[Chase]

The 1st Khitomer Games has been completed and it has been mutually decided upon by SFO and HoK to have the overall Games end in a 1-1 draw. This is a due to both sides not feeling comfortable awarding the trophy after the conclusion of tie-breaking match. This was due to the universal unfamiliarity with the scoring mechanics of the Capture and Hold gametype. More details are below. We received multiple requests to observe the matches throughout, we will look into live streaming the next one!

Participants

Team SFO
Team Captain- Mark Okuda
Zoidberg
Littlestar
Spacedreamer
Stormy
Oodilolly

Team HoK
Team Captain-Bridger
Chase
Ned'ya
Tullius
Gunges
Keenan

Referee:
Blitzfreigable

Match Summaries

Match 1:
Arena Deathmatch- Best of 3 Rounds, first to 15 points is the Round winner

Round 1: Team HoK go off to a early lead, using the element of surprise with their cloaks to get some quick strikes to get some early points. HoK got up to a 5 point lead about midway through the set. HoK led 8 to 3 at about the midpoint. Once the element of surprise wore off, SFO was able to utilize the tankier nature of their cruisers to slowly chip away at HoK until they tied the score at 12 to 12. Both teams then traded two points until it was 14 to 14 with SFO dealing the final blow and picking up their 15th point and the Round.

Round 2: Round 2 had an almost identical flow with HoK picking up a lot of early points very quickly and then SFO slowly getting their way back into the game until it was once again tied at 14-14. This time though, HoK was able to land the final blow and picked up the victory in Round 2.

Round 3: With the match now tied a 1-1, the match point came down to Round 3. SFO learned from the first two sets and switched up their strategy for Round 3 to prevent falling in the early deficit like the first two sets. HoK could never really find a weakness to exploit early and SFO actually picked up the early lead this time after a couple failed ambushes by HoK. HoK was never really able to recover from failed attempts early and SFO earned a commanding victory in Round 3 and picked up the Match point with its 2-1 deathmatch victory.

Match 2:
Protect the VIP- First team to kill opponent's VIP 5 times wins the Match point. (In the interest of time, it was mutually decided upon to up the points to 5 and only have one set as opposed to 3)

Both Team Captains were selected as the VIP. HoK was able to use their cloaks to get very close to the VIP and conduct very quick strikes. HoK was able to drop the SFO VIP 5 times in short order and picked up the Match 2 point. Rule changes are being evaluated for the VIP game type in the future.



Match 3:

Capture and Hold- Winner of one game gets the Match point.

With both SFO and HoK having 1 match point, the entire Games and the trophy came down to this final match. Everyone, myself included, found out that we did not understand the actual point system mechanics and some things seemed to be not working as intended. Both teams agreed that they did not want the outcome of the games to decided on the results of this match and decided to call the match and 1st Games to be a draw. We decided it would be best to use the 1st Games as a trial run to fine tune of the rules. After the 2nd Games, an overall winner WILL be determined and the trophy WILL be awarded .

I am looking into creating a Rules Committee for the 2nd Games. While anyone can propose changes, those on the committee will be able to vote in an official capacity on proposed rule changes for the next games. Please let me know if you are interested.

[spacedreamer]

This type of event I miss! Less power creep, more skill and teamwork.

A definite advantage for the Klingons in their BoP's during "Protect the VIP". For the Fed's it was more "Nice knowing ya" .

Red team made the most in terms of ambush tactics and lures, causing Blue Team to think instead of blindly rushing towards the first visible enemy. Very refreshing to see players adapt new and different tactics.

Allowing free choice of the primary specialization, in my opinion, adds some additional flavor to the fun. I found myself being more aware who I as flying to and where or where not to place my ship during an engagement.

With 100k dps everything goes *poof*, but how good are you really when stripped of almost all of your shiny trinkets?

Set-up as it is now, wouldn't change anything drastic.

Let the good times roll!

[Bar'ol]

I'd be up to be part of rules committee.

[Tullius]

Hi guys, it was an awesome match! Would be glad to participate again!
I'd also like to mention that Spacedreamer and I have just been testing the mechanics of Capture and Hold on holodeck. We're pretty sure we've figured it out and believe that the Capture and Hold mode works like this:

You start off with 5 neutral locations on the map and an influence ticker.
For every location captured MORE than the other team, the ticker will drop one point per second. This means that when TEAM A captured three locations and TEAM B two locations, TEAM B will lose one point every second. The amount of points you can lose per second is only limited by the amount of locations, which is 5. In theory, if you capture all the locations and the enemy team has none, you can make the opposing team lose 5 points per second.

Any location on the map has 4 possible states:
-neutral (standard state)
-being captured
-captured
-being downgraded

To capture a location in a "neutral" state, at least one ship has to be present of at most one team. At that moment, the location will transition into the "being captured" state. This process will continue for about 1 minute (has to be verified). After that time has elapsed, the location will transition into the "captured" state.

To capture a location in a "captured" state, at least one ship has to be present of at most one team. At that moment, the location will transition into the "being downgraded" state. This process will continue for about 1 minute (has to be verified), provided there are no interruptions. After that time has elapsed, the location will transition into the "neutral" state. After this transition, the process of capturing a point is exactly the same as described for a neutral point above.

A few remarks:
-The state of locations is not affected by cloaked ships.
-Locations will appear to be reverted to a neutral 'white color' after an attempt to downgrade a location has been made, but failed. This is in fact not the case and these locations are in fact still in the "captured" state. The color of the team will appear on the location emblem after a short while.
-Neutral locations can be recognized most of all by their symbol: white circle with a cross in the middle (although this seems to be somewhat buggy and unreliable).
-The starbase has no special significance compared to the other locations on the map.

This was just some quick testing today on holodeck done by Spacedreamer and me, but feel free to test and verify our findings yourself. There is nothing better than constructive criticism. We're hoping that this can be of use to all of us, but most of all make the next edition of this event even better!

[Chase]

Thank you Space and Tullius for doing that testing. That makes a lot more sense. I think the next bit of testing that we should do is to see what affect having multiple people at a point affect on the time to capture. For example if it take one person 1 min, does adding a second cut it in half to 30 seconds or just take 10 seconds off. I think once we know that, the teams can better develop strategies. I think once everyone is fully aware of the nuances of the gametype, we can develop effective strategies. I feel the gametype has a lot of potential and can actually be a fun match in the future! I personally still enjoyed that match even though there was so much confusion.

[blitzfreigabe]

Here are some of the highlights from the post mission debrief. with some notes that I added with some thoughts

- One referee per team, then the 2 referees can IM between themselves if needed and both teams get equal attention.

- Keep teams to a specific size, as an example 4, if there are enough participants then individual events could theoretically operate simultaneously.

- Figure out exactly how the capture and hold tiebreaker event works.

- Opening the event to Romulan captains, each captain would need to pledge allegiance to a faction, this could be based off of the faction selected during the story or it could be at the beginning of the games (sneaky Romulans and their shifting politics) but would need to remain static at least for the games.

- Opening the use of cstore ships - Needs to be reviewed due to B’rotlh having access to raider flanking.

- Carrier Defense, each team has 1 frigate class and the remaining team members are in small craft and the goal is to destroy the opposing frigate. Frigates cannot directly target small craft (prevents them from just spamming them down). FAW/CSV may need to be banned, first team to destroy the opposing frigate wins. Frigate class for each faction would be Miranda/NX/Oberth for Fed (for this event, banning the connie would be prudent, T’Liss/T’Varo for Romulan, and B’Rel/B’Rotlh for KDF. This could mitigate the cloak and burst for the KDF and level the field.

- There could also be ground events but I haven't put much thought into that yet

[spacedreamer]

If the STO Wiki is to be believed, Raider ships gain Raider Flanking:

If I recall, Bridger used the B'Rotlh (T1 C-Store). In fights with him I didn't notice any (dis)advantage.

This would indicate (low tier?) C-store ships can be included.

Not so sure if this applies to higher tier ships. Then again, by keeping it low tier its fun, affordable and accessible.

[Ned'ya]

It was a great event, and I definitely would like to be involved in the next one, all the points I was going to make have already been raised
Only thing I will add is would it be possible to change the tier (T1) at which the games are aimed? The death match format heavily favoured the Feds in their cruisers, however the Klingons were overpowered massively in protect the VIP. One suggestion HoK put forward on TS was the use of T2 ships for Klingons (Raptors) or limit the Feds to T1 Light cruiser/escort (not connie!) these limitations would only be for the death match portion.

[Stormy]

I really enjoyed the game, much more than I do when as mentioned before- everything is just pew pew pew. The teamwork and camaraderie were also refreshing. If needed, I will gladly serve on the rules committee.

As far as those talking about "balancing" it out, while in a perfect world that would be awesome, the truth is it would be almost impossible to achieve. Take this event for example.

In game one, yes, when the FED side chose to stick together they were the more formidable force. By sticking together they were able to overcome the KDF advantage of having cloaking devices.

In game two, however, the KDF clearly had the best strategy and it showed. That type of event clearly favored Klingons.

In game three.... well... we will never really know because no one was exactly sure of what was going on..... HAHA! ! !

This contest went for three hours and that was after deciding against a 2-3 in game two. I am afraid that if we start changing ships or even builds between matches, it will prolong the event even longer and become tedious.

One thing that might help is to hold a pre-event time period where people who want or need help with allowed builds can get it. Maybe a half-hour or so. This would speed up getting things organized and started quicker, reducing the overall time the event takes. It would also allow players new to the event a chance to have someone look at their build, while those who regularly make the event can just show up at that time.

While I am likely in the minority, I do think Specializations needs to be looked at. Here is the reason:
- As mentioned in the post-event debrief, not all people play enough to fill up every specialization. If semi-active players build primarily for PvE, they will likely not have multiple specializations to choose from. This could put them at a distinct disadvantage.
- Since we are limiting weapons and ship equipment, it seems to me we should do the same for Specializations. I would NOT ban all specializations, but as in this event make one mandatory and give players a choice between two others.

Finally, as to the regularity of the event, I say we start with once a quarter as we do with UFPAC and go from there.

[Chrome]

My apologies for signing up and not showing up. I'd like to say something super important came up, but fact is......I partied all friday and partially into saturday, maybe got home around 8am so slept right through it

[Chase]

- One referee per team, then the 2 referees can IM between themselves if needed and both teams get equal attention.
- Keep teams to a specific size, as an example 4, if there are enough participants then individual events could theoretically operate simultaneously.

I think this is a great idea if we are able to get some more participants, having multiple matches going on simultaneously would be an interesting dynamic.

- Figure out exactly how the capture and hold tiebreaker event works.

Space and Tullius have already done some great testing on that, we just have a little more to do and I think we will have it figured out

- Opening the event to Romulan captains, each captain would need to pledge allegiance to a faction, this could be based off of the faction selected during the story or it could be at the beginning of the games (sneaky Romulans and their shifting politics) but would need to remain static at least for the games.

I would also be open to allowing T'varo and T'liss Warbirds for those that would interest. But like you said, once they pick a side they would be stuck there for the rest of the Games.

- Carrier Defense, each team has 1 frigate class and the remaining team members are in small craft and the goal is to destroy the opposing frigate. Frigates cannot directly target small craft (prevents them from just spamming them down). FAW/CSV may need to be banned, first team to destroy the opposing frigate wins. Frigate class for each faction would be Miranda/NX/Oberth for Fed (for this event, banning the connie would be prudent, T’Liss/T’Varo for Romulan, and B’Rel/B’Rotlh for KDF. This could mitigate the cloak and burst for the KDF and level the field.

I think this sounds like it has a lot of potential, but I think it would need some testing for balance (Along with VIP) first before we make it an official gametype.

- There could also be ground events but I haven't put much thought into that yet

I have some rough rules laid out for some ground events. Since there will be definitely less people interested in ground unfortunately, this could be an opportunity to have run a match simutaniouly with smaller team sizes made up of those that are actually interested in ground

If I recall, Bridger used the B'Rotlh (T1 C-Store). In fights with him I didn't notice any (dis)advantage.

This would indicate (low tier?) C-store ships can be included.

With the rules as they were last Saturday, the only C-Store ship that was allowed was the Connie. Everybody for HoK was using B'rel (including Bridger). It became very apparent in the deathmatch games that the B'rel's Cloak was quite a disadvantage compared to the Battle Cloak that most of us are used to. We would have to be completely out of combat before we could re-cloak which pretty much made it useless one the fighting started. I think allowing HoK to use B'Rotlhs would go a long way towards balancing the much beefier cruisers because then actual Hit and Run tactics can be utilized by smaller weaker ships against bigger stronger ships. The B'rotlhs do come with an extra ensign boff seat but we can easily just ban the use of that seat and while still debatable, B'Rotlhs might come with raider flanking which would also lend toward some further match balancing.

One suggestion HoK put forward on TS was the use of T2 ships for Klingons (Raptors) or limit the Feds to T1 Light cruiser/escort (not connie!) these limitations would only be for the death match portion.

As mentioned above, I think if we allowed HoK to use B'Roths and the Battle Cloak, I think things would be much more balanced. But we definitely need some testing.

One thing that might help is to hold a pre-event time period where people who want or need help with allowed builds can get it. Maybe a half-hour or so. This would speed up getting things organized and started quicker, reducing the overall time the event takes. It would also allow players new to the event a chance to have someone look at their build, while those who regularly make the event can just show up at that time.

I think this is a great idea, and now that we will have multiple people familiar with the rules, it will be more than just me frantically trying to get everyone ready and geared before we start. We can request the new players to show up 30 mins early and the veteran players and help them get everything ready and answer any questions they might have.

While I am likely in the minority, I do think Specializations needs to be looked at. Here is the reason:
- As mentioned in the post-event debrief, not all people play enough to fill up every specialization. If semi-active players build primarily for PvE, they will likely not have multiple specializations to choose from. This could put them at a distinct disadvantage.
- Since we are limiting weapons and ship equipment, it seems to me we should do the same for Specializations. I would NOT ban all specializations, but as in this event make one mandatory and give players a choice between two others.

I agree, and I think I have a plan to keep specializations balanced while still allowing some sort of customization and I would like to hear some thoughts on it. Firstly, completely eliminate the use of Strategist by mandating the use of Commando as the secondary. As for the Primary Specs, we allow anyone to use any of the main* three specs. This will allow people who have all of them filled out to chose if they want the Hull Buff, Defense Buff or Turn Rate Buff. Then those people who could potentially have only a couple points in one spec will still be able to get one of the three Buffs, only to a lesser degree. While there will be a difference between someone having a fully filled tree and someone with one point in the tree, it should not be big enough to be game breaking and quite frankly unavoidable because we can not deselect spec points. I personally believe that we should ban the Temporal Agent Spec, its my personal opinion that is is just full of "gimiky" abilities that are interesting in PvE but seem perfect at unbalancing PvP and they don't lend themselves to what we are trying to accomplish here. I think if we give people the option to choose Hull, Defense or turnrate buffs, that should be enough choice while mitigating as much unbalance as we can. I would also like to make it an official rule that no active spec abilities will be allowed to prevent imbalance between people of differing spec point numbers, plus rock and roll is just cheap in PvP haha But I would love to hear other thoughts on the subject.

Finally, as to the regularity of the event, I say we start with once a quarter as we do with UFPAC and go from there.

I think that is a good idea as well, maybe it can be help either the week before or after each UFPAC

Finally, as of right now, Stormy, Gunges, Ned'Ya, Tullius and thexpl0r3r have confirmed they would like to be on the Games Committee (sounds a little better than Rules Committee ), if any others would like to join please let me know. I will be compiling as master list of potential rules and new ideas for the committee to discuss and then vote on.

[blitzfreigabe]

Or maybe run it after each UFPAC (Pronounced OOF PACK to those uninitiated)

[Three of Seven]

All achievements awarded! Since no one won, there was no winners achievement.

[Stormy]

There was no winner because the Feds did not want to have to see the Klingons fall on their swords in shame after losing. <snicker> Can't wait to do this again!