Will there be enforced faction barriers?

[Mjoellnir]

Hello, since I saw with World of WarCraft how easy it is to make enemies out of factions that are supposed to be united against a common enemy I'm a bit afraid that the same mistake will be made with the Federation and the Klingons. So I have a few questions.

1) Will there be some kind of communication barrier? (It absolutely wouldn't make sense in a universe with universal translators but undead being unable to speak their own language and instead speaking gutterspeak isn't logical either).

2) Will there be an effect barrier? Something like you can't help repairing ships of other factions wouldn't fit into Star Trek either.

3) Will it be possible to team up with other factions? The most important thing, after all Star Trek is about cooperation. The problem is that this could interfere with PvP (I really wouldn't like it as a Klingon to see how other Klingons shoot a Starfleet member of my team, in fact I guess I would try to shoot him or worse). This could be solved by really confining PvP to a few zones that cooperative players would have to avoid.

[indigowhale345]

I don't think we really know anything on the subject yet, unfortunately.

1) I hope not. There is really no reason to limit communication between factions. Yes, have the faction only chat channels, but have global ones too. I also hope that there will be neutral, peaceful gathering spots where Feds and Klingons, and whoever else can come and socialize "in person", like a space station controlled by some neutral alien race.

2) I hope not. Obviously this is risky to do, but that's the risk you take. If they betray your trust, and help, then that's a fun story to retell at Quarks or something.

3) I hope so, although I wouldn't mind if it was largely limited to teaming in certain areas for certain missions against certain very powerful enemies, be they Borg or Giant Taco monsters or whatever.

[ParkerHayden]

2) Depends on the faction. If it's a ship that's a member of a faction your faction is at war with, most likely not. If it's neutral or an ally, probably.

3)Cryptic said that it will be a possibility, but they haven't made a final decision.

[Refridgerator]

I got the impression from all the info that I'm reading that the Federation and Klingons might not necessairly be allies, but still valid questions.

[Hagon]

There is going to be an, and I quote from the GameInformer article, "unending factional war between the Federation and the Klingons."

They have hinted that there might be an occasion that will require a temporary truce and for the factions to work together to defeat a common enemy, but the key word there is temporary, and I personally would hope that there's never a way for one faction to "assist' the other in terms of repairing etc.

As far as the communication thing goes, as much as I'd love there to be no cross faction communication allowed since that added air of mystery adds such an incredible amount to the atmosphere of a faction vs faction game, they have indicated it will be. Which I have to accept considering the established existence of the universal translator in Star Trek. They have spoken of possibly also providing a way for each faction to only talk amongst themselves as well though.

[OrabIbo]

They have hinted that there might be an occasion that will require a temporary truce and for the factions to work together to defeat a common enemy, but the key word there is temporary, and I personally would hope that there's never a way for one faction to "assist' the other in terms of repairing etc.
.
I have to agree with this, and I can see it happening to some of the more sinister aliens in the star trek series. Like the Borg, Species 8472, and I think cryptic is coming up with one of their very own.

I have a hard time seeing a communication barrier working well in Star Trek. Especially if they plan on employing diplomacy as a valid tactic and technique in the game. Usually the episodes where the Federation had issues communicating often led to throughout most of the show, they tried to find a way TO communicate!

Often the ones that didn't talk at all, were more instinctual in nature. So the show was about less an intelligent being, and more one that reacted by instinct. These episodes made for a ominious show.

[Tain]

I hope not. Communing with the enemy in time of war outside of diplomatic channels is generally seen as treasonous.

[Urantia]

There is going to be an, and I quote from the GameInformer article, "unending factional war between the Federation and the Klingons."

They have hinted that there might be an occasion that will require a temporary truce and for the factions to work together to defeat a common enemy, but the key word there is temporary, and I personally would hope that there's never a way for one faction to "assist' the other in terms of repairing etc.

As far as the communication thing goes, as much as I'd love there to be no cross faction communication allowed since that added air of mystery adds such an incredible amount to the atmosphere of a faction vs faction game, they have indicated it will be. Which I have to accept considering the established existence of the universal translator in Star Trek. They have spoken of possibly also providing a way for each faction to only talk amongst themselves as well though.

Still does not stop Klingons from repsponding to a hail with disruptor fire....this is how I would do it. What the **edit** would I have to say to a bunch of human [insert Klingon plural expletive here]. But aye I do not see us having this option closed...even if it makes way less sense in one direction.

[Mjoellnir]

There is going to be an, and I quote from the GameInformer article, "unending factional war between the Federation and the Klingons."

They have hinted that there might be an occasion that will require a temporary truce and for the factions to work together to defeat a common enemy, but the key word there is temporary, and I personally would hope that there's never a way for one faction to "assist' the other in terms of repairing etc.

Great, I'm in hell.... How the heck did that happen? In the Perpetual version we had Klingons joining Starfleet and now we have another Martok changeling........:(

As far as the communication thing goes, as much as I'd love there to be no cross faction communication allowed since that added air of mystery adds such an incredible amount to the atmosphere of a faction vs faction game, they have indicated it will be. Which I have to accept considering the established existence of the universal translator in Star Trek. They have spoken of possibly also providing a way for each faction to only talk amongst themselves as well though.

No cross-faction communication is actually the absolute worst thing that can happen to any game, and especially to Star Trek. It makes it terrible easy to forget that there are also humans playing the other guys, it kills roleplaying and it forces confrontations that wouldn't happen otherwise.

I hope not. Communing with the enemy in time of war outside of diplomatic channels is generally seen as treasonous.

"Surrender or die!" is treason?:eek:

[Interdictor]

Great, I'm in hell.... How the heck did that happen? In the Perpetual version we had Klingons joining Starfleet and now we have another Martok changeling........:(

How could it NOT happen? The likely answer is that the Klingons wanted to kick someone's butt and the Feds either said "we're not in" or "no, you can't do that". Which would tick off the Klingons and they would start whining and rip up the treaty. Look how quickly the alliance dissolved into outright combat when the Feds wouldn't join the Klingons in their war against Cardassia. Founders schmounders - it did NOT take a lot.

[Jenshae]

There is going...

I think that is a pity, already the universe can't be changed, we can't over come their obstacles, so it is pointless to war or try diplomacy, there will be no change, the efforts are wasted.

We can't conquer completely and we can't live in peace and suceed together. Totally demoralising.

Edit I wish it to be different and I hope:

1) Not.
2) Not.
3) We can.

[SelorKiith]

You can live in peace... just don't shoot at one another and peacefully fly side by side to wherever you want... problem solved!

[SolidSnakeUS]

Honestly, I feel that they should have anything that goes, except for maybe enforcing a rule where a powerful ship cannot destroy just-made newbie ships or something. Just an idea...

[TheMasterpiece]

I would hate to see pvp "limited to a few zones". Also, it makes no sense for klingons and federation vessels to team up on a "quest". i can see it being possible to team up when the borg come through, or when something catastrophic happens. Other than that no, the factions should remain seperate

[Mjoellnir]

How could it NOT happen? The likely answer is that the Klingons wanted to kick someone's butt and the Feds either said "we're not in" or "no, you can't do that". Which would tick off the Klingons and they would start whining and rip up the treaty. Look how quickly the alliance dissolved into outright combat when the Feds wouldn't join the Klingons in their war against Cardassia. Founders schmounders - it did NOT take a lot.

That was Deep Space 9. Deep Space 9 had only 3 good parts. Dax, Worf and the Defiant.:p

You can live in peace... just don't shoot at one another and peacefully fly side by side to wherever you want... problem solved!

This doesn't work properly in some cases. Like when you can't communicate, or when autotarget suddenly makes you target a Klingon when you want to shoot at a Breen....:eek:

I would hate to see pvp "limited to a few zones". Also, it makes no sense for klingons and federation vessels to team up on a "quest". i can see it being possible to team up when the borg come through, or when something catastrophic happens. Other than that no, the factions should remain seperate

I hate PvP.:D And why should it make no sense for Klingons and Federation Vessels to team up? We saw Worf calling in help against the Romulans, a Bird of Prey brought Data and Picard to a Mission on Romulus, in the Dominion War we had whole Fleets that were mixed from 3 factions (of course, something catastrophic but it is always harder to implement something new for a special event than making it possible from the beginning). I don't see a problem with A Federation and a Klingon ship teaming up. In fact I think it's far more logical than 4 Federation ships teaming up for one landing mission.....

[Hagon]

It's important to understand that the faction vs faction element in STO isn't all about PvP. Much of the PvE content is going to be centered around it as well. As in the competitive PvE elements, and diplomacy efforts.

[Jenshae]

Still all pointless. The server world won't change, it is rigid. Our characters will pass through and have no lasting impact. The only gains will be transient and likely to change the faster the higher the demand on those aspects are.

Unless we just have a case of Federations wins everything, just reroll or play the weaker side.

[Hagon]

I prefer this dynamic way of doing things, but still maintaining a basic framework that everyone understands, both vet and newcomer alike.

Much better than some mess created by a "them that get the biggest clique together determine how everyone else will play' sandbox silliness.

[Jenshae]

I found that last line hilarious. You obviously haven't seen how predictable faction "wars" become when there are set places of PvP and how one or the other side dominates the controllable areas. Not to mention the PvE, since it doesn't change they have alternating weeks and don't even PvP in the PvP/PvM hybrid raids. The spawn times are taped, people follow nice little routines and go by rote, no one is remembered for long.

Probably only one player stands out that I can think of, that is Leroy Jenkins, which was a fluke.

I play one of these unchanging games, it really is pointless. The PvP is only really done by those that have completed the PvM content, it is how they pass the time while waiting for more. They have multi faction guilds and have complete alts just to balance the sides. They also war privately over areas and will turn with full might on anyone that trys to help.

Why do they take turns and basically give areas to the other side? To stop the whining, to give them hope, to prolong it. To try and give them some incentive. One side controls everything until something dramatic happens, the change is measured in years, then everyone changes factions or plays some alts more. They don't even try and struggle against it or push it back, just swop sides.

[Loekii]

As far as the communication thing goes, as much as I'd love there to be no cross faction communication allowed since that added air of mystery adds such an incredible amount to the atmosphere of a faction vs faction game, they have indicated it will be. Which I have to accept considering the established existence of the universal translator in Star Trek. They have spoken of possibly also providing a way for each faction to only talk amongst themselves as well though.

I do hope that inter-factional communication has to be [ACCEPTED] first -- ie 'Captain, the Federation Ship is hailing us...'.

Thus, you may refuse to acknowledge the Hail and remain silent -- as well as avoid annoying communications from the opposing faction.

[Loekii]

It's important to understand that the faction vs faction element in STO isn't all about PvP. Much of the PvE content is going to be centered around it as well. As in the competitive PvE elements, and diplomacy efforts.

I think the recent ASK CRYPTIC supports this -- While Semantics, they did choose to say 'Planet Loyalty' rather than 'Planet Ownership', which suggests some Diplomacy in planetary 'control', which would be a PVE function (ie competative PVE).

[indigowhale345]

I hope not. Communing with the enemy in time of war outside of diplomatic channels is generally seen as treasonous.

Totally and completely false. How do you think things like cease fires or surrenders on the condition of (tacos) are arranged?

[Jenshae]

To add to that. If it is as immutable as the other game I play, then I will explore, play with the ship movements and leave. No point trying to co-ordinate the faction.

One of the things these games forget is that most people don't care about the wars and will remain neutral even if they are within a faction. This was so strong that a third faction, the "Neutrals" was created in Anarchy Online. Even there, the neutrals are perceived as being allied with the corporate faction, which dictates the terms of how everything is going to be done to the rebel faction.

They set and enforced the weekly turns of running the PvM raids, they win the towers and give the neutrals some as rewards for being good. I have seen them pull out, leaving minimal decoy resistance and leave a tower field for the clan to conquer just so they would have one, give them hope. Despite their being strict rules on their for their raid bots, I have seen people log their alts just to balance things out, to make it a more fair fight until the clan think they have a chance, then stop, so they lose. I have seen the birth of exploiters who thought they would be the heroes of the clan side but are hated. I watch the zerging and safe zone hugging, the desperate attempts to fight back, there are less and less of the real ones and as soon as there is some resistance it is like fox hunt.

Then WoW? Hahahahaha!

[Hagon]

I found that last line hilarious. You obviously haven't seen how predictable faction "wars" become when there are set places of PvP and how one or the other side dominates the controllable areas. Not to mention the PvE, since it doesn't change they have alternating weeks and don't even PvP in the PvP/PvM hybrid raids. The spawn times are taped, people follow nice little routines and go by rote, no one is remembered for long.

Probably only one player stands out that I can think of, that is Leroy Jenkins, which was a fluke.

I play one of these unchanging games, it really is pointless. The PvP is only really done by those that have completed the PvM content, it is how they pass the time while waiting for more. They have multi faction guilds and have complete alts just to balance the sides. They also war privately over areas and will turn with full might on anyone that trys to help.

Why do they take turns and basically give areas to the other side? To stop the whining, to give them hope, to prolong it. To try and give them some incentive. One side controls everything until something dramatic happens, the change is measured in years, then everyone changes factions or plays some alts more. They don't even try and struggle against it or push it back, just swop sides.
Actually I've played faction vs faction games sine the early days of DAoC. In fact that's pretty much the only type of game I'll play now. Everything else seems meaningless to me. You seem to be experienced with it in one game, WoW, from the sounds of it.

I've never found it as you describe in all the years I played faction vs faction strangely enough.

I have on occasion seen one side be overpopulated, but that's never lasted all that long, or it's actually been not that bad a thing because the underpopulated side always seems to come together better, and quite often wins out in the end.

I'd have to say that you're entirely mistaken about "The PvP is only really done by those that have completed the PvM content". Certainly that might be the case for a lot of players in WoW (although I think it's gotten better for the PvP only player since I left the game), but the majority of the players of DAoC and other games with a strong PvP element to the faction vs faction were pretty much PvP only, and did PvE only when forced to.

As for players "standing out", well I think that the fact that most UO vets, DAOC vets, Planetside vets, Early WoW vets that played on PvP servers(before BGs and the HK/DK system) , and vets from a number of other games, would have to completely disagree with that as well. That because you can bet they can name tons of players from memory that "stood out" as being exemplary leaders, or exceptional players that were rarely defeated, or exceptional diplomats that brought a faction's diverse members together, etc.

[Jenshae]

... You seem to be experienced with it in one game, WoW, from the sounds of it.
....

Assumption is wrong but interesting to see how similar they all are and sound.

...
Then WoW? Hahahahaha!

Means I won't even bother making examples of that game, it goes from the sublime to the ridiculous.

[Hagon]

One of the things these games forget is that most people don't care about the wars and will remain neutral even if they are within a faction. Are you sure you've actually played a real faction vs faction game? Sorry, no offence meant, but it would seem so since it's really the exact opposite.

Most players in a well designed and well nurtured Faction vs Faction game come to care a great deal about fighting for their faction. In fact that caring about fighting for their faction, and caring about fighting for their faction mates, is one of the biggest subscriber retention elements found in these games to date. If you doubt that, go ask the thousands and thousands still playing DAoC and fighting "for their faction" after 7 1/2 years, or all the people still fighting for their faction in Planetside after almost 6 years, and yes even though you might not want to believe it, the thousands and thousands of OG WoW PvP players that will still yell "For The Horde" proudly after 4 1/2 years. Even in EvE it's like that. Granted it doesn't really have factions as we're talking about here, but the player corporations act as pretty much the same thing, and they have incredible loyalty as far as players fighting for their "team", and have had for close to six years now.

[Jenshae]

Anarchy Online and WoW certainly do try; the majority, just don't care. Even on the WoW PvP servers I find people don't care. Like the Eastern Plains, three towers were allies and the fourth was nothing, the horde hadn't even bothered going there and the allies hadn't even bothered to take them all.

Nothing changes, I can't name you any of "Early WoW vets" I can barely scratch up a few Anarchy ones from more than three years ago and that is a much smaller community.

Anarchy has battle stations with mechs and turrets, tower wars, PvP/PvM hybrid raids, PvP dungeons, PvP cities, flags, duels, team PvP, twinking, nemisis professions, special attacks, orbital strikes, so forth and so on, for the most part people don't care. Even with faction sides XP bonuses.

Nothing changes, just log on at the same time each day on alternative weeks, get your raid points, bid and get your items and a few of the hard core players will battle out for the towers. The towers are really guild against guild and only a few really do that, the other guilds get given them since you can only have one of each type. The battle stations are farmed afkish for the points to get the PvP armour.

[-Brett-]

Nothing changes, just log on at the same time each day on alternative weeks, get your raid points, bid and get your items and a few of the hard core players will battle out for the towers. The towers are really guild against guild and only a few really do that, the other guilds get given them since you can only have one of each type. The battle stations are farmed afkish for the points to get the PvP armour.

Your objection seems to be something inherent to all MMOs. Are you trying to suggest that they drop STO and make a single player game? That's the only way to give the player that kind of influence over the in-game world. Would be nice, I agree, but it's seriously unlikely to happen.

[Jenshae]

I always did think Second Life was too good to exist.

There is a neat little thing known as events. Where the winner will have won and when the next patch cycle comes along, they have taken over or made a city.

These groovy things known as events are designed by the developers and probably closely watched so that they give the players a chance to decide the future of the game's time line. They then collect information, how many accounts took a protest placards, how many deaths on one side there were, what was destroyed, what the total of the vote for a new shop was, on and on and on, this powerful rabbit is all too often left in its hat.