Developer Blog entry from November, 28th. Sector Conquest Update

Mercenary Center Developer Blog
201

You know, I’ve noticed a distinct lack of official attention here. I know it’s the weekend, but Error and Antibus have both been online…

I wish the Devs would break the habit of a lifetime and listen to us for once. If they turned around and said they were FINALLY giving us the fix tier mode we’ve asked for since they took it away, I’d drop £40 to £50 on the game as soon as I saw the post. Even if it’s just the default battle mode, the simple fact that it’s what we want, not what the Devs want, would win back loyalty (and thus earnings) from me and plenty of others.

202

we don’t need fixed tier though. if anything, mixed-tier provides an incentive to increase in tier/rank without being too pushy.

 

i have no problem taking down T4s in a T3.

 

before all this, i had no problems taking down T3s in a T2.

 

after having played T2 for a few hours now however, it seems like a pretty big issue, which isn’t even being addressed (because it hasn’t been tested).

 

personally? i just dropped another 50$ on the game, making that 130-150$ total… it makes me sad to see how they’re destroying the game for new players, because i’m mostly unaffected by the changes thus far (not completely though).

 

but it is like a constant shadow lurching over my shoulder that haunts me. never know when i WILL be affected by the next change…

 

actually, i was previously. when the few T1 and T2 prems i had got nerfed into the ground with the changes, including my DLC ships, devaluing them… what can i say?

 

that certainly isn’t the sort of atmosphere you want to be creating :what:

203

This is why I’ve suggested having both - a fixed tier mode, and a mixed tier mode. That way, players can vote with their feet and prove which is most popular. Of course, SQ will usually be more popular than vanilla PvP, unless they utterly botch it up…

204

btw, here is your suggestion for sector conquest:

 

just make it so that you need to be rank 13+ with each faction in order to obtain benefits from sector conquest via your corp.

 

this way, all tiers/ranks can participate, and not feel left out by being matched against T5s.

 

it might also reduce the number of tier-rushers, if you need R13+ with each faction.

 

at the same time, you have an end-game bonus to work towards, which should ease your progression further via credit/GS rewards.

 

This is why I’ve suggested having both - a fixed tier mode, and a mixed tier mode. That way, players can vote with their feet and prove which is most popular. Of course, SQ will usually be more popular than vanilla PvP, unless they utterly botch it up…

 

woops, read that wrong. i think they did a vote, didn’t they? in any case, if you remove mixed-tier, there is no longer a reason to increase in rank, since you can just play at the one you’re in forever.

 

the game should in fact face you off vs higher ranks (but not 2 tiers above you), if you are more skilled/in a large party. it provides incentive to rank up, because nothing else will, short of a club or whip, if you catch the drift.

 

anyways, breakfast.

 

i’ll be leaving my corp as soon as the change rolls over, since i’ll be of no use to them any more at T3.

 

maybe it’s better that way. i always was more of a solo player - beater.

205

Hold on a sec…

If the new sector conquest is meant as endgame entertainment for corps… then most of the players who really need the loyalty vouchers to progress won’t get them, right?

206

Hold on a sec…If the new sector conquest is meant as endgame entertainment for corps… then most of the players who really need the loyalty vouchers to progress won’t get them, right?

Yup. Doubly so if my theory is right about them removing contracts and making SQ the only way to get loyalty.

207

Yup. Doubly so if my theory is right about them removing contracts and making SQ the only way to get loyalty.

If they indeed remove contracts and make SQ the only way to get vouchers, then bid good-bye to the game.

208

Yup. Doubly so if my theory is right about them removing contracts and making SQ the only way to get loyalty.

 

 

If they indeed remove contracts and make SQ the only way to get vouchers, then bid good-bye to the game.

It is not planned to remove the contracts.

209

It is not planned to remove the contracts.

 

That’s a relief then. Though I have a feeling my loyalty grind won’t be reduced. ><

210

i spent a month in T2, and if i had to spend a month in T2 now, i think i’d rather quit. just saying… on top of the previous problems, there are now more survivability issues, leading to DPS reigning king, and energy issues across the board. also, the R7 afterburner implant is pretty much required for T3, but it still doesn’t completely solve the question of why it takes a T2 engineer 10-20 secs to regain energy with only 2 modules running. :\

211

i spent a month in T2, and if i had to spend a month in T2 now, i think i’d rather quit. just saying… on top of the previous problems, there are now more survivability issues, leading to DPS reigning king, and energy issues across the board. also, the R7 afterburner implant is pretty much required for T3, but it still doesn’t completely solve the question of why it takes a T2 engineer 10-20 secs to regain energy with only 2 modules running. :\

Turn off the modules and let the energy regain;)

212

Turn off the modules and let the energy regain;)

 

If you or your allies are under heavy fire, you don’t have the option of turning off your modules. 

 

I digress.

213

Turn off the modules and let the energy regain;)

Well that explains why nobody knows how to fly Engineer anymore…

In T3 and up you can have auras and buffs on all the time and still have spare energy. It makes the game feel much faster and more fluid.

Put that in T2. It would make T2 pilots feel more empowered and put more emphasis on using modules (which is what T2 is meant to teach). Plus, they’ll be familiar with playing with always-on modules when they hit T3.

214

But saying “Yeah, you CAN come and get curbstomped!” is just… it’s a scumbag move. If people have “stopped playing” at T2 you shouldn’t be trolling them and trying to make them feel worthless; you should be asking them (and yourselves) why they have stopped at T2, and then looking to see if anything can be done to help them keep moving up and onward.

 

You do realize you are trying to reason with the same Dev team that thought breaking rare loot items in our face would encourage us to buy GS and pay for a 30% chance of recovery, right?

 

I’m not sure they are capable of understanding the difference between encouraging players to progress via rewarding them with nice shiny toys, and encouraging players to progress via murdering them with the same nice shiny toys while saying “if you level up, you can have this”.

 

It’s a subtle difference and can be hard to grasp.

215

You do realize you are trying to reason with the same Dev team that thought breaking rare loot items in our face would encourage us to buy GS and pay for a 30% chance of recovery, right?

 

I’m not sure they are capable of understanding the difference between encouraging players to progress via rewarding them with nice shiny toys, and encouraging players to progress via murdering them with the same nice shiny toys while saying “if you level up, you can have this”.

 

It’s a subtle difference and can be hard to grasp.

Dont you know!!! purple is for paying customers.

 

Thats why ive spent like 60 bucks this week.

216

Well that explains why nobody knows how to fly Engineer anymore…

In T3 and up you can have auras and buffs on all the time and still have spare energy. It makes the game feel much faster and more fluid.

Put that in T2. It would make T2 pilots feel more empowered and put more emphasis on using modules (which is what T2 is meant to teach). Plus, they’ll be familiar with playing with always-on modules when they hit T3.

energy aura= problem solved and in some cases permanat afterburner

217

Energy aura does not exist in T2, so problem most definitely not solved.

218

hmmmm… add it then?

219

hmmmm… add it then?

 

yes, let’s make the team entirely dependent on the engineer… oh wait, what happens when he dies?

220

in my experience, teams usually are dependant on the engineer, and there are far too few of them.