750000 credits
Level 9: 810 missions, 20250000 credits
Level 10: 2430 missions, 60750000 credits
Increase the Trading and Commerce License requirement for the basic Centaur to Level 5, and for the Tunguska Centaur Aggresso to Level 7, while retaining the current Tunguska faction standing requirement. Increase the license requirement for the Behemoth to Level 9. Reduce the same requirement for the Valent Marauder Rev B to Level 10.
Hence, a Behemoth would require one to be quite dedicated to trading and commerce. A Valent Marauder Rev B would require one to be extremely so. Only incredibly dedicated traders would ever get to fly one.
The Behemoth and Valent Marauder Rev B requirements would then balance out your Prometheus Skycommand requirement (as well as your implied IDF Valkyrie Vigilant requirement, since it also requires Combat Piloting License Level 9). Players focused on PvE would have something to boast about against players focused on PvP. Neither type would have any overall advantage in ships.
-- DekuDekuplex Ornitier
Well, yes, the centaurs, wraiths, and mauds really shouldn't require combat levels. So I'm fine with that.
I don't mind having PvE players get their own kind of ships, I just think one of the major problems of balancing is that anyone can get
a skycommand if they just bot long enough.
I don't mind having PvE players get their own kind of ships, I just think one of the major problems of balancing is that anyone can get
a skycommand if they just bot long enough.
I haven't seen a single example of actual griefing mentioned in this thread, except for the accounts from beta. I trade almost exclusively in grey space because I find the possibility of piracy fun and interesting, and it keeps me on my toes. Hell, sometimes I even announce my position in 100 because I get bored.
People who get pirated and then whine about how it's "griefing" and demand changes in the rules are at least as immature as the people who say "ZOMG I AM TEH ROXXORZ" and act dishonorably in PvP. They need to figure out how to run away (it's dead easy, probably too easy) and get thicker skins. And I'm not even a pirate.
-- bluelaser
People who get pirated and then whine about how it's "griefing" and demand changes in the rules are at least as immature as the people who say "ZOMG I AM TEH ROXXORZ" and act dishonorably in PvP. They need to figure out how to run away (it's dead easy, probably too easy) and get thicker skins. And I'm not even a pirate.
-- bluelaser