avezes Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Before I start let me say this is not a ***** thread. On our server 80% of pvp is won by the Imps, on some servers it is the opposite and the victories are usually pretty one sided. This is not a complaint or *****. It cannot be fun for the winners or the losers (unless they like beating up on much weaker opponents, wives children etc) But a serious suggestion. Why not give us an option when we choose pvp: 1) for those that care more about the story line let them choose to stay Imp vs Republic 2) let the pvp groups be random mix with Imp and Republic in it (for those of us that care about a good fight) This does not ask for any classes or sides to be balanced. This does not ask to do anything abut the alleged Battlemaster kill traders that got there early. Let them stay as is or hash those fights out in another thread. The point is that if there are imbalances they will show up on both sides of the PVP fights and should even the battles out more. (and hopefully cut out some of the ************. Dont start arguments here, please. Just add to or adjust or create new positive suggestions. Maybe we can find a solution that works for everybody (except those that just like beating up on the weak). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avezes Posted February 15, 2012 Author Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) PS Bioware STOP the adding of people to a short PVP session (eg 5 people or less) with 10 seconds left. They wont be able to help 8v5 for 110 seconds just let it farging expire. Edited February 15, 2012 by avezes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grubfist Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Before I start let me say this is not a ***** thread. On our server 80% of pvp is won by the Imps, Please produce proof or don't state this as fact. on some servers it is the opposite and the victories are usually pretty one sided. Momentum is HUGE in PvP in this game. Many wins are "pretty one-sided" because the opposite team either could not break the enemy team's momentum (despite valiant efforts) or gave up because they believed stopping that momentum was impossible, which it is not. But a serious suggestion. Why not give us an option when we choose pvp: 1) for those that care more about the story line let them choose to stay Imp vs Republic 2) let the pvp groups be random mix with Imp and Republic in it (for those of us that care about a good fight) What if I love a good fight and the story line? There's a reason I chose to play a Star Wars game. There's a reason I PvP in it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avezes Posted February 15, 2012 Author Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) Very good points and that is why I suggested that people can have the option of the Imp vs Republic, but some of us want fights that are evenly matched without bi***ing about one class or side being overpowered. Just let there be a choice for random groups. If nobody likes it, it wont be used. What is the harm, unless you just want to force people into playing so you can beat up on them and pretend that you are winning tough fights or gripe cause you are losing (my grandma actually used to love to gripe and was not happy unless there was something to gripe about, so I know some people are actually like this). by the way I do not mean that as an attack, some people do like both those and they are valid options. Edited February 15, 2012 by avezes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grubfist Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 If nobody likes it, it wont be used. What is the harm, . The harm is that it takes valuable time and resources creating such a system, which is not worth it if it won't be used. Nothing will ever stop people complaining. Get this through your head. Human beings like to complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avezes Posted February 15, 2012 Author Share Posted February 15, 2012 why be antagonistic? I am making a simple suggestion not trying to pick a fight to feed your ego or mine. A lot of us would like a system where there would be pvp without the sides being based on set abilities that might or might not be unbalanced (on a per server basis with each server being different of course). Maybe it isnt the best idea, but I am trying to come up with ones that dont attack others and claim "unfair unfair!!" Just griping or dogging ideas without puting counter ideas offers nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avezes Posted February 15, 2012 Author Share Posted February 15, 2012 What ever teh cause, on many servers there appears to be an imbalance. Whichever side is the strongest PvP will continue to grow stronger and the oter side is stuck losing 8/10 WZs. I do not care which side is stronger. The suggestion is to make it irrelevant by creating random teams. No "side" gains an advantage by this. While I understand that some people need to feel superior and handily win everytime the play, so let them have the option to continue. I feel that the reason people are against this is because they know that most people will not enter a PvP that they know 99.99999999999 percent chance they will lose when there is an option to a fair (or chance of fair) fight. This pisses the wimps who get stomped in real life of. They have nobody to take their aggression out on if we do this. The basic point is that this is a pretty cool game but is falling in the same trap That Eve Online did at first. Yes they will survive, but with 100k subscriber, or millions... the call is youre Bioware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts