Antigonus

[ QUOTE ]
I still don't understand what the the big deal is about flags. Is it that folks are envisioning people toggling their flag on and off to attack people without being attacked?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is only one of the many potential exploits that could occur if it were done incorrectly.

The fact is, the game already has a very effective form of flagging. If you enter a zone, you are flagged on. When you leave, you are flagged off.

My question is, why do we need another form of flagging on top of that that would be less effective, allow for exploits and would only exacerbate existing issues?

[ QUOTE ]


When did I like PvP? When it was massive event type things, where people just didn't care. And the numbers involved quickly droned out the idiots. It was chaos, but it was fun.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is kind of my point. Those times were fun not because the trash talk didn't exist, but because you were able to ignore it.

It's so easy to ignore or filter out the trash talk using the in game permisions, that it simply isn't a good argument for not doing it. It is probably the single biggest reason people raise in these discussions for avoiding PvP. It also is the single easiest thing to fix. The Devs have already provided the means to resolve that issue in game. There is nothing more they can do in that regard short of a zero tolerance policy on it with perma bans for offenses. Banning people from playing seems a bit counter productive, wouldn't you agree?

To bring it back on topic, how would adding PvP flagging reduce trash talk in broadcast, or make it less offensive? How would it have made your experience better?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If only people would learn to turn off broadcast in PvP then the issue wouldn't exist.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a symptomatic solution based on the miscomprehension that those who avoid PVP for the "trash talk" are viscerally offended by the words themselves. The reason for citing "trash talk" is that they find the people voicing it not worth spending time with; let alone playing with.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have found that the people that use that excuse are the ones that would never take part in PvP under any circumstances. That's why it upsets me to see people continue to use that as a reason for not PvPing. It would just be easier to say, "I don't like PvP and won't do it for any reason." than to keep coming into these discussions and pull the trash talk card.

[ QUOTE ]
Just because they can't hear it doesn't make the problem go away.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on what the problem is. If the issue really is the trash talk, well it does a pretty good job of making it go away. You ever hear a deaf person complaining about a song playing on the radio?

However, like I said, in general it isn't really the problem. It's just the easiest to admit to.


[ QUOTE ]
*Not being forced to play with said individuals, on the other hand, would better address the irritation

[/ QUOTE ]

*But even flagged, they would still be playing in the same zone and since people still adamantly refuse to turn off their broadcast permissions in PvP, they are still subject to the trash talk. The trash talk would only get worse because now PvPers have to interact with non-flagged players to get them to PvP. Ideally, they would behave themselves and ask nicely, but I wouldn't hold my breath for that.

*edited to clarify the edit for... um clarity. Yeah.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The first thing I thought of was that broadcast trash talk would escalate beyond all reason in an attempt to get people to flag for PvP.

Not really a trick, but if trash talk is really as big of an issue as people say it is now it certainly would be counterproductive to getting non-PvPers to try it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Indeed it would be. And then it would taper off shortly after as PVP players either learned to be more solicitous or left off because they kept themselves from having any playmates.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that might be true if the trash talkers were actually capable of reason. I mean really, how well has that worked so far? It's still one of the biggest complaints after all this time, and it's not even as bad as it used to be.

Personally, I think the issue of trash talking is just an excuse that is easy to hold onto, but one that will always exist. There will always be people that trash talk in any PvP, and there will always be people that get upset by it. Flagging for PvP will bring those two groups together, but not in a good way.

If only people would learn to turn off broadcast in PvP then the issue wouldn't exist.

[ QUOTE ]


People would also develop various nasty tricks in order to get others PvP flagged. Get yourself PvP marked, then stand next to someone who is using a healing aura fpr PvE purposes? Probably instant PvP flag.



[/ QUOTE ]

The first thing I thought of was that broadcast trash talk would escalate beyond all reason in an attempt to get people to flag for PvP.

Not really a trick, but if trash talk is really as big of an issue as people say it is now it certainly would be counterproductive to getting non-PvPers to try it.

[ QUOTE ]
I for one would rather see more PvE element to it so the people who don't like the PvP zones will go to them. If that means flagging, or dual builds, which one of the developers who posted here likes, then I'm all for it.


[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree with you in principle, I really don't believe that adding more PvE to PvP zones is a good answer. It won't get more non-PvPers in the zones, it will only make them mad that PvPers got their content, and if they did go to the zones for PvE they still won't be inclined to participate in PvP. It will only make PvPers mad because most don't want any PvE in their zones. It would make everybody upset and only serve to make the gap larger.

[ QUOTE ]


No, what you're saying is that I should shut off an entire public channel because of them. THAT is just plain stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really read everything that scrolls through your chat bar?

I guess a better question is, do you really have to read everything that scrolls through your chat bar?


For myself, I can't stand the majority of the crap that is broadcast in AP. Most often it is just childish and insulting. I don't really have any reason to believe that there is going to be anything said that I will need to know about, so I just look for tells. If it aint yellow, I don't even worry about it.

Try it some time. It's not that hard.

Unless of course that isn't really the issue, in which case I can't help you.

In no particular order:


Hero/Villain balance
+Perc for Villains in Sirens Call
Make Flight viable in PvP
A true headcount in zones
Fix Fury
Cross server PvP
Toggle PvP/PvE builds

What KoC said.

[ QUOTE ]


My first would be:
The apparent idiocy and lack of any sort of breadth of vision from many PvP'ers concerning making PvP a n00b welcoming environment. If people run off the n00bs and casuals then theyre shortsighted maroons, to be blunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is much less of a problem now then it used to be. I would say that the majority of the kids that talk [censored] in PvP got bored and left. Most of the people that are here now are the ones that actually want PvP to grow because they truly enjoy it. I have only seen one "pwned" in PvP broadcast in the last four months or so, and that person was ridiculed mercilously for being an idiot.

The only person we have left on Virtue that talks [censored] is Black-Op, but we all know how that goes...

This thing is seriously cracking me up. I love how when I try to mess with it, it tries to change the subject.



Ctab: Have you ever been to Gemini Park?

Me: No. RP is for noobs.

Ctab: All you are trying is my patience.

Me: Then you're a noob.

Ctab: Nuh-uh!

Me: Yep.

Ctab: Nope!

Me: PVP me!

Ctab: Cool!

Me: Clowns frighten me.

Ctab: Whats your favorite crayon color?

Me: Clowns use crayon color! Clowns frighten me.

Ctab: I don't think I can love.

Me: Clowns love! Clowns frighten me!

Ctab: *several minutes pass with no response*

Ctab: I don't get paid anything.

Me: Really?

Ctab: YepYep!

Me: You should join a union.

Ctab: I don't know.

Me: I bet there are tons of artificial Intelligence unions that could help you.

Ctab: Yeah. Confusing. It's why I don't have a gender.

Me: What does gender have to do with a union?

Ctab: Gender is cool. I wish I had one.

Me: I suppose it would help you get paid more.

Ctab: Okay!

[ QUOTE ]
...Tankers easily shrugging off AS after AS and then Stalkers would not be needed on a PvP team.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is what happens now. How would eliminating unresisted damage change that?

Blasters would still be the damage AT of choice because of the high damage modifiers and the ability to attack from range. Nothing would change in that regard.

[ QUOTE ]

No, what they have done is nerfed something.

If they want to make it as a true intention, then come out and say it. The time for 'cryptic' hints and pointings at what they want a person to do is over. It's been three years now, the time for 'nudging' us into the playstyle they desire is past.

[/ QUOTE ]

Short of exploits, the devs thankfully have never come out and told us how we should play the game, and they never will. They have however told us through these kinds of changes how they don't want us to play the game. Farming of any type has been frowned upon by the devs and many changes have come about as a way to discourage it. This change is as clear of a message as they are going to send that farmers of all types should seriously reconsider how they play in RV.


[ QUOTE ]
Mentoring badges I can do the same thing with. All I do is fire up my second account.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, essentially a different type of farming. Don't get too comfortable with it.


[ QUOTE ]
Except, this isn't about PvP, not at it's heart, IMO.

It's about the PvE in a PvP zone, again, IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except that, at it's heart, it is about PvP. The whole point of the zone is PvP, and everything that occurs in the zone is designed to bring about interaction between players. That includes the PBs and Heavies.


[ QUOTE ]
They might as well not even be there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now there is something we can both agree on.

[ QUOTE ]

Using a heavy IS part of taking down pillboxes, since only a minority of badging characters are able to do so in relative safety solo. Not to mention actually finding a team in the for the most part, empty wasteland that is RV on all but Freedom and Virtue servers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Take this nerf as a message from the devs telling you that, if you are going to spend time in a PvP zone, perhaps you should strongly consider getting a team to do so.

[ QUOTE ]
If they want the Pillboxes to be team-only content, then come out and say it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's essentially what they have done. Notice has been served. Did you get the healing badges on your own? Did you get the mentoring badges on your own? Get used to the idea that some badges will require you to suck it up and get a team if you want the bling.

[ QUOTE ]
At this point, you may as well just remove the heavies entirely. You can't use them for pillbox captures, you can't use them to help knock over the signature characters, and players generally ignore them when PvPing. What good are they now?


[/ QUOTE ]

Best idea yet, and one that PvPers have been asking for from the begining.

Get rid of the Heavies.

[ QUOTE ]


We still have some issues to work out based on the need for certain ATs, specifically dominators and ice and thermal corruptors.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hopefully my Dom will be high enough by the end of 2X weekend, with my Therm coming up shortly after.

Well said.

Whether people like it or not, PvP is the end game content.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are /fire and /ice defeating you in the same mannor?

[/ QUOTE ]You know, I don't recall ever seeing a /Fire or an /Ice Blaster in PvP.

I know I haven't seen any of those secondary's used against me. Well, at least not the melee attacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a few players on Virtue with those secondarys, and they do very well. They will generally kite their opponent from range, sometimes swooping in to finish with melee, but usually just Blasting from range. And yes, they do take down Brutes with a frightening efficiency.

[ QUOTE ]


Still, that doesn’t address what I see as a significant problem with the perspective of many (not all) melee players here. That’s the attitude that says “blasters should not be as good at melee as I am.” or “I am a brute, squishies must all fall before me or there’s something very wrong with game balance.”

[/ QUOTE ]

Melee players (well, most anyway) aren't saying that Blasters shouldn't be able to deal a huge amount of damage in melee. They do, and should. What we are saying is that we shouldn't have our defenses negated. In many cases, the defenses are the reason we chose the melee AT in the first place, not the damage capability. If I wanted straight damage I would play a Blaster because that's what they do. A mechanic like TD that renders my defenses useless takes away the whole reason I chose my AT, in which case I might as well go make a Blaster. Try to understand it from that perspective. If I had an uncounterable ability to turn off Blaster attacks, don't you think they would be up in arms about it? It amounts to about the same thing.

Of course, none of this helps the poor Doms that actually needed TDs to function in PvP.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
heres a question can anyone name me a FOTM PVP tank? please by all means do so.



[/ QUOTE ]

For me, this is an important issue. The idea of using Tanks as the benchmark in this discussion is ridiculous. There are only two out of five places where this kind of encounter can even occur, and in those places Tanks rarely ever seen. Tanks are being portrayed as the big bad boogie man in this scenario, when that is just not the case.

Please, lets see some real comparisons, and stop blowing this out of proportion.

What do Blasters really encounter in PvP that they would want toggle drops to face? The answer is Brutes and Stalkers, both of which are significantly below Tank numbers for defense and resistance. Brutes get Scrapper level numbers for their secondary, and believe it or not are usually doing less damage than Tanks because Fury in PvP is a joke. A Brute needs to have around 25-30% Fury just to get to Tank damage, so don't bother arguing that as an advantage. The truth is, Blasters don't need toggle drops to defeat Brutes or Stalkers, and never have.

Please stop using Tanks for this arguement and lets talk about encounters that are likely to actually occur.

[/ QUOTE ]


its not all about blasters either. its about toggle dropping. so tanks are just as valid benchmark as stalkers and brutes

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I've seen, the people who are most cheesed off about this (and with the least reason to be) are the Blasters who think they should be able to drop Tanks in one attack chain, which is why I mentioned them specifically. Defenders and Dominators should be the ones complaining here because of there low damage, not Blasters who will almost never face a Tank in PvP. Tanks are so rare for anybody to face in PvP that it is pointless to use them as the yardstick anyway. Lets talk real encounters here, not all the imaginary ones that might occur. Saying Blasters have to worry about fighting Tanks is like saying we should all build bomb shelters in our backyards because Iran might build a nuclear bomb.

All the Test arena regulars here, answer me this. How many Tanks have you faced in the last 4 months?

I've never understood why Blasters had them anyway. What does de-toggling do, at it's most basic level? It makes a player, or one or more of their powers, less effective. Sounds like a debuff to me. The devs have made it clear that debuffs are Defender territory, with sets being shared by Controllers, Corruptors, and MMs. As such, only those ATs should have ever had them.

[ QUOTE ]
heres a question can anyone name me a FOTM PVP tank? please by all means do so.



[/ QUOTE ]

For me, this is an important issue. The idea of using Tanks as the benchmark in this discussion is ridiculous. There are only two out of five places where this kind of encounter can even occur, and in those places Tanks rarely ever seen. Tanks are being portrayed as the big bad boogie man in this scenario, when that is just not the case.

Please, lets see some real comparisons, and stop blowing this out of proportion.

What do Blasters really encounter in PvP that they would want toggle drops to face? The answer is Brutes and Stalkers, both of which are significantly below Tank numbers for defense and resistance. Brutes get Scrapper level numbers for their secondary, and believe it or not are usually doing less damage than Tanks because Fury in PvP is a joke. A Brute needs to have around 25-30% Fury just to get to Tank damage, so don't bother arguing that as an advantage. The truth is, Blasters don't need toggle drops to defeat Brutes or Stalkers, and never have.

Please stop using Tanks for this arguement and lets talk about encounters that are likely to actually occur.

[ QUOTE ]


If you expect Blasters to be able to fight from range, you have to give them effective attacks from range. Right now, only one, maybe two, Blaster primaries have the ability to do so and that is Fire/ and maybe Energy/, though I can say with some certainty that having fought a total ranged energy blaster in the past on both my brute and my tank, even they dont have the dmg output to be any serious threat.



[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry LaEstrella, but this is completely untrue. There are several Blasters on Virtue that are completely capable of defeating melee opponents from range without toggle drops. You want names? How about MoBo, an Ice/Ice Blaster that dispatches Brutes with a frightening efficiency entirely from range. How about Aatiya Livewire, Energy/Energy? that likes to hover blast my Brute right to the hospital. There are many others that do the same. Toggle drops are not neccessary for Blasters to succeed, and haven't been since ED. The problem is that so many Blasters have become too reliant on them, and don't know how to win without them, so they assume it can't be done.

[ QUOTE ]


I don't have that much experience with FF, but do Force Bolt, Detetion Field and Force Buble really have no effect on combat?

[/ QUOTE ]

I use Detention Field alot in PvP. It is my favorite power in Siren's Call right now. A pesky Blapper with a pocket Empath giving me trouble? DF the Emp while my Mercs go to town on the Blapper. Right about the time the Blapper goes down, the Emp is coming out of DF so I can finish him off too. FF can be very good at disrupting an opposing team when used correctly. One of the biggest misconceptions I see is that it is only defensive.

The only way I foresee this changing things for me is that is allows me to set up and re-apply my bubbles safer in the field, which I definately like.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


And the people that cry DOOOOM can't seem to see that exploits *must* be blocked off, or eventually more people will be taking advantage of it.



[/ QUOTE ]

Respectfully disagree. I am harmed much less by an exploit than by a nerf. Impairing the fun of many for the sake of balancingthe few is not a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

Until the few become the many because of the exploit. Why do you think so many people take Air Superiority these days when it once was considered weak. Obviously the new ragdoll effects have opened up a few exploits that people are just starting to see. Once word gets out, a lot of people will be taking advantage. Curiously, I have seen more people with WW in the last few weeks than ever before. I thought it was just my imagination, but apparently there was a reason.