I for one find too many faults currently in PVP and wanted to hear what other people think. I think that the way that some things are implemented make no sense gameplay wise and are too restrictive.
OK one of the things that I find have no place in this game is the module of the NY “saucer” ship that blocks all energy regen. I think that as a gameplay choice its too restrictive to the enemy ships.
I think that it is unfair that lower tier ships are made to be stronger than special project ships and have special modules, same goes many premium ships. I already made two threads on the interceptor problem,
but I feel that the tai’kin wobble build is still too strong along with the waz got module that pushes your ships around. I think that destroyers as a class are on the whole too weak currently especially with the 700 meter 3x zone. Overall I think that battles and most “PVP” games have a “odd” or “strange” feel to them. Maybe you guys like this, and well come these changes, but I dislike the current game flow.
hard for me to answer second question.
overpowered ships are for me not what meta means. they make other ships unviable.
for me there is no meta, if the game isn’t in some kind of balance. so i went with first answer, even tho i would say the second would be true.
a broken game has no meta.
That second question is, to put it generously, poorly phrased:
Quote
Meta (from the Greek preposition and prefix meta- (μετά-) meaning “after”, or “beyond”) is a prefix used in English to indicate a concept which is an abstraction behind another concept, used to complete or add to the latter.
In gaming specifically, meta-gaming refers to the practice of seeking solutions to gameplay problems outside of the game itself: applying knowledge and theory rather than one’s own experience to optimize one’s performance.
Refering to something as “meta” is a shorthand for: “better players have collectively agreed upon this being the most efficient way to play”.
Using the term “overpowered” is also misleading here, since it’s a term that is all but meaningless in evaluating gameplay balance, with a typical modern gamer often referring to an element of the game providing a situational strength as being “OP at something”.
Strictly on topic though, my overall opinion on balance itself is that the ship tiers and ranks are now doing more harm than good, and the new progression system is absolutely garbage.
i voted pay to win but with the intie swarms it all comes down to ping and packet loss the current meta is covert ops teams against the unlucky few who actually play the game … i dont play pvp at all
14 minutes ago, Original_Taz said:
i voted pay to win but with the intie swarms it all comes down to ping and packet loss the current meta is covert ops teams against the unlucky few who actually play the game … i dont play pvp at all
same, there’s no point to PVP at this point, all missions that require being in PVP mode should work for COOP as well.
It’s a covops mess…If not front blasters, then aoe blind or quantum defence. Covies are just too strong at moment.
6 hours ago, Rob40468 said:
It’s a covops mess…If not front blasters, then aoe blind or quantum defence. Covies are just too strong at moment.
True, and Secret Project ships can’t equip those modules. They suck more than regular/premium ships now.
The poll keeps failing for me. I can’t submit vote.
I don’t do PVP.
I don’t understand the second question in regards to META.
I don’t think PVP is pay to win.