Mercurysteam's Hangout
SPACELORDS COMMUNITY => Spacelords Universe => Topic started by: Cryptek on September 29, 2018, 12:43:31 PM
-
(https://i.redd.it/vwq6nis9h5p11.jpg)
There is something profoundly wrong about this for both sides, one is that obviously 3 newbies being matched against a high level player only makes you dread the "mentor match" whenever it pops up even more, because not only are you dealing with people who dont know the game, who you cant communicate with but there might also be an antagonist who pops up and destroys your entire team.
Secondly as the antagonist, I didn't die once, I beat them in the big room with lycus and then I proceeded to spawn camp them, that's correct I took them on 4v1 in their spawn. Obviously I could only do this because it was a mentor match with 3 newbies, but for the game to then give you a 6,7 when it was literally impossible to accomplish the mission anymore smoothly just feels like a slap in the face.
This is wronging both sides of the issue.
-
Did anyone quit ? Usually 2 out of 3 mentor matches, new players quit.
-
Did anyone quit ? Usually 2 out of 3 mentor matches, new players quit.
No they lost so fast none of them bothered to pull the plug, although that's usually what happens even without an antagonist, whenever I have a baby-harec on my team I feel like its a 50/50 if they'll stay until the match is over regardless of how well or bad it's going.
-
You say it's not okay yet you still went through with destroying these beginners that will probably quit playing this game because of your actions. Inb4 "i'm just playing as intended" gg.
-
You say it's not okay yet you still went through with destroying these beginners that will probably quit playing this game because of your actions. Inb4 "i'm just playing as intended" gg.
What you want me to just AFK for the entire match or get a disconnect penalty just because its a mentor match?
-
There's your proof people! It is IMPOSSIBLE to get higher scores in PvP as a Raider OR and Antagonists. This guy has the BEST antagonists situation that could have been imagined and he got a 6.7? I've also had games as Raiders where an antagonists was peaceful and we didn't die once and pulled of a 7.5 to 8 in the end. There is currently no incentive to PvP over PvE. You simply get more rewards against the AI. :(
Those poor new players. I wouldn't have attacked them as antag, I don't want to drive new players away from the game. This is probably sure to do so.
-
Those poor new players. I wouldn't have attacked them as antag, I don't want to drive new players away from the game. This is probably sure to do so.
They where gonna leave anyway if one loss against a high level antag would turn them away, hell a lot of people leave just fighting the computer. The kind of player who will stick with the game wont be deterred by losing in 5 minutes in my opinion, since this game in general will kick your ass, antag or no.
Because lets be fair they're not going to stand much more of a chance at level 10 or level 20, in fact I'd say they probably wont have a chance until they're around level 50 because the first time they face a new character as antag they'll kick their ass simply for them not understanding their strengths and weaknesses.
-
I don't thin MSE holds the same sentiment as you. They probably want to retain as many players as possible, and they won't do it with an opinion like that.
-
I don't thin MSE holds the same sentiment as you. They probably want to retain as many players as possible, and they won't do it with an opinion like that.
Hence why I'm saying that the people responsible for creating the situation (Mercurysteam) should take responsibility and fix the system by preventing people from being invaded by antagonists in mentor matches, since it would actually give veterans an incentive to accept mentor matches, which are already horrible enough mind you (especially for us PC players since we have ZERO communication options).
-
Not only should antags not be allowed in mentor matches, I think what is considered a new player in need of mentoring should be increased, imo anyone below lvl 20 should be considered as being mentored.
-
Just ran into a level 492 antag in a mentor match. Sadly, he went all out and crushed us in a few minutes. I'm sure the level 3 and 8 will keep playing after that experience. The next highest level was me at 81 and of course I was using a stock character since it was a blueprint mission.
-
I don't believe stock weapons have strong value in a game that has PvP. They seem more like a liability than a reliable feature. If the game made PvP optional, i could see them being useful. But, I've never built a stock weapon for normal gameplay. I only build one pre Spacelords re-branding so I could AFK antag and get decent rewards still, while lowering my MMR and getting antag affinity, so it wouldn't be a waste of time. But after they nerfed rewards for losing in this game, I didn't bother with stock weapons and built every weapon to maximize success on a mission. Which to me, seems to be more of a problem than anything lately, with Mentor matches and antagonists.
-
I don't believe stock weapons have strong value in a game that has PvP. They seem more like a liability than a reliable feature. If the game made PvP optional, i could see them being useful. But, I've never built a stock weapon for normal gameplay. I only build one pre Spacelords re-branding so I could AFK antag and get decent rewards still, while lowering my MMR and getting antag affinity, so it wouldn't be a waste of time. But after they nerfed rewards for losing in this game, I didn't bother with stock weapons and built every weapon to maximize success on a mission. Which to me, seems to be more of a problem than anything lately, with Mentor matches and antagonists.
Yeah, I didn't really have a choice though since I can't afford to craft the rares, and I don't have a common blueprint for something better. So I'm basically forced to use a worthless weapon with that character since that is the only way to get a better one. Still, facing a level ~500 antag with 2 newbies isn't really fair regardless of which character I was using. It's not fair for the new players, it's not fair for the 2 players that are forced to carry, and it's not fair for the antag to not even get a challenge (although he didn't see to mind killing them instantly).
-
Those poor new players. I wouldn't have attacked them as antag, I don't want to drive new players away from the game. This is probably sure to do so.
They where gonna leave anyway if one loss against a high level antag would turn them away, hell a lot of people leave just fighting the computer. The kind of player who will stick with the game wont be deterred by losing in 5 minutes in my opinion, since this game in general will kick your ass, antag or no.
Because lets be fair they're not going to stand much more of a chance at level 10 or level 20, in fact I'd say they probably wont have a chance until they're around level 50 because the first time they face a new character as antag they'll kick their ass simply for them not understanding their strengths and weaknesses.
(https://i.imgur.com/7lWjDiH.png)
But we're just gonna repeat the same 5 lame arguments over and over again for the 10,000th time. Nothing to see here.
But yeah it's pretty bad that you did that well and got such a low score. Also all of you are looking at the level difference, but no one has even mentioned the MASSIVE difference in MMR here. That's the real crime.
-
(https://i.redd.it/mhwnsz9im6q11.jpg)
To those who feel bad for the newbies in the first post, I guess you could say I got what I deserved ;D
22 minutes against a Konstantin doing everything to throw away the bombs or shoot them was grueling work, but getting the two newbies their guns made it worth the effort!
Sadly I doubt that baby-harec is ever coming back.
-
(https://i.redd.it/mhwnsz9im6q11.jpg)
To those who feel bad for the newbies in the first post, I guess you could say I got what I deserved ;D
22 minutes against a Konstantin doing everything to throw away the bombs or shoot them was grueling work, but getting the two newbies their guns made it worth the effort!
Sadly I doubt that baby-harec is ever coming back.
At least they got the blueprints! And when everything is done, no one had a good time. That's the worst part since the antag just ruins the game in most cases either by making you lose what would have been a challenging match, or by giving you less rewards despite requiring more effort.
This reminds me of what Todd Howard said about making PvP in Fallout 76 as you don't need a reason to make players grief others, but you do need a way to make those griefers into valuable content. The antag is no different here and MSE needs to figure out how to reward raiders so that they want to face antags, but you don't really need a reason to make players want to play as an antag (and Spacelords already has one with the card system).
-
And when everything is done, no one had a good time.
Now that's not technically correct, it may just be because I'm a Dark souls veteran or secretly a masochist. But I loved the match, I just wish the rewards weren't shit because I can without a doubt say I'll be remembering that match for months.. I generally dont even remember PVE matches the next day or hell sometimes even an hour later.
But with the match coming down to the wire more than once (during both phases) and several encounters where it was either a case of getting progress snatched away right at the finish line, or just narrowly managing to squeeze by. With me doing my best Harec impression as he managed to not 3, not 4 but 5 times foil our attempt to blow the last tank up RIGHT AT THE TANK.
In the end the frustration and anger only made carrying those two newbies to their BPs all the sweeter.
-
And when everything is done, no one had a good time.
Now that's not technically correct, it may just be because I'm a Dark souls veteran or secretly a masochist. But I loved the match, I just wish the rewards weren't shit because I can without a doubt say I'll be remembering that match for months.. I generally dont even remember PVE matches the next day or hell sometimes even an hour later.
But with the match coming down to the wire more than once (during both phases) and several encounters where it was either a case of getting progress snatched away right at the finish line, or just narrowly managing to squeeze by. With me doing my best Harec impression as he managed to not 3, not 4 but 5 times foil our attempt to blow the last tank up RIGHT AT THE TANK.
In the end the frustration and anger only made carrying those two newbies to their BPs all the sweeter.
You say you're having fun but then a literal paragraph later state that you were frustrated and angry during the match. Please decide which one is it. You probably meant that the end felt rewarding because of the victory and the newbies getting their blueprints, but at the same time was the match actually fun not just for you but your team which had no choice but to either slug through it or disconnect and get penalized.
-
You say you're having fun but then a literal sentence later state that you were frustrated and angry during the match. Please decide which one is it. You probably meant that the end felt rewarding because of the victory and the newbies getting their blueprints, but at the same time was the match actually fun not just for you but your team which had no choice but to either slug through it or disconnect and get penalized.
Frustration and anger dont need to be seen as negatives, they're powerful emotions, a pendulum of going "no, no, NOOOOO" and "yes! TAKE THAT" ups and downs serve to accentuate each other. You will never feel the same sense of satisfaction if you're just given a 10/10 in 5 minutes with no effort, as if you had to fight tooth and nail to narrowly make it across the goal line for a 6/10.
But as you pointed out yourself, they should change the reward system to tap into this, because in my opinion PVE can only ever keep a franchise going so long without constant content updates (which are expensive), PVP on the other hand is the gift that keeps on giving.
-
You say you're having fun but then a literal sentence later state that you were frustrated and angry during the match. Please decide which one is it. You probably meant that the end felt rewarding because of the victory and the newbies getting their blueprints, but at the same time was the match actually fun not just for you but your team which had no choice but to either slug through it or disconnect and get penalized.
Frustration and anger dont need to be seen as negatives, they're powerful emotions, a pendulum of going "no, no, NOOOOO" and "yes! TAKE THAT" ups and downs serve to accentuate each other. You will never feel the same sense of satisfaction if you're just given a 10/10 in 5 minutes with no effort, as if you had to fight tooth and nail to narrowly make it across the goal line for a 6/10.
But as you pointed out yourself, they should change the reward system to tap into this, because in my opinion PVE can only ever keep a franchise going so long without constant content updates (which are expensive), PVP on the other hand is the gift that keeps on giving.
I see where you're coming but not everyone thinks like that. I just hope they can fix the pvp issues before it's too late.
-
I see where you're coming but not everyone thinks like that. I just hope they can fix the pvp issues before it's too late.
I never claimed the two newbies had a good time or hell even the antagonist, I just felt like I had to point out that at least one person had fun despite everything.
I mean my point in the OP was that antagonists shouldn't even be allowed in mentor matches! The new player experience is pretty bad in this game, antag or no because I've had missions with close to 50% difficulty, in mentor matches! Newbies thrown into a situation like that will have a horrible first impression of the game.
-
You say you're having fun but then a literal sentence later state that you were frustrated and angry during the match. Please decide which one is it. You probably meant that the end felt rewarding because of the victory and the newbies getting their blueprints, but at the same time was the match actually fun not just for you but your team which had no choice but to either slug through it or disconnect and get penalized.
Frustration and anger dont need to be seen as negatives, they're powerful emotions, a pendulum of going "no, no, NOOOOO" and "yes! TAKE THAT" ups and downs serve to accentuate each other. You will never feel the same sense of satisfaction if you're just given a 10/10 in 5 minutes with no effort, as if you had to fight tooth and nail to narrowly make it across the goal line for a 6/10.
But as you pointed out yourself, they should change the reward system to tap into this, because in my opinion PVE can only ever keep a franchise going so long without constant content updates (which are expensive), PVP on the other hand is the gift that keeps on giving.
I see where you're coming but not everyone thinks like that. I just hope they can fix the pvp issues before it's too late.
Completely agree, not everyone does feel this way. Frustration and anger for me means I am not having a good time at all. There is a lot of people who find elation after frustrating gameplay and criticize others that if they just tried harder at games like Dark Souls, Mythic Raids in WoW, and on hard PvP games that they will feel rewarded. But I'm an older gamer and so I see it differently.
If I'm not getting compensated for my time with entertainment and enjoyment I feel cheated. If I am having a terrible time even if I win I don't feel happy, because the experience was bad. A perfect Example was back in WoW, Wrath of the Litch King: Our guild was stuck on Syndregosa for a long time and we fought her every weekend and many times we got close. As a young man I fell for the bait. I thought that smashing against this wall was going to mean something in the end that I would appreciate if I won. After finally winning from 30 or more attempts over a month or more I didn't feel happy at all. I remember it distinctly; she finally died and all I got was some piece of armor or some token, I don't even remember and I didn't care. I was pist. The reward didn't compare or was worth all the hell I had went through. I realized that I felt duped, I felt fooled like I was tricked to thinking this was going to matter and that somehow it was going to be worth it. But it wasn't. Some digital piece of meaningless nothing, that would be outdated in a few months anyways and a feeling of lost time with no REAL reward. At this point I realized completely that I hated super hard games. That nothing a game developer can give you within their game could be rewarding enough to make me feel better. I realized that the reward of the game should be in playing the game itself and then accompanied by some rewards as well.
I think the culture of gamers changed. Young people find false sense of accomplishment in drudging through hardship. But as an adult I ALREADY get this in real life with REAL life challenges. But the difference is that in real life, with bills, relationships, careers, etc... the stress and anguish you go through pays off with REAL rewards that make it worth it. so when a game subjects you with the same level of distress and anguish and then gives you a digital token of your time it feels empty. Unless the developers of any particular ultra hard game could send me a check in the mail, or a real life reward then there just isn't any way I would have incentive to subject myself to anguish and anger, it isn't worth it.
Some might say, "But you get stronger and better." I say,to that, for what? What will me beating Syndrigosa do? Can I put it on a resume? Will someone say, "You beat those hard games, here have some real money.". The answer is nothing. You don't take the experience you had and apply it to anything else, therefore it's a false accomplishment with no merit or true return of investment.
I don't mind challenge, as long as it delights me and gets me to exert myself a little, but not too much or else I am stressed and angry, not engaged and interested. As an older person who has a good idea of what time, rewards and entertainment is I think a game should be something you can get off of work and play after an ALREADY stressful day where you ALREADY did work, and actually are paid. But if I purchased the entertainment and am giving it precious time of my limited life I don't want to come home to another job where I don't enjoy and am not paid for. I want to relax, and have fun. Be rewarded for my time and not be stressed or angry.
This isn't to say that I believe others who like hard challenges are wrong. I'm just saying I would like the option not to have the stress in a game I play after I get home with limited time to waste after work as an already stressed adult. Making PvP optional would fix this. I would allow for some of us just to have fun feeling like a hero against enemy AI that can be challenging enough to peak our interest and make us engaged. Add an antag in there and some of us tilt, disconnect, surrender, suicide, AFK, because we feel the experience will not be worth it and that we shouldn't invest time in a game with an antagonist as it will only bring anguish and anger and nothing that could feel rewarding enough to compensate us for that state of emotional distress.
I'm praying that somewhere in the road-map there will be some sort of way for people like me to enjoy themselves. Sorry for the rant.
/rant
-
Young people find false sense of accomplishment in drudging through hardship. But as an adult
That's a rather childish and bigoted opinion to have, in my case I think about the experiences and memories more than any fleeting currency or meaningless score at the end of the mission, exactly because I am an oldschool gamer.
There was a time when the term "Nintendo hard" was a thing, likewise oldschool PC gaming, especially before the internet with guides and stuff, meant you where in for hours and hours of grueling hard work to figure things out for yourself, because you had no real information to go on when making your purchase so you picked the game with the cool cover and by god you where gonna get your moneys worth even if it was a buggy, unplayable mess. Your reward? If you where lucky a 10 second cut scene using in game assets and a text scroll, most of the time you'd just get a single screen saying "congratulations".
And my advise to you would be: Dont play a game with random 4v1 pvp matches if pvp stresses you out and makes you unhappy, that's a self fulfilling prophecy for giving yourself a bad time.
I can understand saying the current MMR is fucked up or the new player experience is bad, but if a core selling point of the game is leaving you unfulfilled (and not just because the rewards currently suck for both parties), maybe you should consider that this just isn't the game for you.
There is no shame in saying "my job leaves me too emotionally drained to deal with losing in a video game" and switching to something more casual, it's your time after all.
-
I think Level9Drow hit the nail on the head; it's about respecting the player's time. Its one thing to reward the player for playing the game and to keep making the game harder the more that player succeeds. It's another thing to force the player to face an antag and potentially make the game harder/longer and reducing the rewards. One respects the player's time and the other wastes it.
Now some players have more time than others so wasting some of it may not matter to them, but for many players failing a long, hard fought mission and scoring a 3.2 doesn't really respect their time when they could have gotten a 6.5 against the AI. This is especially problematic for blueprint missions since you need to win and if you get a duplicate you basically wasted your time anyway.
-
Young people find false sense of accomplishment in drudging through hardship. But as an adult
That's a rather childish and bigoted opinion to have, in my case I think about the experiences and memories more than any fleeting currency or meaningless score at the end of the mission, exactly because I am an oldschool gamer.
There was a time when the term "Nintendo hard" was a thing, likewise oldschool PC gaming, especially before the internet with guides and stuff, meant you where in for hours and hours of grueling hard work to figure things out for yourself, because you had no real information to go on when making your purchase so you picked the game with the cool cover and by god you where gonna get your moneys worth even if it was a buggy, unplayable mess. Your reward? If you where lucky a 10 second cut scene using in game assets and a text scroll, most of the time you'd just get a single screen saying "congratulations".
And my advise to you would be: Dont play a game with random 4v1 pvp matches if pvp stresses you out and makes you unhappy, that's a self fulfilling prophecy for giving yourself a bad time.
I can understand saying the current MMR is fucked up or the new player experience is bad, but if a core selling point of the game is leaving you unfulfilled (and not just because the rewards currently suck for both parties), maybe you should consider that this just isn't the game for you.
There is no shame in saying "my job leaves me too emotionally drained to deal with losing in a video game" and switching to something more casual, it's your time after all.
I just don't understand why we can't just have both. I know that the game advertises 4v1 but the reality is the larger part of the player base just plays for the co-op pve. If the players that mainly just pve would listen to your solution then this game will die. I love the art style and gameplay of this game even if at times the AI and glitches can be irritating. It's a good game and i really wouldn't want to quit it just because I do not like the random pvp.
-
I just don't understand why we can't just have both. I know that the game advertises 4v1 but the reality is the larger part of the player base just plays for the co-op pve. If the players that mainly just pve would listen to your solution then this game will die. I love the art style and gameplay of this game even if at times the AI and glitches can be irritating. It's a good game and i really wouldn't want to quit it just because I do not like the random pvp.
I get complaining about the rewards.
I get complaining about matchmaking being broken.
I get complaining about the lack of in game communication being unbearable.
I get complaining about the fact that mentor matches offer no real incentive to play (especially when you cant even communicate and help the new players, I mean for crying out loud the only reason warframe does so well is because the community helps teach new players the game).
I get complaining about balancing issues.
What I don't get is complaining about a core feature and system of the game (it's unique 4v1 pvp) over a year after the game came out, when the developers clearly intended for that to be the main playstyle for the game. It's like "what where you expecting?".
What I get even less than that however: Is how people can justify suggesting splitting a already tiny community, and then having the audacity to pretend it wouldn't make the current queue times even more abysmal.
-
Young people find false sense of accomplishment in drudging through hardship. But as an adult
That's a rather childish and bigoted opinion to have, in my case I think about the experiences and memories more than any fleeting currency or meaningless score at the end of the mission, exactly because I am an oldschool gamer.
There was a time when the term "Nintendo hard" was a thing, likewise oldschool PC gaming, especially before the internet with guides and stuff, meant you where in for hours and hours of grueling hard work to figure things out for yourself, because you had no real information to go on when making your purchase so you picked the game with the cool cover and by god you where gonna get your moneys worth even if it was a buggy, unplayable mess. Your reward? If you where lucky a 10 second cut scene using in game assets and a text scroll, most of the time you'd just get a single screen saying "congratulations".
And my advise to you would be: Dont play a game with random 4v1 pvp matches if pvp stresses you out and makes you unhappy, that's a self fulfilling prophecy for giving yourself a bad time.
I can understand saying the current MMR is fucked up or the new player experience is bad, but if a core selling point of the game is leaving you unfulfilled (and not just because the rewards currently suck for both parties), maybe you should consider that this just isn't the game for you.
There is no shame in saying "my job leaves me too emotionally drained to deal with losing in a video game" and switching to something more casual, it's your time after all.
I don't think you know what the definition of bigoted means. That word doesn't fit within the context of our conversation, it has to do with race, religion, sexism, etc... but not videogame philosophy. Also by saying that you also invalidate my existence and experience as an older gamer. And no one is saying that people are wrong to want hard games, just that more options would be good. Saying it's bigoted also means that it's impossible for anyone to have any different opinion on the matter, or they're "bigoted". I'm not trying to stir the pot here, or become your adversary, I'm just trying to inform you kindly that you are reading a bit too much negativity in what I am saying.
This game is rated M, which means the demographic is mostly adults. Adult usually have jobs and most adults already feel they work. So it's not like we're dealing with a rated T game where kids and teenagers, who don't have a sense of money and time know any better. As a kid, sure, I had tones of time and put up with a lot more from video games. So it's not like this game has the wrong demographic and it was supposed to be kids with all the time on their hands.
It's also a myth about "Nintendo hard" most Nintendo games were just fine. They offered moderate challenge. There were a few that stood out and took the limelight, but most Nintendo games, even the good ones, were moderately challenging that required some hard work, but the pacing and progress was never hindered. A lot of hard games, also, were due to glitches and poor design rather than the developers genuinely wanting something to be an impassable wall. So I think "Nintendo Hard" is a hyperbole, I had a lot of fun with my NES and SNES.
Next you brought up hard work and progression. Hard work was never an issue. As long as the pacing is constant, the work is rewarded for and the developers don't have huge spikes of difficulties in the form of impassable walls that stop progress. I've had plenty of games that took time and hard work, I find them rewarding. Time and hard work are not synonymous with stress, anger and anguish though.
Everything you said up to this point was, for the most part, fair and respectable. But the last part was rather underhanded and demeaning. The ol' "Maybe the game isn't for you!" and then you put some extra snark by stating, "There's no shame." How dare you. This is a lazy shield to hide behind in order to shut out another's opinion. Your comment would imply that there is something wrong with me after working. I assure you, there isn't, so you can dispense with your snarky implication.
I was as polite as I could be. I'm sorry you disagree with me, but I feel if the game had an optional PvP function both gamer types could coexist peacefully without stepping on each other's toes. You could have all the masochistic joy you could ever want fighting antagonists with low level players who disconnect and reveling in your frustration and I could completely not care about the whole affair of antagonists and completely ignore the PvP mess, as it would no longer be any of my concern, and just enjoy uninterrupted progression and actually have fun with hard work and time spent as it would not be robbed from me by other players.
-
I don't think you know what the definition of bigoted means.
English may not be my first language but I too can look up a dictionary:
bigot noun [ C ]
uk /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ us /ˈbɪɡ.ət/ disapproving
a person who has strong, unreasonable beliefs and who does not like other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life.
As for the Nintendo part: If you're claiming Contra, Ninja Gaiden, Castlevania, Battletoads, TMNT or the slew of other games specfically built to break your balls where just "moderately challenging" I'll have to ask you to take off your rosetinted glasses, the NES had more than Kirby ya know. It was the era of arcade games so most games funnily enough had the mentality that they where out for your blood.
As for your other points, I'll refer to my earlier response to people complaining about PVP not being optional.
If you take being called "casual" as an offense that's up to you, I'm simply drawing the logical conclusion that if something you're doing in your free time to wind down, is stressing you out and giving you an unpleasant experience, maybe you should stop since that's basically self harm. But dont go forcing your values on others by saying adults cant enjoy hard games, people are wired differently and some people take video games more seriously than others for better or worse.
-
Cryptek, the moment MSE allowed you to play a match without an antagonist present it became optional to have one. So for you to claim that the core of the game requires an antagonist is simply false. The fact that you cannot choose when an antagonist invades your game is what the argument is here; not having one has always been possible.
EDIT: As for splitting an already small community, well the community would not be as small if antags were optional. Furthermore, you are worried about queue times as an antagonist which would also improve if there was a reason to play against them. Right now there is exactly 1 reason to play as an antagonist and it requires minimal play time to flip your experience meter from raider to antagonist. Any more than that and you are doing it purely to grief others, even if it is fun for you, since only the antagonist gets to decide when PvP will occur.
-
What I don't get is complaining about a core feature and system of the game (it's unique 4v1 pvp) over a year after the game came out, when the developers clearly intended for that to be the main playstyle for the game. It's like "what where you expecting?".
What I get even less than that however: Is how people can justify suggesting splitting a already tiny community, and then having the audacity to pretend it wouldn't make the current queue times even more abysmal.
Core feature lol, it’s such a “core feature” that many players wouldn’t even be playing this game if it was not for pve matches, antags can repeat that all they want, hell even MS can claim that, but the reality, the fact is, that antags/pvp are not the core of the game, it’s not uncommon for an artist for example to start piece with a clear goal in mind, yet ends up with something unintended, different from that original vision, that doesn’t mean worse, as is the case with raiders imo.
This game manages to please both pve and pvp players, which is fine, but there is no reason why both sides need to be forced to play together, the community should be split, because there is no reason I or any other pve player should be in a match for the entertainment of an antag.
All the reasons in your earlier post as to why you enjoy pvp in this game mean squat to someone like me, we basically see it in polar opposites, which shouldn’t be an issue, because we should be playing 2 different modes altogether, some ppl are in it only for the characters/skins, the graphics, the combat, taking down mobs and getting xp/gold (which means high scores), I don’t want some annoying little sh**t bothering me while I’m taking down grunts, elites and the boss.
-
Cryptek, I just wanted you to know that I don't want PvP to end for you. I want you to be able to have fun playing PvP and to get enjoyment out of it. I don't begrudge you for enjoying it either, nor do I feel you are wrong for liking it. What I don't like is that you want to force me, or people like me, to be target practice for you at the detriment of out enjoyment and progress.
Why? If I believe you should have a good time, why wouldn't you believe I shouldn't? That seems a bit unfair. Seems to me that you aren't interested in real PvP with others who also want to engage in PvP, you are interested in preying on people who don't want to play in your sand box with you. If I am wrong, and you DO want real PvP and only want willing opponents, then you should be vying for optional PvP as well. Otherwise you are a bully. I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe you are not a griefer troll and honestly want PvP.
-
Furthermore, you are worried about queue times as an antagonist which would also improve if there was a reason to play against them.
"decreasing the pool of players you can invade but increasing the amount of competing antagonists wont make queue times even worse, trust me"
the community should be split
All the reasons in your earlier post as to why you enjoy pvp in this game mean squat to someone like me,
"I think antagonists should be removed from the game because I started playing a 4v1 PVP game, but I dont like PVP and fuck anyone who does"
If you honestly believe splitting the community wouldn't have adverse effects on Antag queue times you are either: Delusional or just don't give a damn and wouldn't mind if they where removed from the game but don't want to outright say it.
There are zero arguments you can make that allowing people to opt out of PVP wouldn't decrease the amount of available matches for antags. The current queue times are already so bad that I have a book on my table for while I wait, if you give people the option to opt out (I mean we already have one person flat out admitting no reward would be big enough to entice them to play PVP mode) you might as well just remove antags, the queue time would be over an hour.
So dont give me that bullcrap.
-
What I don't like is that you want to force me, or people like me, to be target practice for you at the detriment of out enjoyment and progress.
I'm not forcing you to do anything, this is the game we play and here: I'll even play ball and give you two scenarios for how implementing something as awful as PVE mode would go.
Introduce PVE mode and dont change the current rewards: 98% of people opt out of PVP, the only people who do it are 4 man death squads only there to stomp on the antag for the expressed purpose of griefing and premades wanting to flip alignment.
Introduce PVE mode and change the current rewards to entice PVP.
Bearing in mind that currently the business model is based around antags fucking up your games and thereby slowing down your gold/BP/FP progress which means they're going to have to:
Drastically lower the rewards for PVE mode, since they have to compensate for the fact that since you're no longer worried an antag might show up you can now: Freely pick characters based solely on what is optimal for the mission, no need to worry about needing at least 1 guy around dedicated to fighting a potential antag.
Secondly since you now always know if you're going into a PVP match, there is no thought process of "hey my team is weak against this antag on this map, maybe I should pick a good counter instead of just a 4th CQC brawler" instead since you know, you'll always have every team that does go to PVP for the greater rewards, built so that it'll crush any antag.
Let me let you in on a secret: The antag is always at a disadvantage baring things like disconnects, lag and mentor matches. If there isn't that greed from the raiders side pushing them to pick suboptimal PVP builds, the already low win rate of antagonists is going to plummet even lower. (You know ruining any level 10 wanting to try out being an antags experience, in fact dont even think about clicking antag unless you want to go AFK for the entire match, unless you're a level 200 WAAC git kitted out with the best rare cards and guns)
You are selfishly going "But I just dont want to have to deal with, surely someone else will and it'll be fine" without thinking about the larger ramifications of such a change. Or willfully being deceitful by knowing full well but deciding to not acknowledge it.
Which is why I think the much better option would be to make Mentor matches the PVE mode (Along with capping their difficulty at 20%), it would give veterans an actual incentive to play mentor matches and also allow new players a bit of time to actually grow accustomed to the mechanics, throw in some actual in game communication and we'd even be able to teach them not to shoot the elites.
Edit: Also it's like 01:44 here so I'm gonna go to bed.
-
Furthermore, you are worried about queue times as an antagonist which would also improve if there was a reason to play against them.
"decreasing the pool of players you can invade but increasing the amount of competing antagonists wont make queue times even worse, trust me"
the community should be split
All the reasons in your earlier post as to why you enjoy pvp in this game mean squat to someone like me,
"I think antagonists should be removed from the game because I started playing a 4v1 PVP game, but I dont like PVP and fuck anyone who does"
If you honestly believe splitting the community wouldn't have adverse effects on Antag queue times you are either: Delusional or just don't give a damn and wouldn't mind if they where removed from the game but don't want to outright say it.
There are zero arguments you can make that allowing people to opt out of PVP wouldn't decrease the amount of available matches for antags. The current queue times are already so bad that I have a book on my table for while I wait, if you give people the option to opt out (I mean we already have one person flat out admitting no reward would be big enough to entice them to play PVP mode) you might as well just remove antags, the queue time would be over an hour.
So dont give me that bullcrap.
In the current system you are correct as there is zero incentize to play against an antagonist. If, however, the playlists were separate there are a dozens ways to make playing against an antagonist more appealing. I would personally recommend a general play list for both raiders and antags, as well as a total prize that is split among all parties involved based on performance. So if an antag shuts down the raiders they get a larger portion; the same is true for the raiders. Similarly, I would include weekly challenges that reward additional bonuses based on winning in the antagonist pkaylist, and this could even include exclusive cosmetic items. And these are only a few of a dozen plus ways to encourage players to play as/against antagonists. It really is simple once you split the playlists as you can now provide rewards that are also separate.
-
The pve/pvp split should have been done with ftp launch, with the influx of players, and I’m betting player retention from relaunch would have also benefited from such a change at that specific time, the more they wait the worse the whole situation is going to get imo.
-
What I don't like is that you want to force me, or people like me, to be target practice for you at the detriment of out enjoyment and progress.
I'm not forcing you to do anything, this is the game we play and here: I'll even play ball and give you two scenarios for how implementing something as awful as PVE mode would go.
Introduce PVE mode and dont change the current rewards: 98% of people opt out of PVP, the only people who do it are 4 man death squads only there to stomp on the antag for the expressed purpose of griefing and premades wanting to flip alignment.
Introduce PVE mode and change the current rewards to entice PVP.
Bearing in mind that currently the business model is based around antags fucking up your games and thereby slowing down your gold/BP/FP progress which means they're going to have to:
Drastically lower the rewards for PVE mode, since they have to compensate for the fact that since you're no longer worried an antag might show up you can now: Freely pick characters based solely on what is optimal for the mission, no need to worry about needing at least 1 guy around dedicated to fighting a potential antag.
Secondly since you now always know if you're going into a PVP match, there is no thought process of "hey my team is weak against this antag on this map, maybe I should pick a good counter instead of just a 4th CQC brawler" instead since you know, you'll always have every team that does go to PVP for the greater rewards, built so that it'll crush any antag.
Let me let you in on a secret: The antag is always at a disadvantage baring things like disconnects, lag and mentor matches. If there isn't that greed from the raiders side pushing them to pick suboptimal PVP builds, the already low win rate of antagonists is going to plummet even lower. (You know ruining any level 10 wanting to try out being an antags experience, in fact dont even think about clicking antag unless you want to go AFK for the entire match, unless you're a level 200 WAAC git kitted out with the best rare cards and guns)
You are selfishly going "But I just dont want to have to deal with, surely someone else will and it'll be fine" without thinking about the larger ramifications of such a change. Or willfully being deceitful by knowing full well but deciding to not acknowledge it.
Which is why I think the much better option would be to make Mentor matches the PVE mode (Along with capping their difficulty at 20%), it would give veterans an actual incentive to play mentor matches and also allow new players a bit of time to actually grow accustomed to the mechanics, throw in some actual in game communication and we'd even be able to teach them not to shoot the elites.
You still have the problem of unwilling participants then. Your suggestions about Mentor matches are great by the way, but there is still the problem with high level players who hate PvP.
Why lower rewards? Just keep the rewards for PvE the same as they are now and increase the rewards for PvP. You say only Elite Navy Seal teams will queue for PvP against antag, but the antag can choose what missions they can do. And besides, this is willing PvP where both opponents want to PvP. And maybe this will cause MSE to make better changes for Antag now that it is optional. Now that there is no people who hate PvP there to say that it's already too hard, they can now balance the AI and levels to be more balanced with PvP and give the antag more help since Navy Seal teams will only be queuing.
But otherwise you are saying it's completely fine to have unwilling participants, sheep for wolves to east. This isn't good at all. this will create a never ending cycle of animosity that will go beyond you and me being here on the forums arguing. If it was optional there would be no animosity between the two groups and no one could ultimately complain because they aren't FORCED. So if a new player decided to dip his toe in the PvP pool and had a shit time of it and got tilted, he could just easily say, "Well i won't do that again." instead of ranting on the forums,m or worse, quitting.
Just consider that, optional PvP didn't hurt other games, I don't see why it would hurt this one.
-
Why lower rewards? Just keep the rewards for PvE the same as they are now
Because as I said there are cards and weapons which are better at PVP which you would normally want to bring in for regular missions on the off chance that an antag shows up, just like there are characters that are way better at dealing with PVE than dealing with an antag.
Like honestly give me a good reason to for example pick Harec over other raiders if PVP was optional, and no "thinking he's fun" doesn't count. His damage to objectives is worse than raiders like Schneider, Valeria and Hans and since his headshots kill elites rather than put them in a downed state there are much safer bets.
And finally because Mercurysteam is a business and current gold rewards like them or not, are balanced around the fact that you're going to lose matches or get a low score, thanks to antags showing up. You dont honestly think ANY company with a f2p model would just leave those values the same do you?
I mean why do you think the gold rewards for solo missions are a one-time thing? Because otherwise the most efficient way to grind gold would be to run missions solo, no bad players or antags to mess up your game and you can bring a character custom built to speed run that one specific map.
-
Why lower rewards? Just keep the rewards for PvE the same as they are now
Because as I said there are cards and weapons which are better at PVP which you would normally want to bring in for regular missions on the off chance that an antag shows up, just like there are characters that are way better at dealing with PVE than dealing with an antag.
Like honestly give me a good reason to for example pick Harec over other raiders if PVP was optional, and no "thinking he's fun" doesn't count. His damage to objectives is worse than raiders like Schneider, Valeria and Hans and since his headshots kill elites rather than put them in a downed state there are much safer bets.
And finally because Mercurysteam is a business and current gold rewards like them or not, are balanced around the fact that you're going to lose matches or get a low score, thanks to antags showing up. You dont honestly think ANY company with a f2p model would just leave those values the same do you?
I mean why do you think the gold rewards for solo missions are a one-time thing? Because otherwise the most efficient way to grind gold would be to run missions solo, no bad players or antags to mess up your game and you can bring a character custom built to speed run that one specific map.
Blueprint missions, faction points (not everyone has multiple characters unlocked per faction), testing cards, trying a new weapon, using treasure/bounty hunter, a preferred character is locked, just for fun, etc. are all reasons why players would select suboptimal characters for PvE.
Also, there are plenty of gold sinks that could be added to the game. Converting gold into faction points, paying for experience boosters (technically already in the game but not worth it), buying loadout slots with gold (highly requested), rerolling weapon stats without upgrading, etc. You make it sound like players would be sitting on millions of gold when that is just an indication of not having enough gold sinks in the game.
-
You make it sound like players would be sitting on millions of gold when that is just an indication of not having enough gold sinks in the game.
You're straight up naive if you think this way, if you actually thought like a developer or watched how this goes down in EVERY f2p game with very few exceptions, you'd understand that this isn't me being cruel or trying to take your candy.
This is me stating facts on how it would go down because that is how it has gone down every time prior to this.
The most efficient gold making methods always get nerfed and we both know that the safety of PVE mode WOULD greatly improve efficiency across the board, people who play for fun are never the subject of balancing, it's what you can do with a WAAC optimized group that sets the gold standard for everyone else.
Current rewards are balanced around the fact that every match you run the risk of an Antagonist showing up and ruining your score, if they remove that element of risk, they're obviously going to lower your rewards as a result.
Edit: Ok for reals this time I'm going to bed, good night.
-
You say it's not okay yet you still went through with destroying these beginners that will probably quit playing this game because of your actions. Inb4 "i'm just playing as intended" gg.
As "mean" as that is, that is actually pretty common for an Antag nowadays. Most of the people I see playing this are noobs with a few vets and, trust me, people like this guy aren't the reason newbies ultimately quit. They quit because the gameplay gets hella frustrating, for both noob and vet alike. As a rule of thumb, I think the antag should have some kind of scaling system and shouldn't be accessible to the "boss" stages. An antag on that last mission is the LAST THING anyone needs; same thing for the Aneska mission. Things like THAT will make a person quit before getting a bad hand antag on a simple mission will.
As a rule of thumb, I play antag only to get the points for a level change. Since I get points as long as I get a single kill, I don't even spawn. I just do some homework, jiggle the controller every once in a blue, and let them play. In my opinion, THAT is a good antagonist in this game. This way, I don't mess with a person's potential chance at getting a blueprint, I don't "discourage" noobs from playing the game, and I get my points.
Everyone wins.
-
You make it sound like players would be sitting on millions of gold when that is just an indication of not having enough gold sinks in the game.
You're straight up naive if you think this way, if you actually thought like a developer or watched how this goes down in EVERY f2p game with very few exceptions, you'd understand that this isn't me being cruel or trying to take your candy.
This is me stating facts on how it would go down because that is how it has gone down every time prior to this.
The most efficient gold making methods always get nerfed and we both know that the safety of PVE mode WOULD greatly improve efficiency across the board, people who play for fun are never the subject of balancing, it's what you can do with a WAAC optimized group that sets the gold standard for everyone else.
Current rewards are balanced around the fact that every match you run the risk of an Antagonist showing up and ruining your score, if they remove that element of risk, they're obviously going to lower your rewards as a result.
Edit: Ok for reals this time I'm going to bed, good night.
I try to give you the benefit of the doubt but you keep making up excuses to try to justify forced pvp. You're making it seem like all these missions are a cake walk and not difficult enough on their own. People fail and get bad scores all the time even without an antagonist this is just reaching for straws at this point seriously. You just want it to stay this way so players still bring unoptimized team composition because they don't always expect an antagonist. The moment they make it optional with good enough incentives to make players want to do it they will always bring top tier pvp characters/cards and that's what you're afraid of. Trust me if they make the gold earning/faction points of antagonist matches double or more of the normal amount, even i would probably join a few myself. Aslong as there's good enough incentive players will join and there won't be any matchmaking issues other than the current ones present already.
"Oh but the game has been and will always be advertised as 4v1" then why is not every match guaranteed 4v1. They should just have made every mission have an antagonist that way I would have already stopped playing this game.
-
I try to give you the benefit of the doubt but you keep making up excuses to try to justify forced pvp.
If you call explaining that the current system is built around, balanced around and infused with PVP "excusing forced PVP" here's what I have to say to you:
The moment you downloaded and installed Spacelords you consented to PVP.
If you're a Vet you have no excuse, you didn't start playing the game and "suddenly the devs introduced forced PVP" no, you joined the game and kept playing despite the PVP or indeed because of it.
Meanwhile you address none of the antag side issues, because you dont care about the antag side, you dont care about the antag experience, you dont care about the already horrible antag queue times or the fact that what you're suggesting would benefit only YOU and would negatively impact anyone who enjoys playing an antag in multiple ways.
The difference is one party here is playing the game, as it is, as it was intended by the devs and how it is marketed.
And the other is a spoiled child who wants to change the game and anyone who's experience is negatively impacted by your desires be damned, because the most important person is you and no one else.
-
I try to give you the benefit of the doubt but you keep making up excuses to try to justify forced pvp.
If you call explaining that the current system is built around, balanced around and infused with PVP "excusing forced PVP" here's what I have to say to you:
The moment you downloaded and installed Spacelords you consented to PVP.
If you're a Vet you have no excuse, you didn't start playing the game and "suddenly the devs introduced forced PVP" no, you joined the game and kept playing despite the PVP or indeed because of it.
Meanwhile you address none of the antag side issues, because you dont care about the antag side, you dont care about the antag experience, you dont care about the already horrible antag queue times or the fact that what you're suggesting would benefit only YOU and would negatively impact anyone who enjoys playing an antag in multiple ways.
The difference is one party here is playing the game, as it is, as it was intended by the devs and how it is marketed.
And the other is a spoiled child who wants to change the game and anyone who's experience is negatively impacted by your desires be damned, because the most important person is you and no one else.
You are not listening if you think no one has suggested ways to make the antag experience better. We want better rewards, weekly challenges, faster queue times, exclusive cosmentics, leaderboards, etc. The issue remains that only the antagonist is 100% prepared for pvp while the raiders may be farming blueprints with a stock character. Why waste their time and cheapen your win? Or is beating players that are not prepared part of the fun? No one wants the antag removed, we just want it to be a better experience for all 5 players.
-
No one wants the antag removed, we just want it to be a better experience for all 5 players.
I cant take that statement serious from people who would like to opt out of PVP and play PVE instead because they dont enjoy the PVP.
But I'll level with you and give it one last effort to hammer home why you cant suggest splitting the community currently as if it would fix the game and wouldn't just ruin the game for people who PVP while only benefiting people who are scared of it.
Things you need to fix before you can even consider it:
The reward system, currently rewards are shit
The new player experience, both PVE and PVP because I see so many level ones just pull the plug halfway through a mission, even if we're winning because they aren't having fun.
The latency issue, no one is having a good time if there's 400 ping and I would personally prefer having to wait longer in the queue than have 20+ minutes of being unable to participate (and before anyone jumps on that: No an antag doesn't make it so you cant participate, get better at the game, you cant get better at dealing with ping when it breaks the CQC system to the point that even if you throw a counter punch BEFORE an enemy starts a grab, you'll still get grabbed due to the delay)
Most importantly however: Much, Much better communication, it's laughable that a team based game like this has such piss poor communication options (Especialy on PC, but we're the smallest playerbase so that's probably last on their to-do list)
Once you fix all those things, which will take a LONG ass time, you then have to look at the population numbers. It's no secret that spacelords doesn't have the numbers like for example: Warframe.
at time of writing just on Steam Warframe has 56k people online, then you add the consoles ontop that afterwards.
If spacelords had a population like Warframe? You could definitely survive splitting the community into PVE/PVP.
With the current however? I dont know what numbers for PS4 and XBONE but for steam there's currently 91 people online
ninety-fucking-one
You CANNOT with a straight face say splitting a community this tiny wouldn't adversely affect antags, you CANNOT say "oh but the guys who wanna PVP will just PVP and I'll live in my magical happy place without mean antags" without accepting that holding that opinion is tantamount to: Fuck antags, remove them from the game by giving them huge queue times and make every, single, match a complete stomping of them. "oh but we'll just balance it"
Have you seen the last patch? They cant even balance one map (talking about "In shock" here) what makes you think they can just magially make the antag experience anything resembling what it is now if you did a split?
Never mind that again, Antags are going to have 30+ minutes to an hour queues and that's IF you beef up their rewards to drastically out perform PVE rewards.
And then we come to the final thing, it might not be you, but you just know that if you make the rewards for PVP better than PVE, someone is going to be angry and whine that "why isn't their hard work being rewarded as much? Is their time less valuable than people who PVP?" and because players are hardwired to always go "yes more rewards for less effort" it'll get a landslide of approval, with any antag speaking up getting shot down as a brutal dick who is stepping on the poor defenseless casuals.
So no, your appeal of "but I dont want to PVP so you should feel bad for invading me in a game about 4v1 PVP" doens't hold up in court.
-
I try to give you the benefit of the doubt but you keep making up excuses to try to justify forced pvp.
If you call explaining that the current system is built around, balanced around and infused with PVP "excusing forced PVP" here's what I have to say to you:
The moment you downloaded and installed Spacelords you consented to PVP.
If you're a Vet you have no excuse, you didn't start playing the game and "suddenly the devs introduced forced PVP" no, you joined the game and kept playing despite the PVP or indeed because of it.
Meanwhile you address none of the antag side issues, because you dont care about the antag side, you dont care about the antag experience, you dont care about the already horrible antag queue times or the fact that what you're suggesting would benefit only YOU and would negatively impact anyone who enjoys playing an antag in multiple ways.
The difference is one party here is playing the game, as it is, as it was intended by the devs and how it is marketed.
And the other is a spoiled child who wants to change the game and anyone who's experience is negatively impacted by your desires be damned, because the most important person is you and no one else.
Yeah you're not listening at all I've already said antagonist matches need better rewards like double or triple gold/faction points etc. The reason why i haven't adressed the antag side too deeply is because the only problems with it is the score and rewards which I agree need a change but other than that they're fine. The wait times are not that long or about the same as it is for raiders at least from my experience and everyone already knows matchmaking is terrible for either side with the lv difference.
"The moment i downloaded and installed spacelords I consented to PvP" really? Like i said before not every match is 4v1 or pvp. Sure the game says it has 4v1 experience but look at fortnite they started out as a standard horde mode 3rd person shooter co-op and now they have a battle royale pvp mode. Games can change they don't have to stay the same, spacelords was pay to play and now it's free to play. In the words of valeria your excuses for this harassment system are absurd and the way you dress is atrocious. Like many have said before in the current system you will often run into players that are not prepared for pvp by bringing a character to farm a specific blueprint or faction points etc, their team composition in that case is gonna suck and that's probably what you want. If you truly wanted a fair pvp match you would be supporting optional pvp so that players know for sure there will be an antag and they won't get bullied when they're using a useless stock weapon character to farm blueprints or trying out a character they just purchased. The way it is now the raiders have more to lose than the antagonist since it's 4 players losing out on rewards/blueprints vs 1 single person. I'm not asking for them to ban pvp or remove it just make it optional with enough incentives for players to opt into it. You're the one asking pve players to uninstall the game and completely stop playing if we don't enjoy pvp so if anyone is being spoiled here its you. You offer no way for both type of players to co-exist and just want us to slug through pvp matches we do not enjoy to satisfy you.
-
No one wants the antag removed, we just want it to be a better experience for all 5 players.
I cant take that statement serious from people who would like to opt out of PVP and play PVE instead because they dont enjoy the PVP.
But I'll level with you and give it one last effort to hammer home why you cant suggest splitting the community currently as if it would fix the game and wouldn't just ruin the game for people who PVP while only benefiting people who are scared of it.
Things you need to fix before you can even consider it:
The reward system, currently rewards are shit
The new player experience, both PVE and PVP because I see so many level ones just pull the plug halfway through a mission, even if we're winning because they aren't having fun.
The latency issue, no one is having a good time if there's 400 ping and I would personally prefer having to wait longer in the queue than have 20+ minutes of being unable to participate (and before anyone jumps on that: No an antag doesn't make it so you cant participate, get better at the game, you cant get better at dealing with ping when it breaks the CQC system to the point that even if you throw a counter punch BEFORE an enemy starts a grab, you'll still get grabbed due to the delay)
Most importantly however: Much, Much better communication, it's laughable that a team based game like this has such piss poor communication options (Especialy on PC, but we're the smallest playerbase so that's probably last on their to-do list)
Once you fix all those things, which will take a LONG ass time, you then have to look at the population numbers. It's no secret that spacelords doesn't have the numbers like for example: Warframe.
at time of writing just on Steam Warframe has 56k people online, then you add the consoles ontop that afterwards.
If spacelords had a population like Warframe? You could definitely survive splitting the community into PVE/PVP.
With the current however? I dont know what numbers for PS4 and XBONE but for steam there's currently 91 people online
ninety-fucking-one
You CANNOT with a straight face say splitting a community this tiny wouldn't adversely affect antags, you CANNOT say "oh but the guys who wanna PVP will just PVP and I'll live in my magical happy place without mean antags" without accepting that holding that opinion is tantamount to: Fuck antags, remove them from the game by giving them huge queue times and make every, single, match a complete stomping of them. "oh but we'll just balance it"
Have you seen the last patch? They cant even balance one map (talking about "In shock" here) what makes you think they can just magially make the antag experience anything resembling what it is now if you did a split?
Never mind that again, Antags are going to have 30+ minutes to an hour queues and that's IF you beef up their rewards to drastically out perform PVE rewards.
And then we come to the final thing, it might not be you, but you just know that if you make the rewards for PVP better than PVE, someone is going to be angry and whine that "why isn't their hard work being rewarded as much? Is their time less valuable than people who PVP?" and because players are hardwired to always go "yes more rewards for less effort" it'll get a landslide of approval, with any antag speaking up getting shot down as a brutal dick who is stepping on the poor defenseless casuals.
So no, your appeal of "but I dont want to PVP so you should feel bad for invading me in a game about 4v1 PVP" doens't hold up in court.
For the 100th time if they make the rewards good enough for opting into a pvp match the matchmaking won't be a problem. You think nobody will join pvp if the rewards are 10k gold and faction points? Sign me up even if i hate pvp I'll do it a few times before i get completely stressed out and then go back to pve only.
-
Like many have said before in the current system you will often run into players that are not prepared for pvp by bringing a character to farm a specific blueprint or faction points etc, their team composition in that case is gonna suck and that's probably what you want.
Yes it is, you're being punished for being greedy deal with it. If you think the developers wouldn't lower your PVE rewards as a result for not being punished you're delusional.
It's very obvious that you dont play as an antag if you think the queue times are just as good or if you think a 4v1 against a team set up to stomp an antag is fair.
You are ignoring every new player who jumps into this game, who gets frustrated being stomped on by 4x level 200+ character over and over again, because they have hero killer for like 50-60% extra damage on their guns and access to WAY better cards than them, the only way a new antag is ever going to win in this scenario is if he gets matched with people not prepared to fight an antag, who are as inexperienced at PVP as him. That would never, NEVER happen if you split the current community into PVP/PVE, there would be no one but hardcore PVP fanatic playing AS the raiders, since they'd get to do the two things they love: Stomp on other people and they'd even get better rewards than if they played the game normally.
I get where you're coming from, and sure it would be a nice safety net if you could just opt out of PVP to garauntee that you'll get a BP drop, but if you give people that opportunity you are killing every future antag, or alternative you're going to have a MASSIVE balance overhaul and redesign of the game.
The current system favors the raiders and if you lose, it is because: You suck at the game (aka he outplayed you AND your 3 teammates), Something unfortunate like a Disconnect or Mentor match happened, or you where greedy and made a shitty, fucking team composition so you got stomped on one of the 3 hallway maps because no one bothered to bring a character that can counter Valeria with the WHIP.
Sign me up even if i hate pvp I'll do it a few times before i get completely stressed out and then go back to pve only.
And there's your problem, because you just removed a HUGE chunk of the population from the pool.
Currently people Antag for two reasons: Because they love PVP or because they want cards/equilibrium bonus.
Queue times are usually around 10 minutes (at least on PC) and that's if you have every map selected. Now lets say you make the rewards good, this will increase the amount of antags who just want the reward. That's gonna increase the wait time, but not to unbearable levels.
But then you remove most of the population they can invade? Yeah those queue times are going to be abysmal, How much of your play time do you think you'd spend in PVP mode?
How much of any newbies time do you think they'd spend in PVP mode?
If that number is anything less than 100%, you're trading your enjoyment for the enjoyment of every antag by making their experience more miserable.
You are the ones trying to fundamentally change the game, so no you dont get to make demands like that.
-
Like many have said before in the current system you will often run into players that are not prepared for pvp by bringing a character to farm a specific blueprint or faction points etc, their team composition in that case is gonna suck and that's probably what you want.
Yes it is, you're being punished for being greedy deal with it. If you think the developers wouldn't lower your PVE rewards as a result for not being punished you're delusional.
It's very obvious that you dont play as an antag if you think the queue times are just as good or if you think a 4v1 against a team set up to stomp an antag is fair.
You are ignoring every new player who jumps into this game, who gets frustrated being stomped on by 4x level 200+ character over and over again, because they have hero killer for like 50-60% extra damage on their guns and access to WAY better cards than them, the only way a new antag is ever going to win in this scenario is if he gets matched with people not prepared to fight an antag, who are as inexperienced at PVP as him. That would never, NEVER happen if you split the current community into PVP/PVE, there would be no one but hardcore PVP fanatic playing AS the raiders, since they'd get to do the two things they love: Stomp on other people and they'd even get better rewards than if they played the game normally.
I get where you're coming from, and sure it would be a nice safety net if you could just opt out of PVP to garauntee that you'll get a BP drop, but if you give people that opportunity you are killing every future antag, or alternative you're going to have a MASSIVE balance overhaul and redesign of the game.
The current system favors the raiders and if you lose, it is because: You suck at the game (aka he outplayed you AND your 3 teammates), Something unfortunate like a Disconnect or Mentor match happened, or you where greedy and made a shitty, fucking team composition so you got stomped on one of the 3 hallway maps because no one bothered to bring a character that can counter Valeria with the WHIP.
Sign me up even if i hate pvp I'll do it a few times before i get completely stressed out and then go back to pve only.
And there's your problem, because you just removed a HUGE chunk of the population from the pool.
Currently people Antag for two reasons: Because they love PVP or because they want cards/equilibrium bonus.
Queue times are usually around 10 minutes (at least on PC) and that's if you have every map selected. Now lets say you make the rewards good, this will increase the amount of antags who just want the reward. That's gonna increase the wait time, but not to unbearable levels.
But then you remove most of the population they can invade? Yeah those queue times are going to be abysmal, How much of your play time do you think you'd spend in PVP mode?
How much of any newbies time do you think they'd spend in PVP mode?
If that number is anything less than 100%, you're trading your enjoyment for the enjoyment of every antag by making their experience more miserable.
You are the ones trying to fundamentally change the game, so no you dont get to make demands like that.
We're done talking after this I can confirm for myself the type of pvper you are. Just a greifer,troll and harasser. You've admitted that you just want to have the advantage against raiders that are not prepared for pvp this is disgusting. The horrible lv gap matchmaking goes both ways so this is just something that needs to be fixed anyway. I'm very disappointed.
-
We're done talking after this I can confirm for myself the type of pvper you are. Just a greifer,troll and harasser. You've admitted that you just want to have the advantage against raiders that are not prepared for pvp this is disgusting. The horrible lv gap matchmaking goes both ways so this is just something that needs to be fixed anyway. I'm very disappointed.
And there we have the exact name calling that comes up from carebears anytime a PVPer tells them to suck it up. You have no empathy for the other side of the equation and it is so blatantly obvious that you view anyone who isn't on your side as the enemy, you ignore the consequences your suggestion would have because deep down: You would gladly trade every antags enjoyment for your own.
-
Cryptek, it's so funny that all your responses start with cherry picked statements. You latch on to one statement in a whol paragraph or two and then ignore the rest and then claim victory.
-
We're done talking after this I can confirm for myself the type of pvper you are. Just a greifer,troll and harasser. You've admitted that you just want to have the advantage against raiders that are not prepared for pvp this is disgusting. The horrible lv gap matchmaking goes both ways so this is just something that needs to be fixed anyway. I'm very disappointed.
And there we have the exact name calling that comes up from carebears anytime a PVPer tells them to suck it up. You have no empathy for the other side of the equation and it is so blatantly obvious that you view anyone who isn't on your side as the enemy, you ignore the consequences your suggestion would have because deep down: You would gladly trade every antags enjoyment for your own.
I could have let the other things slide but once you said players that try to farm blueprints are greedy and deserve to be stomped that pretty much confirmed for me you only care about yourself and curve stomping unsuspecting players and don't care at all for fair pvp matchups. I've already given plenty of suggestions to make the system more balanced but you just want us pve players to suffer through it or leave. Those are the only 2 options you give us. After all this the names fit perfectly well.
-
Cryptek, it's so funny that all your responses start with cherry picked statements. You latch on to one statement in a whol paragraph or two and then ignore the rest and then claim victory.
It's funny how not one single proponent of splitting it into PVP and PVE is willing to tackle the fact that:
making it optional WILL decrease the fun of antags
Even if you make the rewards SO good that it'll occasionally entice a few PVE babies, they're not going to play it all the time, you admitted as much yourself.
NONE of you are willing to answer: Why is your enjoyment worth more than the Antags?
Why is it okay to drastically increase their queue times by dramatically decreasing the ALREADY tiny pool of players they can invade
Because all of you know deep down, that even a generous offering of saying people would PVE/PVP 50/50 would dramatically change the experience of playing as an antag. (they wouldn't play nearly that much and I dare any of you to say you'd opt into PVP more often than that just for the rewards. After all if that was the case we wouldn't be having a discussion, it would just be combined rallying cry to make PVP rewards better)
You cannot say with a straight face that you aren't ruining others fun with that system and if I have to start validating my fun to you, you can fuck off. I'm not asking you to validate your enjoyment of PVE and if you're saying someone elses fun is less valid just because you dont enjoy it, your opinion is shit.
-
The antagonistic mode, as it is today, shouldnt exist. Just as the Mentor Matches shouldnt either (at least not with this 20% xp reward).
The antagonistic mode, in its early stages, had a reason to exist. The player should stay in an Antagonist rank to get certain BPs or RPs. There was logic in everything. Today, the antagonist mode frightens novice players, annoys veterans, and brings smaller rewards to the antagonist himself.
Fortunately, I believe MercurySteam has plans to make the Antagonist Mode be useful and welcome to all players.
-
Cryptek, it's so funny that all your responses start with cherry picked statements. You latch on to one statement in a whol paragraph or two and then ignore the rest and then claim victory.
It's funny how not one single proponent of splitting it into PVP and PVE is willing to tackle the fact that:
making it optional WILL decrease the fun of antags
Even if you make the rewards SO good that it'll occasionally entice a few PVE babies, they're not going to play it all the time, you admitted as much yourself.
NONE of you are willing to answer: Why is your enjoyment worth more than the Antags?
Why is it okay to drastically increase their queue times by dramatically decreasing the ALREADY tiny pool of players they can invade
Because all of you know deep down, that even a generous offering of saying people would PVE/PVP 50/50 would dramatically change the experience of playing as an antag. (they wouldn't play nearly that much and I dare any of you to say you'd opt into PVP more often than that just for the rewards. After all if that was the case we wouldn't be having a discussion, it would just be combined rallying cry to make PVP rewards better)
You cannot say with a straight face that you aren't ruining others fun with that system and if I have to start validating my fun to you, you can fuck off. I'm not asking you to validate your enjoyment of PVE and if you're saying someone elses fun is less valid just because you dont enjoy it, your opinion is shit.
Why would the antagonist enjoyment be decreased? Is it because you'll have to actually fight good team compositions and not pushovers? I agree the wait time might be longer at first but as the player base grows due to not killing it all off with antagonists in mentor matches or low lvs getting stomped by higher lvs. Things will improve and if the incentives are good enough more and more players will opt into it. There are players out there that enjoy pvp and will opt into these matches but if players keep leaving and this continues you won't have anyone left to play against.
This would only ruin the fun for antagonist that just want easy wins against bad teams. Other then the possibility longer wait time i do not see how this will ruin the fun of pvp.
-
I know some mod will delete this thread, they don't want us to argue about the problems of the game, even if the thread have good points...
So i gonna open one tab for every page and read it in calm when i return from work.
Its sad that the forum is more entertaining than the game...
-
This would only ruin the fun for antagonist that just want easy wins against bad teams. Other then the possibility longer wait time i do not see how this will ruin the fun of pvp.
There we have it again "your kind of fun isn't allowed because I disapprove".
Edit: Along with just handwaving "oh it'll be fine" to the population problem, if you want me to take you seriously say right now:
On an average day how many matches do you play
and then:
how many of those would you opt into PVP?
how many of those would you opt into if PVP didn't give much more than 20-30% increased rewards (because lets fair, beating an antag isn't hard, hell I proved it IN THIS THREAD, so they aren't going to give you 100-200% increased rewards for PVP)
Every single match that you say you'd opt out of PVP: You robbed an antag of the possibility of playing.
-
This would only ruin the fun for antagonist that just want easy wins against bad teams. Other then the possibility longer wait time i do not see how this will ruin the fun of pvp.
There we have it again "your kind of fun isn't allowed because I disapprove".
Is that honestly what you want? To be able to fight teams that can't fight back?
-
Is that honestly what you want? To be able to fight teams that can't fight back?
"I cant into PVP therefor it's impossible to win against an antag"
GIT
GUD
vets have no excuses and the entire point of the thread was to protect new players in mentor matches.
-
Antagonists are too worried about their preys going away yo a pve mode... When sooner or later pve players will grow up tired of this situation and leave the game, and those who only enjoy PvP will be the ones remaining. Things will get lonely anyways.
-
Is that honestly what you want? To be able to fight teams that can't fight back?
"I cant into PVP therefor it's impossible to win against an antag"
GIT
GUD
vets have no excuses and the entire point of the thread was to protect new players in mentor matches.
Ok at this point you're not making any sense. What?
-
GIT
GUD
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/531/986/465.gif)
sorry i can't let this argument pass hahahahaha
Its the mantra of the "Hardcore pvpers"
-
Ok at this point you're not making any sense. What?
GIT GUD is the dark souls mantra of: Attain proficiency, become better at the game, seek mastery, it's a bastardization of the phrase "Get Good".
And since you missed my earlier edit (not your fault) I'll repost it here:
Edit: Along with just handwaving "oh it'll be fine" to the population problem, if you want me to take you seriously say right now:
On an average day how many matches do you play
and then:
how many of those would you opt into PVP?
how many of those would you opt into if PVP didn't give much more than 20-30% increased rewards (because lets be fair, beating an antag isn't hard, hell I proved it IN THIS THREAD, so they aren't going to give you 100-200% increased rewards for PVP)
Every single match that you say you'd opt out of PVP: You robbed an antag of the possibility of playing.
-
Ok at this point you're not making any sense. What?
GIT GUD is the dark souls mantra of: Attain proficiency, become better at the game, seek mastery, it's a bastardization of the phrase "Get Good".
And since you missed my earlier edit (not your fault) I'll repost it here:
Edit: Along with just handwaving "oh it'll be fine" to the population problem, if you want me to take you seriously say right now:
On an average day how many matches do you play
and then:
how many of those would you opt into PVP?
how many of those would you opt into if PVP didn't give much more than 20-30% increased rewards (because lets be fair, beating an antag isn't hard, hell I proved it IN THIS THREAD, so they aren't going to give you 100-200% increased rewards for PVP)
Every single match that you say you'd opt out of PVP: You robbed an antag of the possibility of playing.
And it comes down to THIS, a troll, juvenile, idiot mantra..."git gud". I knew I had too much faith in you. You're a fraud and an enabler of misery and griefing. Nothing you say at this point has any mote of credibility from here on. You're brotard mantra made that clear enough.
The rest of the community should move on past you, ignore you, report you, and continue to vie for the game to improve for more options that increase viability, progress and fun gameplay, not argue with someone who doesn't have any interest in making the game better. just someone who wants to have his thirst for greifing quenched and a regular supply of low level unwilling sheep to get fed.
You're the enemy. Nothing more. Just another PvP griefer, the worst kinds. There's nothing we need to hear from you anymore. Going back and forth with such a person is beneath those who care about the game and a waste of time.
-
You're the enemy. Nothing more. Just another PvP griefer, the worst kinds.
"Your fun is bad and wrong and mine is good and pure so therefor antagonists should be removed from the game"
"Also I'm not going to actually answer the question because that would point out that yes, I never actually wanted antags to have fun or be part of the game, I just want to remove them"
Good of you to finally show your true colors.
-
You're the enemy. Nothing more. Just another PvP griefer, the worst kinds.
"Your fun is bad and wrong and mine is good and pure so therefor antagonists should be removed from the game"
"Also I'm not going to actually answer the question because that would point out that yes, I never actually wanted antags to have fun or be part of the game, I just want to remove them"
Good of you to finally show your true colors.
Hypocrite. You are the one saying others should be forced to be your play thing. Stop lying. What a disingenuous fraud.
-
Hypocrite. You are the one saying others should be forced to be your play thing. Stop lying. What a disingenuous fraud.
I'm the fraud? I'm the one playing the game as it is and how it was designed by the developers.
I'm the one offering constructive suggestions that would be good for the health of the game and DOESN'T ruin anyone playing the current games fun (Like making mentor matches immune to Antagonists and capping their difficulty score to allow new players the chance to learn how to play the game, since there aren't many titles that work like spacelords)
I'm the one saying that rewards should be increased to incentivize PVP for both raider and antag.
I am however not the one discrediting other peoples playstyles, saying their fun is wrong, saying my time is more important than theirs.
Neither am I the one suggesting changes that would completely remove certain aspects of the games (and therefor some peoples fun) or the one who thinks it would be great to drastically increase one part of the communities queue time.
-
Hypocrite. You are the one saying others should be forced to be your play thing. Stop lying. What a disingenuous fraud.
I'm the fraud? I'm the one playing the game as it is and how it was designed by the developers.
I'm the one offering constructive suggestions that would be good for the health of the game and DOESN'T ruin anyone playing the current games fun (Like making mentor matches immune to Antagonists and capping their difficulty score to allow new players the chance to learn how to play the game, since there aren't many titles that work like spacelords)
I'm the one saying that rewards should be increased to incentivize PVP for both raider and antag.
I am however not the one discrediting other peoples playstyles, saying their fun is wrong, saying my time is more important than theirs.
Neither am I the one suggesting changes that would completely remove certain aspects of the games (and therefor some peoples fun) or the one who thinks it would be great to drastically increase one part of the communities queue time.
Bullshit, you'r clearly dancing around the subject, switching the goal post to suit your narrative when you are cornered.
Drag your ass back to what you said, don't ignore it. You said I was f"Your fun is bad and wrong and mine is good...", even though I already stated I had wanted you to play the game the way you enjoyed, with others who wanted the same thing. Then you go on to straight out LIE by adding, "...so therefor antagonists should be removed from the game." Who do you think you're talking to boy? YOU know this is a lie, what do you think you're doing here? You know as well as I that I didn't want it removed from the game you manipulative little....
How DARE you. Stop pretending that you have some legitimate precedent to stand on, you don't.
You are framing others and adding words they never said, you have done more dodging and weaving while picking cherries than a United States politician, which you'd be good at by the way, I recommend the position for you. Shitting on people and lying to them and telling them how they should like it to seems to be up your alley.
Just stop, please. You aren't fooling anyone. Others are offering solutions, you are trying to keep your griefing haven going because actual solutions and good ideas threaten troll PvPers.
-
you are trying to keep your griefing haven going because actual solutions and good ideas threaten troll PvPers.
And here we go again.
Please explain to my poor European mind how you can hold these two opinions at the same time, because that is the real political masterpiece right there:
"I think anyone who plays the PVP in this game for any purpose other than to fight 4 level 200+ navy seals kitted out to murder the antag, is a troll and should be removed and banned from even voicing their opinion"
but at the same hope anyone will take you seriously when you say:
"I dont want to remove antags"
Either you are engaging in some next level psyop and trying to change the definition of words by saying the vast majory of antags who actually play the game and dont just AFK, aren't actually antags. But instead evil trolls who should be banned.
Or you're just really not thinking about what you're saying.
And you still refuse to accept the fact that yes, removing yourself from the pool of raiders to invade IS denying someone else fun, so holding that position means you're putting your own desires above others, because you consider their version of fun inferior to yours.
As I said, you're a bigot.
-
Dodging and weaving, wow, you're good at it. Cherry picking and re-framing. I didn't even read your post beyond the first sentence. It's non productive and it's just feeding at this point. It's not worth it, you're not worth it. You haven't had anything productive to say for THIS long, and you've been going in circles while dancing out of corners, why would you say anything different at this point. You've already established yourself as Griema Wormtongue at this point, kid. Move on, move on. It's just going to be Ad Hominem at this point.
-
Dodging and weaving, wow, you're good at it. Cherry picking and re-framing. I didn't even read your post beyond the first sentence. It's non productive and it's just feeding at this point. It's not worth it, you're not worth it. You haven't had anything productive to say for THIS long, and you've been going in circles while dancing out of corners, why would you say anything different at this point. You've already established yourself as Griema Wormtongue at this point, kid. Move on, move on. It's just going to be Ad Hominem at this point.
For someone claiming that I'm a troll you sure do love replying, are you secretly being Tsundere for me? I mean you did say you where a very busy man with a job that left them too stressed to deal with antagonists, so is this some sort of strange courtship of yours?
Because throwing shade sure is a great way for you to keep ignoring my questions.
-
This guy just keeps going in circles and destroying all his previous arguements on his own to the point where i don't even know what the heck he's going on about now lol.
-
Lol I can always count on this forum to make me chuckle:) what platform do you play on Cryptek? If its not Steam, I suggest not playing cross plat. Steam players seem to me to be repped by one dude who hates differing opinions... Seems he hates this game too. Still can't figure out why he keeps playing... Unless... He is the real troll. Antags suck to fight sometimes but I'd rather have em once in a while than just npc's all day everyday. This game would be super boring otherwise. I don't post much but I've been loving this gem for bout 7 months or so. Nothing bad to say of the game. Nothing good to say of these forum rants though... Why I stay away. But if we all did that, baby would get his bottle for sure!! I don't reply to crappy people so don't bother with the inevitable toxicity L9D;)
-
Dodging and weaving, wow, you're good at it. Cherry picking and re-framing. I didn't even read your post beyond the first sentence. It's non productive and it's just feeding at this point. It's not worth it, you're not worth it. You haven't had anything productive to say for THIS long, and you've been going in circles while dancing out of corners, why would you say anything different at this point. You've already established yourself as Griema Wormtongue at this point, kid. Move on, move on. It's just going to be Ad Hominem at this point.
For someone claiming that I'm a troll you sure do love replying, are you secretly being Tsundere for me? I mean you did say you where a very busy man with a job that left them too stressed to deal with antagonists, so is this some sort of strange courtship of yours?
Because throwing shade sure is a great way for you to keep ignoring my questions.
I've already reported the thread. I think it's going to get shut down.
You don't have any interest in the health or future of the game. I have plenty of posts demonstrating my intent and desire to give feedback and improve the game for both PvP and PvE. My integrity is not in question.
Everyone else has stopped feeding. I'm just here to report at this point. By all means, keep going though, *yawn*.
-
Lol I can always count on this forum to make me chuckle:) what platform do you play on Cryptek? If its not Steam, I suggest not playing cross plat. Steam players seem to me to be repped by one dude who hates differing opinions... Seems he hates this game too. Still can't figure out why he keeps playing... Unless... He is the real troll. Antags suck to fight sometimes but I'd rather have em once in a while than just npc's all day everyday. This game would be super boring otherwise. I don't post much but I've been loving this gem for bout 7 months or so. Nothing bad to say of the game. Nothing good to say of these forum rants though... Why I stay away. But if we all did that, baby would get his bottle for sure!! I don't reply to crappy people so don't bother with the inevitable toxicity L9D;)
It's Steam, crossplay is my only hope because we don't even have a three digit population most days :'(
And every forum has people like him, luckily I dont really care about someones opinion when they try to invalidate my existence and say I should be banned for playing the game.
-
This guy just keeps going in circles and destroying all his previous arguements on his own to the point where i don't even know what the heck he's going on about now lol.
Hey if you're not just trolling because you dislike antags: I'll offer you something right now if this is getting too confusing for you:
Answer this one question and I will answer anything I might have missed or any new question you have to the best of my ability, no dodging or anything. A direct answer to a direct question for the same.
Edit: Along with just handwaving "oh it'll be fine" to the population problem, if you want me to take you seriously say right now:
On an average day how many matches do you play
and then:
how many of those would you opt into PVP?
how many of those would you opt into if PVP didn't give much more than 20-30% increased rewards (because lets be fair, beating an antag isn't hard, hell I proved it IN THIS THREAD, so they aren't going to give you 100-200% increased rewards for PVP)
Because every single match that you say you'd opt out of PVP: You robbed an antag of the possibility of playing.
-
This guy just keeps going in circles and destroying all his previous arguements on his own to the point where i don't even know what the heck he's going on about now lol.
Hey if you're not just trolling because you dislike antags: I'll offer you something right now if this is getting too confusing for you:
Answer this one question and I will answer anything I might have missed or any new question you have to the best of my ability, no dodging or anything. A direct answer to a direct question for the same.
Edit: Along with just handwaving "oh it'll be fine" to the population problem, if you want me to take you seriously say right now:
On an average day how many matches do you play
and then:
how many of those would you opt into PVP?
how many of those would you opt into if PVP didn't give much more than 20-30% increased rewards (because lets be fair, beating an antag isn't hard, hell I proved it IN THIS THREAD, so they aren't going to give you 100-200% increased rewards for PVP)
Because every single match that you say you'd opt out of PVP: You robbed an antag of the possibility of playing.
No thanks I'm done feeding into your bs, you're just gonna keep running in circles.
-
No thanks I'm done feeding into your bs, you're just gonna keep running in circles.
Welp there we have it, unwilling to answer a direct question because it ruins his narrative that a PVE/PVP split wouldn't heavily damage antags fun.
you're like the pot calling the kettle black.
-
This guy just keeps going in circles and destroying all his previous arguements on his own to the point where i don't even know what the heck he's going on about now lol.
Hey if you're not just trolling because you dislike antags: I'll offer you something right now if this is getting too confusing for you:
Answer this one question and I will answer anything I might have missed or any new question you have to the best of my ability, no dodging or anything. A direct answer to a direct question for the same.
Edit: Along with just handwaving "oh it'll be fine" to the population problem, if you want me to take you seriously say right now:
On an average day how many matches do you play
and then:
how many of those would you opt into PVP?
how many of those would you opt into if PVP didn't give much more than 20-30% increased rewards (because lets be fair, beating an antag isn't hard, hell I proved it IN THIS THREAD, so they aren't going to give you 100-200% increased rewards for PVP)
Because every single match that you say you'd opt out of PVP: You robbed an antag of the possibility of playing.
No thanks I'm done feeding into your bs, you're just gonna keep running in circles.
Just report him.
-
Dear all,
Since nothing new is being added to the original topic and the general tone is turning sour, we are closing this thread.
Please, remember that debate is desirable, and it is impossible that all of us are on the same page, but please to respect the others' point of view even if you don't share it.