Improving T4 and T5 Desirability, And Dreadnaughts

Game Discussion PvP
#1

Hey everyone, I’d like to make a suggestion that I think could really improve the game.  I’ve been playing for about two years now, and I’ve noticed that most big corporations and good squads wind up playing in T3 despite having T4 and T5 ships maxed and purpled.  I wish that this wasn’t the case, as it is not fun for a new group of players, new to T3, go up against a veteran squad of players.  I think one of the big reasons for this is the removal of the old sector conquest (which I enjoyed).  The old sector conquest gave most players a reason to push towards higher tier ships.  Now that dreadnaughts are out (only T3/T4 atm) most people have no reason to play T5.  I know that T5 sectors will soon be introduced, but there will be a very small niche of corps that will only be able to acquire them (help from fake attacks and other exploitations).  I don’t see the drive to play more in T4/T5 improving with that upcoming update.

 

My first suggestion is to improve the rewards in T4 and T5 PVP and maybe PVE battles so that players would be able to get more income, or even craftable material directly after a battle.  (vanadium, silicon, vouchers, iridum, graphite plates, ect).  Repair costs in T4 and especially T5 are very high, and if you don’t have a license, you can actually loose money from battles.  In order to fight in high tiered dreadnaughts, players first need to be able to get there, and improving rewards/costs would reduce the immense T4 grind that exists for new players trying to tier up.

 

Seeing how in dreadnaughts, most teams won’t even get a chance to fight for control over sectors because of fake attacks filling up the fighting que, I’d like to suggest that any wing (no matter what allegiance) can que up for either the Attack OR Defense of a sector.  This would get rid of the ridiculous fake attack spam that keeps the current alliances from keeping sectors and only getting richer.  The mechanics for the new attack/defense could be done several ways, but I’ll post my idea below:

 

  • Keep the current format of list of attackers and defending wings can decide who they would like to face. 

  • Removal of the limit of attackers per sector so that corporations can actually fight for control of a sector in mass. 

  • Defender squads that successfully defend the sector, and are not part of the corporation that owns it, will get 50% of what that sector provides in rewards per battle (initiative to defend instead of zerg attacks).

  • Defender squads that successfully defend the sector and are part of the corporation that owns it get the full reward of what the sector provides per battle (initiative to own your own sector).

  • Attacking squads that successfully attack the sector will not receive sector rewards, but instead keep the voucher victory reward.

  • Improvement of the rewards given in higher tiered sectors.

 

I think that doing this would improve the desire, and opportunity to fight in T4/T5 leaving T3 with less of a skill gap, as more players in lower tiered corporations will want to fight in higher tiered sectors without always facing elite corporations.  Please take the poll and tell me what you think of this idea.

#2

I think there are a lot of good ideas in this. +1

 

Generally I would find anything nice, where people just can … play. The old SQ allowed you to form a wing and… play. every couple hours, there was the chance. I miss this a bit in the whole sector war now. I like having a map, a bigger picture, a strategic game of corporations, but it could be solved without all these time problems, waiting for no games for an hour, etc. It burns out people.

Of course I have no idea how to do it :frowning:

 

 

I wish that this wasn’t the case, as it is not fun for a new group of players, new to T3, go up against a veteran squad of players.

 

I am still skeptical about this argument. Well, you know it. And since it gets repeated often nowadays, and I get PMd quite frequently about the matter, since people know my standpoint, I feel the urge to state here why.

T3 should be like that, it’s not T2. Also, the loudest complaining voices in pms (not you) for this are usually from players who actually have T4&T5 ships, and are therefore much more also driven by the desire for people to move on, so they also spread this to the mid-tier. There was no problem with death squads in higher T3 pop times, like 2013, where T3 was huge, while the module differences with the luck-system the game initially had for modules was much more of a player gap (having full purple with iridium is a luxury compared to that), partly also, because in T3, even with full purple setups, you will not be able to make a single ship unbreakable (every ship has its downsides), while in T5, not just the module difference between a beginner and an endgame fit is much more significant, but also the amount of modules fittable creates way stronger ships that can close their resistance holes and similar while keeping their strenghts like movement, energy, damage etc. still viable. Additionally, R13 implants give the good player even more strength if he gets early kills, so T5 is unforgiving for a “I don’t care if I die” playstyle.

The term death squad never applied to T3, it was a terminus from T4&T5, where a single squad of ships could be equipped to carry a game alone, and basicly it ended in the same strategy over and over, going over to the spawn directly, and keeping the fight there until the end. I know, my Juggernaut Medal was against ESB in T4, facing a death squad with partly t3s, and killing a single drone on the beacon… also, the game has changed a lot - especially after tacklers became more usable.

 

Even more, T3 was a lot harder back then too, with organized players and groups around the clock, giving other players better role models, better ways to learn the game, and much more corporation pvp; playing against weak players does not make you better. So I am a bit skeptical, to start giving this argument space; after all, you *need* experienced players at some point to teach you, you need that frustration, to point out how much potential there still is, even if it hurts. In most other games, this is completely accepted, and nobody even dares to whine about this.

It should just not hurt their progression overall. So repeating this argument, and validating it, I cannot, and all who try to, I say, you have different agendas (more t4! t5!), or problems that cause your frustration (grind; rewards) and you are not realizing it. Because we had all to go through the gauntlet, and back then, nobody wanted to give up, but we were faced with the same dilemma, that some players already had everything; and it produced a lot of strong pilots who still fly until today, or at least are still active on the forums.

However even if my theory about this is different, I come to the same conclusion: it is completely about the rewards, and I have the same desires, so that everyone can have fun, and battles.

 

Having more incentive for T4&T5 play for dreads is one good idea. Other ideas would be Monocrystals for high tier PvP loot , and generally, optional loser loot in the game in those tiers, and generally cheaper modules/module upgrades in T3 and T4 (yes, even more cheap) so that T3 can be explored more “in depth” “horizontally”, and your ships actually start to become fully purple before you get to the next tier (atm, you are faster in just skipping to the next tier, which also brings a lot of players to T4&T5 who try to avoid T2&T3, which leads to the funny part of T5, where you can meet players who have no clue about PvP aswell as people who think they are too good to go down a tier; sealclubbing on a whole different level; T5 is basicly also home to the most legendary “bad players” aswell, I think you might agree on that)

T3 should progress even without license a lot more, and be a lucrative spot for the first year pilot to stay, but a good platform to reach higher ships.

T2 should be a no-vet-squad-zone, allowing new players to mindlessly blow each other up, as it always was, but still stay progressionwise as something that needs you to complete a few weeks.

 

I cannot agree to declare T3 a beginner zone. T3 is supposed to be a mid-tier. It should always be a focal point, where good and bad come together, and teamplay comes up. It is the tier, where you can lose 10 matches in a row without going bankrupt. It allows you even as first-year-pilot to kill legendary pilots, because no ship is invincible by itself, learn from them and follow them, but all ships still can be fitted to use their strengths - something T2 does not strictly allow you to do, mainly because you miss all 4 actives, a lot of slots are not present, and ships are a lot more unforgiving to mistakes in direct fights (so in T2, a veteran pilot becomes even stronger by gameplay)

 

And before anyone rages about my standpoint, just think about this. I am in no way the main voice that drives the game anyway, but just a wall-of-text-producing, overlooked bystander with some responsibilities, so dont freak out. in fact, I welcome anyone who reflects upon this, and starts to fight for the same things, like better rewards, and less grind; Also, note, I don’t need less grind personally. I am finished with all the ships, and I don’t particullary need any of the mono ships either, but it would be nice, since i am too lazy for missions.

#3

I agree that there needs to be more incentive to play T4+, so yeah anything that will help I’m all for, those queue times can be pretty bad at times.

 

As for unlimited attacks on sectors, that is just a bit daft, you will not be able to hold a sector for longer than a day, but then again with the lack of a decent sized player base you might get a few days at best. I mean how on earth are meant to defend say 40+ attacks? It’s just silly.

#4

How about a slightly different take on this? Leave T2/T3 as they are and give extra bonuses to T4 and T5? E.g. so that matches in T4 would give you +50% or +75% vouchers, while matches in T5 would give you additional credits + materials for SP? You could even toss in some very small GS rewards there, too.

 

I think in such arrangement the tier system would be more approachable. In T2 you learn the basics of the game, in T3 you learn how to fly like a baws, in T4 you get to easily upgrade your stuff while using your leet skillz learnt in previous tiers, and by playing T5 you get everything you need to max out your in-game status (standard ships and SP).

 

Other than that, I’d like to see a permanent boost to free synergy gained in T4+ PvP, to make sure people actually see some sense in playing higher tiers.

 

But first please forbid joining T4+ with less than 3 T4+ ships equipped. I’d like to see new people in T4, but I don’t want them ruining my games.

 

That being said, I think the repair costs are just fine.

 

 

As for SQ… The current system encourages skillless zergs, fake attacks, 4-man wings, fake attacks to prevent one from capping your sector, and it’s bad and simply needs to go.

 

Give additional defense points for successfully defending a sector from a single wing (e.g. a fixed 5-10% per win… OR 20% of the sector’s current defense: if it’s at 60%, you get 12% for defending it; 10% if it’s at 50% and so on), and resort to an auction system again, so that at least the max cap of attackers wouldn’t get filled within the first 5 seconds.

#5

The term death squad never applied to T3, it was a terminus from T4&T5, where a single squad of ships could be equipped to carry a game alone, and basicly it ended in the same strategy over and over, going over to the spawn directly, and keeping the fight there until the end. I know, my Juggernaut Medal was against ESB in T4, facing a death squad with partly t3s, and killing a single drone on the beacon… also, the game has changed a lot - especially after tacklers became more usable.

Did you never play against a T3 WPK squad in detonation? First thing they did was have two squad members take the bombs so that none of the other teammates could plant and thus end the game early. Second thing they did was spawn camp for the rest of the game, easily racking up 60 to 70 kills a match. That happened to me several times.

 

As for the suggestion, I’m not sure about the dreadnought thing, but the fact that T3 is the de facto end game bothers me. As with most of the problems this game faces, if more people played, it wouldn’t exist. But alas, advertisements for the game are nary to be seen. I’m not sure rewards or a random attack/defense workaround would help, either.

#6

https://forum.star-conflict.com/index.php?/topic/27867-redesign-the-sector-conquest-system-important-read-this/

 

Allow me to direct you to this topic for thoughts on how to revamp the system. Feedback in the thread is welcome.

 

Currently you get 20k vouchers for wins in T4 rather than the 15k in T3, just a head’s up. GS comes from sector rewards, though it would be really cool to have crafting components be given away. Maybe even 1 Monocrystal/day sectors!

 

I do think that repair costs should be lowered, though. Whether or not dreads change with them.

#7

I agree that there needs to be more incentive to play T4+, so yeah anything that will help I’m all for, those queue times can be pretty bad at times.

 

As for unlimited attacks on sectors, that is just a bit daft, you will not be able to hold a sector for longer than a day, but then again with the lack of a decent sized player base you might get a few days at best. I mean how on earth are meant to defend say 40+ attacks? It’s just silly.

 

Defenders get sector rewards for successfully defending a sector…  where as attackers only get vouchers.  There would be slightly more initiative to defend than attack (credit reward sectors would need to be changed or improved to make them valuable I think).

#8

Just one thing:

 

There is no dreadn a ughts!

Dreadn o ughts only!

If the Russians did a spelling mistake at first, there is no need that others repeat it as well.

I may go a bit off-topic, but I will say this anyway.

 

 

About OP’s suggestion:

 

TIV/TV loot rewards:

 

I already suggested the same, or very similar system.

I always got the same answer back, or just non-responsiveness later, which proves their initial response: “This is not planned.” by our good friend, Error.

 

This means, that most likely, no Monocrystals will be presented whatsoever.

A HUGE MISTAKE!

That’s one of the main reasons, why I no longer play PvP (this game) anymore.

I could play it just for fun, but the fact is, that it isn’t fun for me. I always want something gratifying in return, and I do the same, if I can. The circle is complete, then.

I would still play it, but for me it is just absurd, that I am getting something, that I don’t really need or want.

 

Premium License isn’t worth buying anymore and I would buy it for +2 more extra looting spots, if such (monocrystal) loot would be presented, even if only in tier IV and V.

 

I just grind 3 boring, repetitive, predictable daily missions to get 6 Monocrystals now. Every day, if I can. 7 days per week. 30 times per month.

I will soon have enough monocrystals to construct all 9 Secret Projects and then I will immediately synergize all of them to rank 10.

I don’t buy anything (Monocrystal Containers) and I actually no longer invest into a game, until they show some respect towards a customer.

 

If I would knew, that this game has at least 5 more years ahead, I wouldn’t worry about it and I would actually support it with open arms!

Problem is, that this game reminds me of a Ghost Town now. Sure, it isn’t dead, but it is pretty much like a fish in the open, suffocating!

This game is a much better, than Gaijin realizes. But now we got another game, which may not be bad, but I got an impression that that game may be prioritized over Star Conflict (Gamescon 2015).

 

About SQ:

 

Another really major issue, which I don’t understand, why it is so vulnerable to exploits or rather loopholes, since there are basically no failsafes.

 

I would still rather have the old SQ system and a new one together, just slightly modified.

There could be sectors, where a dreadnought would not be able to warp and only a fighter wing could access (exceptions).

Also, presence of one’s dreadnough in a sector would be really good. Even better, if you could dock on it.

I found it puzzling, that there are no sectors occupied by Biomorphs (Aliens), since they are all over sectors in Invasion. They also do not have any dreadnought! A major loophole!

Okay, I will stick to a subject at hand. So…

The system itself will need a few critical tweaks and failsafes first. There is enough feedback on this.

NuclearHail already discussed and pointed out a link to it.

I also agree with TESL4.

Also, I think that developers should organize some 1 hour meeting in Gaijin’s Teamspeak with someone, so that we can all arrange and talk about this, but not before all suggestions are read and considered.

Developers must first acknowledge them, so that we know that they are aware of it. However, it would also be nice, if they could provide their thoughts on this matter as well.

 

Enough has been written so far.

Analysis of all given data is required.

#9

Did you never play against a T3 WPK squad in detonation? First thing they did was have two squad members take the bombs so that none of the other teammates could plant and thus end the game early. Second thing they did was spawn camp for the rest of the game, easily racking up 60 to 70 kills a match. That happened to me several times.

Of course I did. ESB did the same before them. And when I started T3 in '13, NASA squads were as vicious, aswell, in T3, albeit they always played honorable.

Of course I know how frustrating it is. Still not comparable imho. Not every game in T3 is like this, but every game in T4 back then was; But in T3 at some point, they meet another good squad who mops the floor with them. The same can happen in any tier, at any time, you can get spawncamped in T5 aswell.

All these thoughts just come back to the grind, and lost progression, in the end, when it is about developing players, if we, as elder players who already have stuff, think about them. Also, for a long time, squads were punished in MM if they squadded up with less skilled players, while the named corps usually never did mixed skill squads; I also want to remind of the times, where the rumor of a strong 4squad in global only lead to appearance of sudden challengers, like nova, hawk, r4ge etc. forming their own, instead of singular voices bringing up insults against any who squad in T3.

 

I personally really want to see more T5 squadding anyway, still, T3 is T3 and never really was a beginner tier, and people should reflect on why it suddenly appears to them to be, especially if they have T4&T5 already.

Because honestly, without good players and spectacular defeats i would have never stayed in this game, and i believe this is true for many of other forum elders aswell.

It’s a harsh reality we all have to accept at some point in life: there has to be resistance, or you will not grow!

 

But it’s slightly off topic, and I am listening to this, and trying myself to promote more simultanious solo queueing aswell as more T5 queueing personally. So I am just saying, the vetbashing argument is not new, as are the calls to bring up players to T4&T5 not new, but in reality they do not move up, they disappear. And I partly think, the real problem is, that players are hooked to progression upwards, instead of expanding their repertoire.

Cheaper Modules in T3 could make players more resistant to vets while progressing. I think the real thing that turns one off is in reality, that until I buy a golden ship or synergize everything, and get all the modules, I cannot compete. It’s like getting a pistol only for years in Counterstrike only.

It’s not fun, and of course I would blame the guys with the big guns.

 

IF everybody moves up, and plays only the tier they are supposed to be skilled in, we face the same problem later somewhere else. I find T5 way more easy to play as vet player than T3 personally, so this is what keeps my personal interest there. And the large games where a single pilot is less important. I would never queue T2 except maybe with clearly badly fitted ships on purpose. So I am not defending seal clubbing here.

 

@OP:

as far as i understand however, all this would still be the same type of queue-up, like now, with sometimes empty games at certain times, or do you mean it really like i understood: you queue up to attack a sector, and someone has to respond, and the battles are more frequent?

because this also needs some abuse protection, of corps playing for you to actually lose the sector on purpose!

 

And to the rewards: I really think Monocrystals should be in PvP loot in T5.

 

@Koromac

a common misspelling it seems, quite explainable because of the origins:

"One who fears nothing. dread′naught′. Losely: I dread not! "

#10

Thanks for the feedback on the idea everyone.  It was just an idea and I wanted to see everyone’s opinion.  There have been some good points made on the Pros and Cons of what I have suggested.  Either way I still think dreadnoughts and T4/T5 desirability should still be improved in some way.  I tried my jab at it :006j:

#11

I’m not sure about letting people queue to defend a Dreadnought that isn’t theirs. This would likely go badly in one of two ways;

 

  1. the strongest Corps all ally together to build an unbeatable alliance that controls every system.

  2. people queue to defend, then piss about and throw the match to make sure the controlling faction loses out.

 

I am totally fine with ad-hoc attackers though. I like the idea that groups of players should be able to push a corporation out of a system, even if they can’t take the system back themselves. You could do it by having these “non capture” wings form up under the flag of the local power (ie: New Eden in Federation space, Mendes in Jericho, etc) and if they defeat the local Corp the sector either reverts to neutral, or is in the hands of an NPC corp.

#12

2-man vs randoms would fix squad issues in t5, to some extent. Currently if there are no squads, you have to be the first and wait for a long time in hopes of another squad queueing up
But if 2 man squads get game isntantly, other 2 man squads join in… then 3, and suddenly you full squads in t5

 

However, actual t5 population would remain around the same. Since SQ is mostly t3 and tournament is t3-only. They suck out players from higher tiers

 

Here’s what I loved- Old SQ + sector sweep <3

#13

Sorry, wrong tab.

#14

I just don’t like flying in T3 ships so everything that helps decrease waiting times in T4/5 gets a two-thumbs-up from me  :012j:

#15

The spelling of dreadnought is with an o, not an a. The class of ship is named after the HMS Dreadnought, as spelled. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Dreadnought_(1906)

 

By the way, T4 Dreadnoughts aren’t desirable because T4 itself isn’t desirable. Pretty much anything else you can name as a reason is a minor semantic.

#16

Purple loot 4 1st win (T5) would also be nice.