Possible fixes for tier/rank system

Suggestions Balance
1

The current MM system isn’t really working. Rank-based matchmaking really isn’t feasible with the low player base, and removing squads wasn’t a great idea for a team game. Here are my thoughts on how to fix that.

  1. Reintroduce the tiers, but with some tweaks.

-The old 1-3, 4-6, etc tiers should be brought back, but all ships in a tier should have the same number of actives and passives.

-The current module system should be slightly tweaked, but otherwise remain the same. It is nice to be able to bring up lower-tier modules to the low-rank ships of the next tier so you aren’t stuck with all white gear moving up a tier.

-Personally, I do think it a good idea to keep some modules available only on certain ranks in a tier (I.E. make adaptive a for R8/9+, or inertial stabilizers R11/12+). This combined with implants will give pilots a reason to get higher ranked ships, but it won’t make the old ones next to useless in that tier.

  1. Bring back 3-man squads.

-4 man squads could easily swing a game’s favor, yes, but 3-mans are that balance point. Your team will have an advantage, but it is still possible to win.

  1. +1/-1 squad queueing. This would make it so 2-man squads don’t need another squad to get a game, but they can also face 3-mans. -This will optimize squadding so more people can do, and more people will want to. The big issues with large squads were how so few squads were ever formed.

Any thoughts?

2

You would destroy the ancient assumption that a guy who has a silent fox in his lineout is a bad pilot and will feed the enemy? :O  How dare you!

 

About squadding, I agree with you. However I was more thinking along the lines of merging Leagues and normal PVP in some way. I will think it over and make a new thread with my suggestion.

3

I didn’t know what to vote for in the second question of the poll, because I fully agree only in general, so I’m leaving that one blank.

 

  1. The only bad thing about the old system was that rank 4 and 7 ships were useless and r10’s were at a disadvantage. I say bring back all tiers as they were, except all ships of the same tier should have the same amount of active/passive module slots, with access to the same modules.

 

The current solution is utterly pointless.

 

  1. I don’t understand why squads were removed in the first place anyway… not after the mid-join patch which killed squadding. Death squads might have been a problem before that patch, but after that, they were pretty much non-existant.

 

What I would do is bring back the 2vRandom rule to encourage squadding in general, maybe with a tweak that the team with no squad would gain an additional member. So (2+0)vs3, (2+1)vs4, (2+2)vs5, etc. But it’s not an idea I would fiercely defend.

 

  1. I don’t think you can have a hybrid system. It excludes randoms by making them face higher tiers, and a squad vs squad only thing (with no randoms) would inevitably lead to exploits, methinks.
4

I didn’t know what to vote for in the second question of the poll, because I fully agree only in general, so I’m leaving that one blank.

It’s multiple choice in case people only agreed with parts of it. Just check what applies, so for you, check “all of it”

I disagree with you on 1. With the old system, all ships in a tier had the same modules available, but it was the lack of passives/actives that made lower ranked ships within a tier basically useless. Which is why all ships in a tier should have the same number of actives/passives.

Not having certain modules on lower rank ships in a tier may be a slight disadvantage, but there needs be be incentive to rank up in that tier (and to higher tiers)

Squads were removed because “they are too OP”. Which really means “we hate teamwork”. Team play should be rewarded in this game, not punished and pushed into very specific, confined places. I can understand the frustration of facing 4-man death squads, I was there at one point, but if you reward teamwork and give people incentives to squad up, more people will, making them better pilots, making the team better, and reducing the chances of a 4-man n00b squad facing a 4-man death squad.

From my experience, I have been on both sides of the death squad scenario, and all I can say is practice. Fly with teammates, use Skype or TS or w/e, and get good. It worked for me, it has worked for others, it can work for everyone.

I think you misunderstand 3. It is only allowing 2-mans to face pubs as well as other 2-mans and 3-mans. It makes it easier to squad up, and because of this, more people will. When they tested this in the summer, more squads were playing in every tier than ever before.

5

I disagree with you on 1. With the old system, all ships in a tier had the same modules available, but it was the lack of passives/actives that made lower ranked ships within a tier basically useless. Which is why all ships in a tier should have the same number of actives/passives.

Well, that’s what I said.

 

This is the bit that I strongly disagree with:

 

-Personally, I do think it a good idea to keep some modules available only on certain ranks in a tier (I.E. make adaptive a for R8/9+, or inertial stabilizers R11/12+). This combined with implants will give pilots a reason to get higher ranked ships, but it won’t make the old ones next to useless in that tier.

In the old system, you could use e.g. adaptives on rank 7 ships only once you’d unlocked a rank 8 (or 9, I don’t remember) ship, they weren’t available for purchase otherwise. Now you can’t use them at all unless your ship is r9. Both options are bad in my opinion, while the second one is just dumb and makes weak ships weaker. Reaper, Wolf, Anacondas, etc. are even weaker than they were, and that’s an accomplishment. Same with Galvanised Armour, or TTC/Submatter Shield at rank 12; it creates gaps in power between ships that used to be (or at least used to have the potential to be) almost equal.

6

Well, that’s what I said.

 

This is the bit that I strongly disagree with:

In the old system, you could use e.g. adaptives on rank 7 ships only once you’d unlocked a rank 8 (or 9, I don’t remember) ship, they weren’t available for purchase otherwise. Now you can’t use them at all unless your ship is r9. Both options are bad in my opinion, while the second one is just dumb and makes weak ships weaker. Reaper, Wolf, Anacondas, etc. are even weaker than they were, and that’s an accomplishment. Same with Galvanised Armour, or TTC/Submatter Shield at rank 12; it creates gaps in power between ships that used to be (or at least used to have the potential to be) almost equal.

 

But modules don’t make nearly as much difference as missing passive or active slots. That is what I am trying to get at. The reason everyone hates the Silent Fox or really any R7? because they had 1 less active and 2 less passives. That makes a huge difference, a lot more than not having an adaptive will make. I think it is a bigger issue to have ships be at the tremendous disadvantage of having fewer slots than not having access to one module. You don’t want all the ships in the tier to be the exact same, then there would be little incentive to work for the higher ones, but if you give a slight disadvantage as not having access to a certain module, then people would want to rank up to get a ship that can use that module.

7

You don’t want all the ships in the tier to be the exact same, then there would be little incentive to work for the higher ones, but if you give a slight disadvantage as not having access to a certain module, then people would want to rank up to get a ship that can use that module.

But they aren’t the same. Different slots/different synergy boni = different builds = different playstyles = different purpose. That’s why the only real advantage the Falcon-M has over the regular Falcon are implants. Hyena, Parallax and Bear have the same number of modules, the same implants, but they’re used for different purposes. Same with DEagle, Nukem and Achilles. Or Panther, Tiger and Tiger-M, even though the Tiger is one rank lower.

 

The Nyx has one more passive slot than any other r9 ship, but it’s still the worst T3 CovOp.

8

But they aren’t the same. Different slots/different synergy boni = different builds = different playstyles = different purpose. That’s why the only real advantage the Falcon-M has over the regular Falcon are implants. Hyena, Parallax and Bear have the same number of modules, the same implants, but they’re used for different purposes. Same with DEagle, Nukem and Achilles. Or Panther, Tiger and Tiger-M, even though the Tiger is one rank lower.

 

The Nyx has one more passive slot than any other r9 ship, but it’s still the worst T3 CovOp.

 

I never said they needed the exact same layout, just the same total number. I would love the Silent Fox if it had the same total number of passives and actives as the Hyena, simply because of the effective range boost. But having only 3 actives and 5 passives ruins the ship and makes it useless compared to a R9 with 4 actives and 7 passives. Get my drift?

 

Honestly, I would like it if all the ships in a tier had the same number of slots as well as access to the same modules. T5 is great for that reason, no ship is at a huge disadvantage, as the only differences are 1-2 implants, module layouts, and passive bonuses, of which only the lack of implants is a detriment, but only a slight one.

9

Yes, and we already agreed on that…

 

I’m saying that once you have max module slots on your ship (r11-r15), it’s the accessibility of modules that makes all the difference. Currently r11 ships are worse than they used to be because they can’t equip TTC or Submatter Shield. R8’s vs r9’s were fine in the old system too, because both ranks were able to use modules like Adaptive Shields or Galvanised Armour. They can’t anymore, therefore r8’s are at a disadvantage not only because of the lack of the r9 implant and one module slot fewer, but also because they can’t be equipped with modules that are crucial to most builds.

10

True. But I never said they shouldn’t rework module ranges. I just said it wouldn’t be detrimental if they didn’t, or at least not as detrimental as missing slots.

 

Imo, the module ranges should be as follows:

 

1-5, 4-8, 7-11, 10-14, 13-15

 

This way you can bring older modules up to the next tier, but the next tier’s modules are still better once fully upgraded. And the entire tier will have access to the same modules, but no higher ranked ships in a lower tier will have access to more advanced modules.

11

I don’t necessarily think forcing 3man squads is required if we bring back the 2man no-restrictions tweak. At least for now while other matchmaking balance fixes are in the works.

 

I do HEAVILY advocate for the tweak of 2man restrictions. Have done and will continue to do whenever possible.

 

 

Also, I agree with tiers returning, but keeping the module/modifier rank system. The rank system for customization is great. For ships themselves, not so much.

12

Only part I will oppose of this suggestion is the tier system, which completely blocked any possibility of gaining any experience to your new ships in any fashion and forced you to start fresh with a set of grey modules. Other than this, I think it’s very important that groups and squads come back for Skirmish mode. This parrt is critical.

13

Only part I will oppose of this suggestion is the tier system, which completely blocked any possibility of gaining any experience to your new ships in any fashion and forced you to start fresh with a set of grey modules. Other than this, I think it’s very important that groups and squads come back for Skirmish mode. This parrt is critical.

 

You missed the part where I stated that we should keep the current module system.

14

I like the idea, I 100% support the Tier reintroduce.

About the module system I would like to have the old system, BUT with the option to put the lower tier modules to the higher tier ships, but don’t let the other way around.

Since the playerbase is small, I suggest to split each tier into 3 queue.

  • Low (R1) (R4) (R7) (R10)
  • Mid  (R2) (R5) (R8) (R11)
  • Top  (R3) (R6) (R9) (R12)

 

Separate the endgame Queue:

  • Endgame queue: R13, R14, R15

  • Low (±1 rank with TierMix) is the mixed Queue, here the players have can face with lower tier ships.

  • Mid (±1 rank) is the leveling queue

  • Top (-1 rank) is the high tech queue

GS ships doesn’t have Rank -1 bonus!

T1 - No Squad
T2 - 2man squad
T3 - 3man squad
T4 - 4man squad
T5 - AutoSquad - Event the solo players should understand PVP is a teamgame.

Stupidity control, and Tier rush control for PVP.

  • Only 2 different consecutive rank ships can go in battle
  • The player has to fill all the 3-4 slots, (no more Tier rush in PVP)

4th combat slot should open at rank 10 

15

You could just reclassify the tiers as follows:

 

Tier 1: Rank 1-4

Tier 2: Rank 5-7

Tier 3: Rank 8-10

Tier 4: Rank 11-15

 

Fewer total PvP queues means faster and generally more-full games, and the divisions of rank/tier above are mostly balanced by passive/active availability.

 

The new T4 would be based on the current League system (aka the old Sector Conquest system). That tended to be self-managing, and a restriction on ship lineups (see my previous suggestion) would keep this more or less in line. Breaking Rank 10 would essentially mean you’ve entered ‘high-tier’ gameplay and would carry additional weight.

16

I like the idea, I 100% support the Tier reintroduce.

About the module system I would like to have the old system, BUT with the option to put the lower tier modules to the higher tier ships, but don’t let the other way around.

Since the playerbase is small, I suggest to split each tier into 3 queue.

  • Low (R1) (R4) (R7) (R10)

  • Mid  (R2) (R5) (R8) (R11)

  • Top  (R3) (R6) (R9) (R12)

 

Separate the endgame Queue:

  • Endgame queue: R13, R14, R15

  • Low (±1 rank with TierMix) is the mixed Queue, here the players have can face with lower tier ships.

  • Mid (±1 rank) is the leveling queue

  • Top (-1 rank) is the high tech queue

GS ships doesn’t have Rank -1 bonus!

T1 - No Squad

T2 - 2man squad

T3 - 3man squad

T4 - 4man squad

T5 - AutoSquad - Event the solo players should understand PVP is a teamgame.

Stupidity control, and Tier rush control for PVP.

  • Only 2 different consecutive rank ships can go in battle

  • The player has to fill all the 3-4 slots, (no more Tier rush in PVP)

4th combat slot should open at rank 10 

+1

This sounds like a good idea to me

17

You could just reclassify the tiers as follows:

 

Tier 1: Rank 1-4

Tier 2: Rank 5-7

Tier 3: Rank 8-10

Tier 4: Rank 11-15

 

Fewer total PvP queues means faster and generally more-full games, and the divisions of rank/tier above are mostly balanced by passive/active availability.

 

The new T4 would be based on the current League system (aka the old Sector Conquest system). That tended to be self-managing, and a restriction on ship lineups (see my previous suggestion) would keep this more or less in line. Breaking Rank 10 would essentially mean you’ve entered ‘high-tier’ gameplay and would carry additional weight.

I made a similar suggestion long-long time ago, but this change would need a lots of rework on ships, because the 11 and the 15 ships has too big difference.

As first step it would be easier to just rollback the old system. The old system was brilliant and well designer, imo the only problem was the player-base with that, and the allowed Tier-rush and the missing stupidity control.

I like the less tier idea, but at the same time I hate it because instead of increase the current player-base, we design the system to low population. I’m not sure that is the right way. I would give a chance to the original system after the fixes + advertisement.

18

Why would devs revert from a good and balanced rank system to a previous unbalanced and sealclubbing tiers one?

 

As it is now is much better than it was. Now you feel a progression, the game invites you to keep going up in ranks.

 

With the previous tier system, people just stopped at rank 9, because why bother with rank 10 and start again the tier grinding vs fully upgraded ships in rank 12?

 

Now you don’t have a place to stop. No matter if you fit a rank 4, rank 7, rank 9, rank 12. You will have the same chances to be top rank or bottom rank, except with full rank 15-14 line up.

 

Give it more time, until people stop thinking in tiers, and just start using ranks. 

 

It gives you a sense of progression you didn’t have before. It also encourages you to get top rank ships, so that will means more people playing high tiers.

19

Why would devs revert from a good and balanced rank system to a previous unbalanced and sealclubbing tiers one?

 

 

Because there is no good balanced rank system. And because the problem never was not the Tier system.

The sealclubbing was not a direct consequence of the Tier system.

The sealclubbing was the consequence of the Rank -1 GS ships rule, and the missing stupidity control.

Why it feels a bit better now? Because they removed the Rank-1 rule with the Tier system together.

And the Shiptree and the impants and ship bonuses still have the tier system. it is a really hard work to remove it totally.

20

Because there is no good balanced rank system. And because the problem never was not the Tier system.

The sealclubbing was not a direct consequence of the Tier system.

The sealclubbing was the consequence of the Rank -1 GS ships rule, and the missing stupidity control.

Why it feels a bit better now? Because they removed the Rank-1 rule with the Tier system together.

And the Shiptree and the impants and ship bonuses still have the tier system. it is a really hard work to remove it totally.

No, seal clubbing was a direct consequence of the tier system. If you can always be top rank with top ship, then of course you are encouraging seal clubbing.

 

Now you can fit a Kalah with rank 10 rails, and if you are in a rank 6 game you will be death incarnate. But you will also face rank 8 ships, so it is not that easy anymore.

 

The -1 rank of the premium ships was used just as a workaround when the mixed tiers were first implemented, because purple weapons rank 9 will give you tier 4 games. But now, it just don’t work, no matter what ship you get, you are always in a +2-2 range.

 

Which is really good.

 

I don’t understand how is possible all of you think the module rank system is great, but you cannot see the game rank system is as good or even better. Because it shares the same principle, that you are not constricted to a tier, but you are progressing smoothly.