[Brewwonder]

I enjoy sweaty missions against a dozen pve enemies and an antag, but I have noticed a drastic uptick in the number of Antags out there. When Im trying to get a blueprint to lvl up a character I dont normally play, its punishing to run into a lvl 200 antag that one shots you. Most missions Ive played lately have ended with the others in the group quitting. Antag missions should either be opt in, or lvl restricted. A lvl 10 newbie shouldnt be grouped with a lvl 200 Antag. I just think it will turn new playets away before they can get a feel for the game. It sucks to spend 20-30 min foghting it out only to have others quit the mission or worse disconnect.

[MeleeMaster]

For real, I was playing in a group with two friends, we were all above rank 1 and the difficulty of the mission was more than 50, nothing wrong with that. The thing is, we got paired with a baby Harec who couldn't shoot to save his life(literally), and that happened in two missions. How does this works?

[MSE_Ojuel]

Hi!

So, if we take a closer look to the Roadmap:



We're currently getting ready some systems for newcomer players's first matches so they are able to understand missions and mechanics better. Some of those features should be released along with the Rewards Galore update

[sonofoz]

well hello =)

i'm not against pvp.
nor i am against asymetrical pvp.
nor i am in this game.
it's fun.

and i think if players are organised, stays grouped and focused on the mission (even better if one of them can take the antag down) most of antag will be no match for a team
(well, ok, it will depend the lvl of the mobs of course, since they can be far stronger than any antag...)

moreover, there is very good counter antag characters.
so yes, some missions are really antag friendly (exactly like some are not), and the good counter antag characters are not always usefull for missions objectives, and as you don't know if you'll have to face an antag or not, sometimes choosing them can be a flaw for the rest of the mission if antag don't shows up...

but i'm pretty sure a good team of players can bash the face out of most antags...

in fact, i think that right now, the real power of antag is, in the great majority of their fights, they can smash down new players because they are no match in their knwoledge of the game, in their equipment, BUT in addition of all that in their inner lvl bonus... (really stupid idea, that one, only here to praise ego of old players in order they can make puke blood to new be...)
or retarded rank *1 player who absolutly don't know what they are doing in this game whereas they must play it for months...

but all this being said, facts are almost all games, even pure pvp ones like mobas, propose non pvp mode...
specially to new players, the time they get used to the game mechanics and become more confident.

so why not do this in this game too ?
for example, make the same as for solo mode.
when a player does not have made a mission 5times, he can't encounter antag on this missions.
(in fact, no, give the solo mode from the start, so people can train AND keep this restriction for pvp)
add this with a short and drama scene/message when each mission become available to pvp in order to warn the player so he can get used to the idea and you'll have a more smooth pvp immersion.

maybe add an "AI antag" in solo mode too, always to make things easier to accomodate with for new players.

you should compare this to sodomy you see, when you're new at it you can like it, but you're partner will have to make it gently first, otherwise most won't like that.
same in games friends.
we can take pleasure being sodomised by old veterans, but first times have not to be too rough and unprepared, or it will just disgust the majority. ^^

and that's what you are doing right now, with antag and absurd cheating AI.
add this with all that random flaws in fight, and most people don't even want to try and get used to it. they just think, "no thank you, sodomy is not for me", and leave.

[Alex2199]

I am not a fan of PvP. I enjoy playing supportive co-op games were you get can just jump into a game and play with friends. However I do enjoy a little PvP every now and again, it makes the game more intense and interesting.

But every sense the new adventure mode has been added every. single. mission. has an antagonist and to me it ruins the game especially with them changing the survive time. I shouldn't have to gamble my fun away forcing me to pick characters that would work best on that mission of having a weapon just to counter someone else that MAY have a weaker weapon then me. For example I feel forced to bring Mikah equipped with Barrier just to have a chance to win the mission "A Fistful of Sand" just so a Harec, Shae, or whoever cant just kill the protector.

I don't think having antagonist optional would solve the problem because then I feel like no one would be able to play antagonist sense the queue time is already insanely long (no joke waited a whole day just for one mission). I think having it to where you can only play like 5 to 10 antagonist matches a day would probably be better change however I doubt MSE will take this into account sense they seem very focused on antag play right now.

[sonofoz]

what you say makes not really sense, first you can't come to a pvp game and say, "hé it's fun but i'd like it more rid of the pvp part".
well in fact yes, you can... and maybe you'll be right, but devs want the game to be pvp and stated it as a pvp game.

and second, you choose you're character/weapon depending on the mission right ? so why not depending of the probability to face an antag, who IS part of the mission ?

problem is not antag, problems are 1) you can't fight antag AND insane IA at the same time.
2) what i said before, there is almost always and alternate mode to keep cool when you want to play the game without pvp stress and accomodate new players to the stuff. 
well in fact IA in this game is utterly absurd so it will bring stress even without antag, but... well...

but still, there is always an full AI mode. always, in all pvp games i have tried. for honor, league of legend, paragon, mortal kombat, street fighters and so on, there is always no pvp mode, same in mmo.

just consider it training and remove all rewards from it, as auto matchmaking.
people will be forced to play in the pvp mode, true mode of the game, but will be able to chill out in training mode with choosen friends.

[Whitebleidd]

what you say makes not really sense, first you can't come to a pvp game and say, "hé it's fun but i'd like it more rid of the pvp part".
well in fact yes, you can... and maybe you'll be right, but devs want the game to be pvp and stated it as a pvp game.

This is not a pvp game, it’s not even a full blown PvPvE, it’s more of a light version of PvPvE since the PVP part of it is many times completely absent, in addition to the fact that it functions completely fine, with no downsides, when played solely as PVE.

and second, you choose you're character/weapon depending on the mission right ? so why not depending of the probability to face an antag, who IS part of the mission ?

This has been brought up many times as one of the MANY reasons why the antag system makes the game less enjoyable, not being able to play a character you want because there’s a “chance” of them invading is simply not fun.

problem is not antag, problems are 1) you can't fight antag AND insane IA at the same time.
2) what i said before, there is almost always and alternate mode to keep cool when you want to play the game without pvp stress and accomodate new players to the stuff. 
well in fact IA in this game is utterly absurd so it will bring stress even without antag, but... well...

Antags and them being enforced are the problem, they are the reason why this game will never grow and they are the reason for the toxicity in the community. Because the PVP in this game is enforced in such a way ppl will leave, anyone sensible is not going to put up with this shit and with good reason.

but still, there is always an full AI mode. always, in all pvp games i have tried. for honor, league of legend, paragon, mortal kombat, street fighters and so on, there is always no pvp mode, same in mmo.

As you mentioned almost all PVP games have their own cooperative PVE and/or Ai mode, this game has a very functional PVE mode, much better in fact than other dedicated coop PVE games, games like left4dead or Vermintide can’t provide even half the awesome coop experience this game has, so fucking this game over just to entertain some griefers is nuts imo.

So in conclusion, optional antags would solve many of this games problems, anyways antags always say that most ppl have no issues with the mode, that PVE players are in the minority, so if that’s true no harm done, wouldn’t it be us “few” PVE players that would suffer the long queues?...

[sonofoz]

This is not a pvp game

if you say so...
but that's not the feeling i had reading what devs had said about it on several topics nor the way the game is presented everywhere on internet... =)

This has been brought up many times as one of the MANY reasons why the antag system makes the game less enjoyable, not being able to play a character you want because there’s a “chance” of them invading is simply not fun.

yeah, still the same as when you have to play a character you don't like to achieve mission's objective... so it's irrelevant.
i think your personnal real problem is you come to play a pvp game (yeah, i always saw it described as an asymetrical pvp game, sorry...) saying "i don't want the pvp part."

and one more time, you too can do that, and maybe you'll be right to do it, maybe the game would be better without pvp... but... the creators of the game wanted it like an asymetrical pvp game... and maybe they are wrong, but complaining about seems a little strange to me... you see.
as if you'd go in a chinese restaurant complaining to the chief is not making indian food...

anyway, for the rest we are ok, most, for not saying all pvp games still have non pvp training mode. and this one should have too.

[Whitebleidd]

if you say so...
but that's not the feeling i had reading what devs had said about it on several topics nor the way the game is presented everywhere on internet... =)

If the game was a mandatory PvPvE game, antags would be enforced on every match, starting one should be impossible without them if that was the case.

What the devs say is not law and can very well conflict with reality, as is the case here, evidence is what talks and that goes for all things related to creations and its creators, a writer can say his book is a serious drama, but if when reading it, it’s clearly apparent to anyone that it’s actually a comedy, no amount of statements on the part of the author will change it, same if the devs decided to say this game was a racing game, they could plaster that all over the games store pages, but it would still not make it so. Fact is arguably half the matches don’t have any PvP in them, give or take depending on the day.

Also when it comes to “the way the game is presented everywhere on internet” this game almost has none, only reason I even found this game was because it popped up in my steam discovery queue, and what is presented about it is very vague and doesn’t reflect the reality of it, in the games own steam page the term PvP or any variation of it is not presented even once, the closest thing you get is this reference to a 4 vs 1 campaing “Experience both sides of the story” that could mean a multitude of things and since it references story it could even allude to playing as an antag against AI…. there is no mention of forced invasions, or that the pvp that will exist is enforced completely at random (which given evidence of other games I’m guessing no one is going to expect forced pvp, since again not even dedicated PVP games enforce it), hell the “Popular user-defined tags” are action, free to play, MP, and adventure, and the developer defined tags are single player, MP, coop, cross-platform, etc, no "PVP", "player vs player" anywhere to be found…

complaining about seems a little strange to me...

“Complaining” is the only thing we can do, this is where you come to leave feedback… and considering the toxic nature of the current antagonist system, it is very much warranted, ppl can lose hours of their time, just to satisfy some random griefer, both because of lost rewards and lost gameplay time enjoyment.

[sonofoz]

If the game was a mandatory PvPvE game, antags would be enforced on every match, starting one should be impossible without them if that was the case.

yes considering that you can because you have at least an antag player for each match played.
and we'll have to ask devs for that, but, i think, that is what they want : antag on every missions.
but there is symply not enough.

a writer can say his book is a serious drama, but if when reading it, it’s clearly apparent to anyone that it’s actually a comedy, no amount of statements on the part of the author will change it, same if the devs decided to say this game was a racing game, they could plaster that all over the games store pages, but it would still not make it so.

obviously.
but there is no such nonsens here, so your example totally miss the point.
the game is presented as an asymetrical pvp game, and he is indeed an asymetrical pvp game...

steam :
"embark in a free and  epic adventure in this SF universe. spacelords show a totally new approach of shooter games. in its 4vs1 campagne, you'll discover all sides of its story."
does not seem so vague to me. but maybe it's not the same presentation in english ?

and on the test i had read before there was still no ambiguities for me concerning the game identity.

Also when it comes to “the way the game is presented everywhere on internet” this game almost has none

i agree.
yet, there still are many tests of the game.
and again... the one i read were clear about the pvp.

considering the toxic nature of the current antagonist system

pvp is toxic by nature. as failure is...
i know no game where it's sooo fun to be crushed by someone else, nor by the AI...

anyway, i said the game should have AI mode.
you said the game should have AI mode...
so remember me why we are arguing about ?
to know if the game is a pvp game or not or if he was thought like that ?
well just ask the devs. (oh no, right, authors have no authority on this neither...)
 
well so i think the discussion is pointless, i think that's exactly the same for half full glass. for you he is not cause sometime there is no antag, and for me he is because sometimes there is...

[Urgehal]

“Complaining” is the only thing we can do, this is where you come to leave feedback… and considering the toxic nature of the current antagonist system, it is very much warranted, ppl can lose hours of their time, just to satisfy some random griefer, both because of lost rewards and lost gameplay time enjoyment.

I've had the (dis)pleasure of getting teamed with you randomly. You immediately dropped out when there was an antagonist...talk about toxic (a game the group ended up winning anyways...)

Regardless...MSE have ALWAYS insisted on the antag system and have never contemplated making it optional or revising it drastically on these froums. You and the same 2 or 3 people complaining about it here all the time should just move on, cause yall sound miserable lol. I realize, as you said, this is their forum for game feedback, but you anti-antag folk are literally talking to a brick wall, it's bad for your health mate. I'm not even a pro-antag guy either, but it's here to stay..."deal with it" or play another game.

That being said, "lost gameplay time enjoyment" is completely subjective...but I agree with you on the lost of rewards. If only MSE implemented personal end mission rewards i.e enemies killed, assists, aleph overloads, deaths, level extraction, etc. That would mitigate the more dragged out fights/losses. But as we all know, MSE isn't known for implementing helpful new ideas/mechanics (quite the opposite sadly...) That I'l never argue against.

[Urgehal]

anyway, i said the game should have AI mode.
you said the game should have AI mode...

I'm on board with this, MSE should implement a hoard mode (or anything with just AI). Since MSE insist on Antag, have the AI mode win you faction points and common weapon blueprints (no gold or rare BPs).

I still love the game as is, but a new mode would be welcomed.

[B30]

… I still love the game as is, but a new mode would be welcomed.

New modes and such was all suggested months ago, but MSE unfortunately is not interested. They prefer to use their limited resources to complicate the game and to artificially increase the grind, … um … sorry, I should've said to make the game more accesible.

[SergeyKosinskiy]

New mode are all nice and good, but you guys DO understand that it will only leave us with worse que time? ppl who que for horde mode, dont wanna play base game, so they will not accept base game que pop. Or this will just leave them all hanging and waiting for god know why.
And that on top of, similar MMR or decent ping that game try to give us.
Basically its nice idea, but we just dont have enough ppl to support more buckets.

[B30]

New mode are all nice and good, but you guys DO understand that it will only leave us with worse que time? ppl who que for horde mode, dont wanna play base game, so they will not accept base game que pop. Or this will just leave them all hanging and waiting for god know why.
And that on top of, similar MMR or decent ping that game try to give us.
Basically its nice idea, but we just dont have enough ppl to support more buckets.

Yes, and why is that?
Because they did it wrong since the beginning. You just need choices in a game because players are different. You can't come up with just one mode, if it's your vision or not, it will not work. Look at all the other MMO's or multiplayer games out there, even Blizzard/Overwatch was forced to offer a PVE mode (and they have millions of players).
Maybe it's already too late now, but what do they have to lose?