[Expertise - symptom of a disease (it rhymes!)]

PVP gear is so stupidly easy to get, more people get them to do the pve content. We've seen this in games like RIFT where gamers grinded R8 in order to do the endgame dungeon hammerknell.

 

Yes, which is why I'm saying it should be based on skill rather than time.

 

Here's another food for thought. When everyone has this trivially easy to get gear all that would matter is 'skill'

 

It's trivially easy to get PvP gear AT THIS TIME. In a few months, as a fresh level 50, it will be incredibly frustrating because you'll be playing against T2+ gear players with full on expertise.

 

That's the very core of the problem with expertise.

 

Sure, you'll eventually get it by losing match after match - but is that FUN?

 

No, and your skill won't matter squat - you just have to suck it up.

 

That's why I want the stat GONE and replaced by a better matching/rank system.

[Expertise - symptom of a disease (it rhymes!)]

Expertise exists for the sole reason of not allowing pve players to faceroll endgame content ... no more ... no less.

I've explained it in multiple threads and people can't seem to understand it. If you called expertise +xx endurance + xx main stat ... it would still behave the same way. People's fundamental misunderstand of simple math or critical thinking skills is staggering.

 

If you need to QQ about anything, QQ about:

 

a) how easy it is to obtain champion gear. (You're expected value just by doing dailies and weeklies is 5 champ tokens/2 centurion every week)

 

b) The gear disparity caused by a). If you're a new 50 and you're challenging someone that's been 50 for 2 weeks, he is a whole tier higher than you. This is worse if you're not even

 

...

 

TBH .. I don't even see problem because of a). Again it's so easy to gear up that by spending 1 hour a day for 21 days, you'll be more than pvp viable.

 

Your post doesn't make sense at all.

 

What has Expertise got to do with facerolling endgame content for PvE players? PvE raiders can already faceroll everything endgame EXCEPT for PvP content.

 

It's to prevent PvE players facerolling PvP players even though they haven't PvP'ed much.

 

Also, the rest of your post is also basically a repeat of what I've said. Attaining good gear is trivial and has nothing to do with skill - but TIME. Making any sense of meaningful challenge and appropriate reward null and void.

[Expertise - symptom of a disease (it rhymes!)]

Pve players...rolling over pvp players in wow? When? Because pvp never really existed in wow untill arena came around (at least not pvp that mattered). I think if you pay $15 for a game a month... you can do w/e u want besides complain about not having pve gear if you do nothing but pvp and vice versa.

 

Also before you go on about "i dont have time to raid i have a job or w/e". Dont, you cant. This games endgame isnt that time consuming as long as you put some effort in.

 

I'd like to respond but it seems you haven't read my post. I can only suggest you re-read it and try to understand what it's actually about rather than conjure up something imaginary.

[Expertise - symptom of a disease (it rhymes!)]

You get pve players on board with pvp players getting equal rewards and access to the best items in game via pvp then we will talk. Until that time there is nothing to discuss

 

Nothing to discuss? You mean you have nothing to add? That's ok.

 

But that's pretty much what I'm suggesting.

 

Good players should get good gear, regardless of whether they play PvE or PvP.

[Expertise - symptom of a disease (it rhymes!)]

It's a very weak design crutch introduced by Blizzard (AFAIK), primarily because a lot of raiders in WoW facerolled PvP players - because the gear disparity was huge between raid-gear and most PvP gear.

 

For some reason, it has become the norm to separate PvP from PvE as much as possible, as if the human beings playing the games came from different planets.

 

In my opinion, there should be no such separation. There are many ways to go about giving players a good experience, and this is just one of the weakest out there.

 

A better way to do it, would be to match players with similar TOTAL gear stats - and I see no reason why PvE/PvP gear can't be similar in that case. It doesn't have to be a perfect match - just something within reason. You can always boost people with a "bolster-like" system if the disparity is too big with few players online.

 

Considering the tiny amount of players in each WZ - that shouldn't be hard to implement in a way where queues had a reasonable wait time.

 

But the issue goes much deeper than that.

 

Modern MMOs cater a lot to the TIME spent playing, rather than the SKILL with which you play. Apparently, it's supposed to be competitive even between people who don't want to invest in becoming good at the game and those who dedicate most of their time to becoming good players.

 

I've never quite understood that. I think it would be reasonable to reward people for their PERFORMANCE much more than their time spent playing. This is just as essential for the raids (I mean "operations").

 

It's "modern" to allow every player access to all content, regardless of their skill level. So, it's not so much a game with challenge - but rather a predictable timesink. Apparently, developers don't think players enjoy a challenge - because that makes it hard to achieve.

 

Funny that, as WoW had millions of subscribers even during the ridiculous PvP ranking system they had after a year or so. Apparently, som players can enjoy a game without being number one at everything along with everyone else being number one.

 

This means gear progression wouldn't have to be vertical - and the best gear should only be possible to attain through SKILL - rather than time spent playing.

 

Obviously, that requires a level playing field - because even the best players can't beat players who're several hundred percent superior in terms of stats. This means that there has to be a much smarter matching algorithm - and a much more intricate design in terms of ranking and ways to excel both alone and as a team. For instance, rewarding damage/healing/etc. output without taking into consideration gear level is MORONIC. You HAVE to reward such things based on POTENTIAL output - not just output.

 

Also, the game needs something to do once you've achieved a high rank. This means tournaments for WZs - and even more important, meaningful world PvP where you can enjoy your achievements.

 

In short, this is not the game you're looking for - if you want that kind of system.

[Expertise: What's the point?]

It's a very weak design crutch introduced by Blizzard, primarily because a lot of raiders in WoW facerolled PvP players - because the gear disparity was huge between raid-gear and most PvP gear.

 

For some reason, it has become the norm to separate PvP from PvE as much as possible, as if the human beings playing the games came from different planets.

 

In my opinion, there should be no such separation. There are many ways to go about giving players a good experience, and this is just one of the weakest out there.

 

A better way to do it, would be to match players with similar TOTAL gear stats - and I see no reason why PvE/PvP gear can't be similar in that case. It doesn't have to be a perfect match - just something within reason. You can always boost people with a "bolster-like" system if the disparity is too big with few players online.

 

Considering the tiny amount of players in each WZ - that shouldn't be hard to implement in a way where queues had a reasonable wait time.

 

But the issue goes much deeper than that.

 

Modern MMOs cater a lot to the TIME spent playing, rather than the SKILL with which you play. Apparently, it's supposed to be competitive even between people who don't want to invest in becoming good at the game and those who dedicate most of their time to becoming good players.

 

I've never quite understood that. I think it would be reasonable to reward people for their PERFORMANCE much more than their time spent playing. This is just as essential for the raids (I mean "operations").

 

It's "modern" to allow every player access to all content, regardless of their skill level. So, it's not so much a game with challenge - but rather a predictable timesink. Apparently, developers don't think players enjoy a challenge - because that makes it hard to achieve.

 

Funny that, as WoW had millions of subscribers even during the ridiculous PvP ranking system they had after a year or so. Apparently, som players can enjoy a game without being number one at everything along with everyone else being number one.

 

This means gear progression wouldn't have to be vertical - and the best gear should only be possible to attain through SKILL - rather than time spent playing.

 

Obviously, that requires a level playing field - because even the best players can't beat players who're several hundred percent superior in terms of stats. This means that there has to be a much smarter matching algorithm - and a much more intricate design in terms of ranking and ways to excel both alone and as a team. For instance, rewarding damage/healing/etc. output without taking into consideration gear level is MORONIC. You HAVE to reward such things based on POTENTIAL output - not just output.

 

Also, the game needs something to do once you've achieved a high rank. This means tournaments for WZs - and even more important, meaningful world PvP where you can enjoy your achievements.

 

In short, this is not the game you're looking for - if you want that kind of system.

[Ilum is bad and you should feel bad]

Who knew they were being literal when saying their world PvP was "to die for".

[Ilum is bad and you should feel bad]

Except the massive faction imbalance will make the whole thing pointless.

[Dear Bioware - it's NOT just about input response/delay.]

The feedbacks really good... I can tell what spells everyone is using, what defensive cd's they have up etc merely by looking. What's the problem?

 

You're the first one I've met claiming to recognise when everything is up and what everyone is using.

 

Certainly to me and those I've spoken to about this, it's almost impossible during PvP to tell what kind of CC you're being affected by without looking at icons (taking a second or two - which is WAY too long) - and it's very hard as a melee class to recognise when your trigger-dependent abilities are up without looking at icons. That's not good for PvP.

 

Also, the cast bar is tiny and during the chaos of PvP - it's WAY too easy to miss for interrupts.

 

The sound effects for CC and the various lightsaber attacks are WAY too indistinct. They all blur together, and you're busy fighting laggy response - so there's no way any mortal can detect exactly what's happening when.

 

If you're perfectly happy with feedback, that's great - but do you mind if they add something for those of us having big problems?

[Dear Bioware - it's NOT just about input response/delay.]

As far as feedback improvements go, the name bar of your target should be slightly enlarged and lightened in color to make it extremely clear who your target is in a layered sea of red. That arrow can be hard to see in the midst of a large fight and as its above the name bar, is prone to tricks in depth perception with multiple targets right on top of each other.

 

Definitely. The arrow should be larger and of a different color - like Orange or Yellow.

[Dear Bioware - it's NOT just about input response/delay.]

I know they're working on improving the responsiveness - but I don't see it happening on the kind of level required for this game to truly shine in PvP. I just don't.

 

The issue is not JUST about input reponse. It's about FEEDBACK. The feedback in this game is awful for PvP. You need CLEAR AND DISTINCT sound effects for every single ability. It's great that, as a Jedi Sentinel, your eyes glow when Riposte is up - but only a very bad designer thinks that's useful in the chaos of PvP. So, you need to make such things show through specific colors and symbols. If you're worried about it looking strange, than just have it enabled for PvP - and not PvE.

 

For the most part, PvE combat is fine in this game.

[Sentinel ... Horridly underpowered?]

Without really knowing the other classes well (I'm 43 Sentinel combat) - I have a feeling the Sentinel is one of the most demanding classes to play.

 

Not because I think of myself as particularly good - but because I've found a HUGE disparity in my performance depending on my personal investment.

 

Meaning, if I'm really engaged and excited about PvP and I have good gear for the level, I seem to be able to kill most things even when they're above my level. But if I'm not at the top of my game - I suffer for it instantly. It's an incredibly mobile class - and if there's one thing we REALLY REALLY need - it's a more responsive combat system. We depend on the game responding to our input INSTANTLY more so than I think most classes do, especially ranged classes.

 

We can't have the game ignore our input, because we have to be in close proximity to the target at all times - and one missed attack means a lot, because our chains are complex and they all depend on each other for focus building/centering.

 

In a way, I think it's a class that belongs in a different kind of game.

 

I know they're working on improving the responsiveness - but I don't see it happening on the kind of level required for this class to truly shine. I just don't.

 

Also, the issue it not JUST about input reponse. It's about FEEDBACK. The feedback in this game is awful for PvP. You need CLEAR AND DISTINCT sound effects for every single ability. It's great that your eyes glow when Riposte is up - but only a very bad designer thinks that's useful in the chaos of PvP. So, you need to make such things show through specific colors and symbols. If you're worried about it looking strange, than just have it enabled for PvP - and not PvE.

 

For the most part, PvE combat is fine in this game.

[Yay! 50 Bracket, Ranked WZ and more PvP News for January!]

Good changes and good news. Can't complain and I must say it seems to be coming sooner than I feared.

[So when can we expect to get working textures?]

On my setup - the armor on character select and in-game look identical. Also, they don't look washed out or low-res.

 

Have you tried the texturequality setting in the .ini file?

[So when can we expect to get working textures?]

Why are people deluding themselves into thinking there's a collection of magical high-res textures in the game?

 

Is there ANY developer quote that clearly states that to be the case? Because I have a very hard time believing they just disabled them for kicks - and that at least an .ini tweak wouldn't exist to enable them.

 

My textures look identical in and out of cutscenes. Well, that or I'm being blind.

 

I wouldn't say they're awful or anything - and I'm not sure what the big deal is about them. They're fine to my eyes.

[Stop comparing SWTOR pvp to WoW pvp!!!]

On todays machines, it could handle it. For really good machines in 2004 it was no problem. For the average joe, it was miserable. And yes, 20v20 or 40v40 freakin lagged to hell. Alterac Valley lagged to hell early on. Why? You had 100 npcs standing around too. Hell, when WoTLK came out and people were swarming the open world PvP there, it was freakin miserable.

 

The flip side to this is that in SWTOR there is alot more going on. In WoW you had a relatively stagnant world. SWTOR is not.

 

 

The game is freakin 3 weeks old. Things will have to be ironed out.

 

Untrue. WoW ran well on mediocre hardware from day one.

 

Also, we were talking about lag - not overall performance. Lag is about latency, and WoW performed well from day one - but it's very true that the first couple of months were plagued by over-popularity and way too many people in popular areas like Tarren Mills.

 

I couldn't disagree more about the world either. WoW had a beautiful and immersive world - and SWtOR is without a soul. Huge and empty for the most part.

 

But I'm not interested in arguing over nothing. If you want to insist that WoW was laggy in 20v20 that's your business. I was there during beta and launch - and no one in the world can erase my very clear memory of how it performed and looked.

 

Moving on....

[Stop comparing SWTOR pvp to WoW pvp!!!]

I think the comparisons are justified. I don't like them, but the majority of people who play MMOs know only one and that is WoW.

 

It took Blizzard a LONG time to get PvP where it is today. Before Battlegrounds, before Arenas, there was World PvP and it was difficult. Running to and from Tarren Mill and Southshore sometimes taking damage from invisible people because the lag got so bad was miserable. Early Alterac Valley was the same way. The fluidity did not come until WAY later.

 

You can say all you want about "they had 6 years to plan and prepare." The bottom line is that you simply don't know. It takes time to see, and test things all you want, you can't find them all. The game has been out for 3 weeks. They aren't going to have it perfect right off the bat. It will take months to get things ironed out. That's simply how games work. The thing about MMOs is that they are an ON-GOING development.

 

Blatant misinformation.

 

The reason the lag got so bad was that the servers were shock full due to popularity - and HUNDREDS of players were present in those areas to PvP.

 

In SWtOR - all you need is 16 players in a small PvP area to bring even high-end hardware to its knees.

 

From day ONE - WoW had VERY smooth and responsive PvP - and the game could easily handle, say, 40vs40 PvP. It just couldn't handle 200vs200 PvP - and no game with any kind of fluidity has been able to do that yet.

[Stop comparing SWTOR pvp to WoW pvp!!!]

Actually the game had 10 years of Development (or since it has been first announced).

 

To improve upon the WoW formula before the WoW release would be quite impressive

 

Still, when you think about how casually they've "borrowed" from that game, one wonders why they missed some of the most basic ingredients for success:

 

Smooth and responsive gameplay

Reasonable performance even on low-end hardware

[what bioware says about open pvp not rewarded]

I agree with some of what has been said here. It appears they have put up a facade of world pvp to make it look like they have a well developed feature that will draw people in and in fact that's what it is, like a fake cardboard cut out that you can only tell it's fake when you get up really close (and you've paid). It's bordering on dishonesty and I'm doubting the integrity of whoever the lead dev is. I really do hope they have some serious plans for pvp.

 

I wouldn't blame the lead developer, necessarily. Usually, how a game is developed, launched and marketed originates from the suits financing the game.

 

But based on what they promised about "Open world PvP to die for" - I find that offensively dishonest - unless they meant it literally.

[Stop comparing SWTOR pvp to WoW pvp!!!]

They took a lot from WoW - and they had 6 years and millions of dollars to improve upon an established formula. Lack of content is one thing, and it can be excused for launch in some areas.

 

But blatantly poor execution of PvP - which is a big part of their marketing campaign - is not so easily excused.

 

I wouldn't mind giving them time to develop the game into something better or comparable to WoW PvP - but I'm paying them while doing it. So, unless they show us some clear and informative details as to what their plans are for PvP (specifically regarding performance/delay issues during 16 player matches - and the meaningless open World PvP as is) - I'm going to have to stop supporting it.

 

I can only suggest that people who want a better PvP experience do the same.

[what bioware says about open pvp not rewarded]

I cant agree more!.

 

and for the point further up "so level 50's cant run around and 2 shoot lower levels";

 

First of all you need a bracket system that rewards kills within the bracket and the rewards should be so "good" that you really dont want to spend time outside your bracket!

 

If it were bracket rewards based on contested zones, then you would not find lvl 50's runing around tatoine hunting level 30's, the 50's would spend their time within their bracket.

 

I really cant understand why BW ended up with the system we have now after so many years of planing and implementing. I just cant fathom that they think this would be a fun and innovative system.

 

The system as it is now is outdated, boring and certainly not innovative in any way!

 

The explanation is sad and simple: The PvP endgame isn't anywhere near being developed.

 

The scope of the game is large, that's true, but they had 6 years and many millions of dollars to develop it. What's worse is that most of what people are asking for is about design - and not about creation of a ton of assets. It's very obvious to me that open world PvP is an empty feature - and they were fully aware of that going in.

 

If they had "grand plans" for big PvP changes in the near future - they would have DETAILED information avaliable. The reason we have no details, is that they're either just starting to develop the design - or sadly, have no intention to take it seriously. They already sold a ton of copies - and they might rely on the PvE players to make it profitable.

 

Wouldn't be the first time.

[what bioware says about open pvp not rewarded]

Why should there be reward for it?

 

So that people in lvl 50 can go around in like lets say taatoine, and find lower lvl ppl to kill?

It would just be fun to fight each others, in open areas imo.

 

Simple: To motivate players to participate.

 

For something to be fun, there has to be a point. Killing in itself is a point - yes, but it's a very very limited point. There has to be something to fight for BEYOND killing others.

 

That's why you're seeing the success of Battlefield 3 as opposed to Quake 10 which doesn't exist. The time for simply killing without meaning beyond killing has come and gone in gaming.

 

Rewarding kills alone is a very poor way to established PvP gameplay in an MMO - but it's better than no reward.

 

Bioware clearly meant for Ilum and Outlaw's Den to be a big part of the PvP endgame - but they very obviously didn't have time to develop them. They're just there as features - so they can make people think they have more PvP content than the average MMO launch.

 

We're going to have to wait and see what they do, but SWtOR is obviously not a very good PvP game for people who're not interested in running WZs over and over and over again.

 

I know people like to talk about WoW Tarren Mills PvP as if the world hasn't changed. There's a reason no one is PvP'ing there anymore. Know what it is? It's not as fun as being rewarded in BGs or Arena.

 

Rewards motivate people.

 

Rewards can be SO much more than a few commendations pr. kill. The best rewards in PvP would be far-reaching stuff like the control of land or something that actually relates to a REAL war. Wars are ultimately about power and control.

[what bioware says about open pvp not rewarded]

AFAIK, their position is that people will do what they think is fun - and I guess that means they don't think motivating diverse gameplay with appropriate rewards is a relevant factor.

 

Maybe they should remove the XP/commendation rewards from Warzones - and nothing would change?

[Never seen a valid argument against the LFD]

I agreed with that could have been a lot better, but people assaulting their body is their own responsibility.

 

I'm not blaming Blizzard for the actions taken by people of their own free will. I'm just saying that if you design a system where you're required to play almost 24/7 to be the best - you're a bad designer.

 

But that's just my opinion.

 

In my world, skill should be the ultimate factor - not time. Time alone should only matter in-so-far as the game wouldn't be fun if it didn't take time to learn and acquire gear. But having to grind your way to the top is completely counterproductive to healthy competition.

 

Well yes EA is the publisher but they have a great say in what happens and what not. It would be strange if they would have no say in the game while spending so much money on it.

 

I'm not saying it's strange. I'm just pointing out the differences. EA is all about money and nothing else - and Blizzard certainly used to be about the game as much as the money. These days, however, I'm not sure what they're about.

[Never seen a valid argument against the LFD]

The PVP system wasn't that bad.

Sure you got people that play 18 hours a day to get there and some others who compete with them.

But that is hardly the mistake of the company that some people are mentally ill, no offense but it is.

Though I do admit they could have been made a lot better.

 

I think it was offensively bad design, but to each his own. In the end, though, they completely changed it - so they must have considered it a mistake.

 

Still in terms of decision making Blizzard is by far better than EA.

So far I am not impressed with Bioware either.

 

EA is a publisher and Blizzard is a developer.

 

Bioware used to be great, but I haven't been impressed by them since KotOR and partially Dragon Age.

 

SWtOR isn't great but it does have potential.

 

I'm hoping their lust for money is enough to make them improve the game - but I'm not deluding myself into thinking it will ever be a truly great MMO.