Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Letís Make PVP Better.

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > PvP
Letís Make PVP Better.

foxmob's Avatar


foxmob
05.30.2019 , 11:12 AM | #11
in regard to arenas, I think the role thing should be just the opposite to the original poster:
  • corellia square spawn zones are so far apart that you cannot mark opponents. you should always be able to mark from spawn.
  • along the same lines, stealth should be disabled behind the spawn gate so that you can mark everyone.

it's a LOT easier to identify players with marks, especially with the BS of adaptive clothing. you have to rely on name plates or portraits (or abilities used), which are far more difficult to read. with a star on the healer, shield on tank, I don't have to look for the weapon or read a comparatively tiny name or class name to know which op, sin, jugg to CC or attack.

cog on dps jugg, gun on dps op, etc., you always know instantly who is who. there's no need for mark swapping or looking for a specific abil before you decide how to deal with the person. there's only 4 in the map.

yeah. my eyes are pretty bad (astigmatism + keratoconus). but ***? marking everyone is perfectly logical, and you're supposed to know who is who in arenas.

having to wait and see which op (in WZs) casts (e.g.) an aoe heal just to figure out which is the healer from the dps is stupid. meanwhile, mandos have the green beam of death pointing the entire enemy team directly to them. lul

side note: I've been studying too many dead languages. does "to be" (is) take the subjective in front and behind in english? I can't decided between who is who and who is whom.
Krack

DavidAtkinson's Avatar


DavidAtkinson
05.30.2019 , 01:19 PM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by foxmob View Post
in regard to arenas, I think the role thing should be just the opposite to the original poster:
  • corellia square spawn zones are so far apart that you cannot mark opponents. you should always be able to mark from spawn.
  • along the same lines, stealth should be disabled behind the spawn gate so that you can mark everyone.

it's a LOT easier to identify players with marks, especially with the BS of adaptive clothing. you have to rely on name plates or portraits (or abilities used), which are far more difficult to read. with a star on the healer, shield on tank, I don't have to look for the weapon or read a comparatively tiny name or class name to know which op, sin, jugg to CC or attack.

cog on dps jugg, gun on dps op, etc., you always know instantly who is who. there's no need for mark swapping or looking for a specific abil before you decide how to deal with the person. there's only 4 in the map.

yeah. my eyes are pretty bad (astigmatism + keratoconus). but ***? marking everyone is perfectly logical, and you're supposed to know who is who in arenas.

having to wait and see which op (in WZs) casts (e.g.) an aoe heal just to figure out which is the healer from the dps is stupid. meanwhile, mandos have the green beam of death pointing the entire enemy team directly to them. lul

side note: I've been studying too many dead languages. does "to be" (is) take the subjective in front and behind in english? I can't decided between who is who and who is whom.
I agree with this...

I remember players and focus them based on their marks. I cannot remember names and so on.. but there are players who are bothered by too many marks.

To the OP...

Practice makes perfect, a wise player told me once in game.

bUrself_'s Avatar


bUrself_
05.30.2019 , 02:04 PM | #13
Quote: Originally Posted by foxmob View Post
it's a LOT easier to identify players with marks, especially with the BS of adaptive clothing. you have to rely on name plates or portraits (or abilities used), which are far more difficult to read. with a star on the healer, shield on tank, I don't have to look for the weapon or read a comparatively tiny name or class name to know which op, sin, jugg to CC or attack.
do you not have class symbols turned on? class symbols are a god send

Quote: Originally Posted by foxmob View Post
side note: I've been studying too many dead languages. does "to be" (is) take the subjective in front and behind in english? I can't decided between who is who and who is whom.
I don't understand the concept of "taking the subjective" because I'm a native english speaker so all that stuff is completely transparent to my brain

But I can say I've never seen nor heard "who is whom." I became curious if this is because the 2nd pronoun there is not an object, and therefore should be who and not whom, or if it's just one of those english things where the phrase became entrenched as "who is who."

I found the following

we use who as the subject and whom as the object. Isn't the second who in Who is Who an object?

If you can ask that question, you have reached at least the intermediate level in the game of correctly choosing between who and whom. At this level, we must distinguish between action verbs and nonaction, or linking, verbs. The verb to be and all its forms, including is, are, was, were, will be, has been, and all the other forms for the 12 tenses, is a linking verb. It links a subject to one of three things: an adjective describing that subject, a phrase identifying the current location of that subject, or a noun or pronoun that refers to the same person or thing as the subject.

That last situation pertains to the who is who situation. When a linking verb links a subject to a noun or pronoun, it is almost as if that sentence has two subjects.

so apparently the 2nd pronoun is not an object, so it's who is who!

Lhancelot's Avatar


Lhancelot
05.30.2019 , 05:55 PM | #14
Quote: Originally Posted by bUrself_ View Post
But I can say I've never seen nor heard "who is whom." I became curious if this is because the 2nd pronoun there is not an object, and therefore should be who and not whom, or if it's just one of those english things where the phrase became entrenched as "who is who."

I found the following

we use who as the subject and whom as the object. Isn't the second who in Who is Who an object?

If you can ask that question, you have reached at least the intermediate level in the game of correctly choosing between who and whom. At this level, we must distinguish between action verbs and nonaction, or linking, verbs. The verb to be and all its forms, including is, are, was, were, will be, has been, and all the other forms for the 12 tenses, is a linking verb. It links a subject to one of three things: an adjective describing that subject, a phrase identifying the current location of that subject, or a noun or pronoun that refers to the same person or thing as the subject.

That last situation pertains to the who is who situation. When a linking verb links a subject to a noun or pronoun, it is almost as if that sentence has two subjects.

so apparently the 2nd pronoun is not an object, so it's who is who!
Don't ever do that again. That was a total mind ****.
The Revival of SWTOR: Petition for More Funding and Resources
(Click link Below For More Information)

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=959696

foxmob's Avatar


foxmob
05.30.2019 , 06:08 PM | #15
I do. class symbols don't differentiate between healing op and dps op. they don't show up on portraits. but most importantly for me, they are not nearly as large/visible as the manually applied markers.

you should see me in RL when trying to heal. I spend 1-5 seconds trying to find the tiny F-ing cursor to click the raid frame. and then I proceed to lose the thing again cuz I constantly have the right mouse button depressed to move/turn/look.

I need to setup a friendly tabbing system, but I just haven't been arsed to do it yet.

Quote: Originally Posted by bUrself_ View Post

so apparently the 2nd pronoun is not an object, so it's who is who!
correct. the verb "to be" is hyper-conjugated in every known language (afaik) because it is a fundamental concept and used with great frequency. I just couldn't remember if it had no subject-object. it's the only verb I'm aware of that you can swap subject with object and mean exactly the same thing (as opposed to "dog ate cat" vs. "cat ate dog"; "dog is cat" and "cat is dog" carry the same meaning). I just couldn't remember if that rule pertained to english.

(also, yes. I have that "google" app thing. I also enjoy conversations. )
Krack

TrixxieTriss's Avatar


TrixxieTriss
05.30.2019 , 08:32 PM | #16
Quote: Originally Posted by bUrself_ View Post

I don't understand the concept of "taking the subjective" because I'm a native english speaker so all that stuff is completely transparent to my brain

But I can say I've never seen nor heard "who is whom." I became curious if this is because the 2nd pronoun there is not an object, and therefore should be who and not whom, or if it's just one of those english things where the phrase became entrenched as "who is who."

I found the following

we use who as the subject and whom as the object. Isn't the second who in Who is Who an object?

If you can ask that question, you have reached at least the intermediate level in the game of correctly choosing between who and whom. At this level, we must distinguish between action verbs and nonaction, or linking, verbs. The verb to be and all its forms, including is, are, was, were, will be, has been, and all the other forms for the 12 tenses, is a linking verb. It links a subject to one of three things: an adjective describing that subject, a phrase identifying the current location of that subject, or a noun or pronoun that refers to the same person or thing as the subject.

That last situation pertains to the who is who situation. When a linking verb links a subject to a noun or pronoun, it is almost as if that sentence has two subjects.

so apparently the 2nd pronoun is not an object, so it's who is who!
That also hurt my head ďouchĒ

Lhancelot's Avatar


Lhancelot
05.31.2019 , 04:31 AM | #17
Quote: Originally Posted by TrixxieTriss View Post
That also hurt my head ďouchĒ
I can appreciate it, though. Anything that takes you out of the realm of normal thinking can be a nice mental trip away, sometimes.
The Revival of SWTOR: Petition for More Funding and Resources
(Click link Below For More Information)

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=959696

Yeldah_'s Avatar


Yeldah_
06.14.2019 , 04:25 PM | #18
Quote: Originally Posted by DarthEnrique View Post
Honestly, PVP is probably one of the most toxic things in this game. Recently it has turned into nothing more than gank fests instead of actual fair and fun matches. There are many teams that go in just for kills and donít do
The objective at all, I actually went into a match where all the team did was farm kills. It was the Alderaan one and they went for none of the turrets just kills and lost the match. Then you got teams thatíll sit there and if itís the one with 3, Alderaan, Yavin 4, Novare Coast and Ancient Hypergate where teams just go for both or all three and some how are able to keep them all. Thereís actual a group or guild on my server that has 4 snipers go into pvp and say it ends up Ancient Hypergate they stalk the respawn point and keep people from getting out. So because of the ganking and unfairness or these farm groups here are some suggestions on how to better PVP in this game.

1. Get rid of kills counting in objection based warzones, leave them solely to the 4v4.
2. Speaking of 4v4 get rid of the ability to tell which player is what role. This pretty much marks healers for ganking and instantly targeted.
3. Get rid of the ability to mark targets in PVP, this should be a PVE only ability. This is the biggest cause of ganking in warzones especially for healers.
4. When it comes to Alderaan, Yavin 4, Novare Coast and Ancient Hypergate, make it where once a team has 1 pylon (Hypergate) or two turrets they are locked from being able to get a 3rd one until the other team takes one away or in the case of Hypergate neither team can have both pylons. This would really make it better for a lot of people to get medals seeing as we now have conquest points based on receiving 8.
5. Give us the ability to choose what maps in pvp we go into. I donít mind Huttball, itís a lot better than Odessen Proving Grounds but it pops up way too much. Personally Iíd rather choose my maps for e.g. Iíd prefer Voidstar, Alderaan, Novare Coast, Ancient Hypergate and the new Huttball map over the rest of the PVP maps so I would prefer to have the ability to choose to queue up for those then the others.
6. Make it where groups canít queue with more then 2 DPS, got it where groups canít queue with 2 tanks or 2 heals now not when thereís more then 2 DPS? What sense does that make?*

So there are my thoughts I am sure there will be people who oppose.

Add-on: I want to help people understand one thing: Iím a conquest person when it comes to this game, if it wasnít for fellow guildies wanting to pvp I wouldnít bother with it because of the issues I mentioned cause getting under 7 medals in a pvp match makes the match not really worth it and I want to enjoy it with my guildies but not with the issues I have mentioned. I like conquest and OPS when it comes to this game but when it comes to these issues honestly you want more people to do it maybe not poo-poo on their suggestions.
*Add-on to the list.
Farm them back. Players that enjoy ganking only understand suffering. After they have been killed 10 times in a match they will usually either stop number farming or log out. If that is not your cup of tea then play a stealth class and join the humble school of node thieving. They can run around farming and you will easily get the win.
APAC And Proud