30 minutes ago, g4borg said:
seriously, so many pages astonishment about 10-3=7.
Maths is hard
47 minutes ago, Spongejohn said:
Go “grab” yourself.
And before someone report this post: it’s a joke related to US elec…oh why do I spend my time like this.
Just give me another warning point already 
As some one who totaly ignored the whole thing i did not get it “)”
this new matchmake is …I… it´s the bigst sh.it ever a f.uck.ing no.ob-bonus i make rank 15 ship´s and this can all to sell this comming out ,if you were drinking too much this update su.cks
Ripping R5-7 ships is fun. Getting 20+ assists/kill too.
Funny thing: In PvE, you can’t use R8 in R11+. They are simple ‘not allowed’. Even ‘within’ your own battleranks in hangar. Logic ftw!
it´s fun it´s a sh.it for than the rank from ship´s it´s fun sure it´is for a… it is a no skill pvp is it sooooo funyyyyy it is the big dirt
2 hours ago, Lord_Xenon said:
Ripping R5-7 ships is fun. Getting 20+ assists/kill too.
Funny thing: In PvE, you can’t use R8 in R11+. They are simple ‘not allowed’. Even ‘within’ your own battleranks in hangar. Logic ftw!
Lol yea now that average kill lvl is arround 10 xD
It seems that they rise max destroyers in battle to 3, and they restore capture the beacon without telling us. So what they change we not yet see? Probably there is problem for them to type short changelog.
As I forseen before not everyone with destroyers take them to battle and sometime we end without one. There is no fun to fight alone 3 destroyers at once protected by swarm :(. Also they give buffs to ranks lower then R15 and guess what, many R15 players change ships to R11-R13, why fly R15 when lower ranks now are tougher and have bigger punch :(.
This game suffer from one excelent decision after another.
35 minutes ago, lordanpu said:
This game suffer from one excelent decision after another.
i think communication has done more damage than the actual changes
having all ships in a large amount of ranks becoming able to compete with each other doesnt sound so bad. It’s more modern to have rankless battles, it also feels more polished, if all ships have their “usage” for a long time, not only for ranking up.
It also allows them to further enhance ranks with more options later on without breaking progression too much.
having ctb in hard isnt so bad either, the mode is definitely the “core star conflict gamemode”, and learning to love it needs a bit of time! especially, because in league 5v5, the gamemode actually sux imho.
but it is crazy if you find it out by random chance. And its bad for the bad R15s atm, like a golden eagle, which is the most useless ship now.
the new meta will also allow the minotaur to finally become the styx of hard, a position it always deserved, lots of underused ships now have big potential.
the destro thing wasnt so cool, yeah. i dont find 3 per side a good solution, but as you can see, some are even wanting less. So it also comes a bit from the playerbase.
there needs to be a solution, where this is more dynamic. unfortunately, i cant think of many. can anyone?
the only one i could come up with after deliberation, is to allow them spawning only, if your team is lower than +1 destros vs. the other team on the field, if you have more than 2. meaning, only if one team continuously provides destros, the other can counter it with increasing the numbers, otherwise both teams are around equal. But how to determine who can take it and who not in the start? Solutions go in circles. I think if anyone has really balanced ideas about this, they probably are open to input.
i’m beginning just my first R7 ship and i don’t how it was before this change… certainly “easy-to-kill” for vet who played in R7-R9 tier… like today even with the buff. I read T5 players say “i prefer play in T3 because…”… ok… these player have 3000-12000 PVP battles and i have 400 PVP battles… can’t you just make 2 group : one with players who have 1000- battles and an other with players who have 1000+ battles ? I say “1000” but i don’t know the good limit… with this system newbies play against newbies and vet against vet… in T3… every body are happy !! :)… and release/delete dessy and LR with missile to let player play more easily mid and short range ships :)… just my opinion ”)
It was fine before. Yea many were whining they are being crushed by higher ranks. But the other team as as much low rank as yours. So go hunt those and run from r9 while flying your r5 if you cant handle it. Boosting the first few synergy lvl was enought i think. Now. What Savanna said is logic to me. If it does work like that then indead higher ranks are worse in that “tranche” of ranks. But i dont beleive it works like that, it would be too big of a flaw. That’s like, idk, getting dumber by learning things. Anyway i’ll give it 2-3 weeks see how it is and give time for changes.
On 07/11/2016 at 8:21 AM, Savanna said:
just get some pic about R15 long range Black Dragon and R12 long range Atlas
as it shows, R12 get a 2831 dps and R15 get a 2910 dps.
so in the pvp r12’s dps will be 2831*1.2=3397.2 and r5’s dps will be 2910?
well…so why should we get the r15? to get 15% decrease on dps?
Atm the changes are not that bad but they need tuning. Low syn/rank/upgraded ships are not farmed that easly anymore by vets in lower tiers, but rules to bring low rank ships to higher tiers should be introduced, as well as a total debuff for the rank bonus on destros. Also the number of those should be 2 per side and not 3 (but maybe by removing the rank bonus, their presence will be way less annoying).
Welcome back capture the baaaacons!
And ffs remove survival game mode asap.
I don’t touch PvP unless an event requires me to. It stopped being fun after getting into 12 v 12’s where individual pilot skill is damped out by the sheer number of random teammates you have. This update reaffirms my opinion- I’ll be sticking to PvE and OS unless required otherwise.
Enjoy the dead game, devs!
2 minutes ago, Fyhlen said:
I don’t touch PvP unless an event requires me to. It stopped being fun after getting into 12 v 12’s where individual pilot skill is damped out by the sheer number of random teammates you have. This update reaffirms my opinion- I’ll be sticking to PvE and OS unless required otherwise.
Enjoy the dead game, devs!
Get in a squad. 2 people can drastically change the outcome of each match based on skill.
2 hours ago, Spongejohn said:
Also the number of those should be 2 per side and not 3 (but maybe by removing the rank bonus, their presence will be way less annoying).
And ffs remove survival game mode asap.
no.
6 minutes ago, EndeavSTEEL said:
no.
No what? This is not 9gag or twitter, explain yourself.
2 hours ago, Spongejohn said:
Atm the changes are not that bad but they need tuning. Low syn/rank/upgraded ships are not farmed that easly anymore by vets in lower tiers, but rules to bring low rank ships to higher tiers should be introduced, as well as a total debuff for the rank bonus on destros. Also the number of those should be 2 per side and not 3 (but maybe by removing the rank bonus, their presence will be way less annoying).
literally no. Everybody is building destroyers atm. (see ingame chat)
Giving players toys and not letting them use them is a bad move. I also find the limit of 3 per side not really good. Let the players fly what they want. I understand, that a whole team of destroyers is broken, therefore maybe split ques? People who want to play with destroyers take them in and then get into another que than players without destroyers.
Removing the rank bonus would also be a big help, i agree on you with that.
24 minutes ago, X_Xharis said:
literally no. Everybody is building destroyers atm. (see ingame chat)
Giving players toys and not letting them use them is a bad move. I also find the limit of 3 per side not really good. Let the players fly what they want. I understand, that a whole team of destroyers is broken, therefore maybe split ques? People who want to play with destroyers take them in and then get into another que than players without destroyers.
Removing the rank bonus would also be a big help, i agree on you with that.
Limiting their numbers per battle doesn’t mean that players will not be able to use destros, it only means that for them, instead of an instant que, they will have to wait 10 seconds or few more.
Agree too. A destroyer limit is stupid.
Limit all classes, or none. But not just one.
What about teams full of LRF or ECM or Gunships ?
Quote
CinnamonFake (Posted yesterday at 03:19 AM)
PvP got destro restriction recently. But they’ll never leave PvP. Balancing and corrections is our priority
By not letting people avoid destroyers outright if they so choose in PvP, and with general PvP balancing choices like you just put in place, you can just expect more people to quit the game, or at least the PvP portion of it. Then events to force people to do PvP, doesn’t make for better PvP, just more people in it, in fact doing that can make for worse PvP. What would make for better PvP, is more people that want to do PvP, for the sake of PvP, but it looks like your decisions are causing for there to be less, and less of those people. Again, run some polls, with good questions, to find out what people ACTUALLY think, not just what you think they do.
4 hours ago, wolfkyler said:
these player have 3000-12000 PVP battles and i have 400 PVP battles…
I am or was one of those, even if actually i am above the 12k, maybe not the most sealclubbing one and probably mostly in T5 anyway, so just keep in mind, someone with so many battles probably was there 3 years ago, when T3 was all there was. Tournaments were the big thing you had as group. You knew every ship in R7-R9 like the back of your hand. Lots of strategies had been established, and it was clear to most players, how to counter. T3 was a fast game gauntlet, T4 was 20 minutes queue time followed by a 4v4 game against a fully purple endgame players. A lot of players stayed on that level, becoming casual players aswell.
in the last months R10 was also labeled as T3, which is actually T4, historically. So caution, that you read a lot of history there behind the words. I can tell, that the change here actually probably will clear R7-R9 from a lot of “vets” - because with a buffed t4, t5 actually gets back parts of the t3 meta which t5 missed, imho, and actually, also makes it interesting to try through all those t4 ships. Problem is, as you see, not everybody sees it right now. But taking those R8-R12 into T5 now is a lot more fun, than trying to stay down there, which means, vets will be able to use their precious r8s and r9s without bothering medium.
If all vets disappearing from medium is your actual whish may be however debatable. It might not be in your own best interest, to only have people around you, that have no experience. Most battles are not lost because the other team has more vets, but because your team picks ships which strategically blocks you from victory.
You will also start to differentiate, that all players are different even after 15k+ battles. Some can play a few styles better, others can support teams. In the end it’s not just about the ships, it’s also about the pilots. And the packet loss fluctoping to russian servers.
With 400 you probably already saw a lot anyway. The difference diminishes, and some get dangerous before 1000 battles, others still search their glory over 9000. Vet is just an elitist word anyway, you can’t really say what it means in numbers.
1 hour ago, X_Xharis said:
literally no. Everybody is building destroyers atm. (see ingame chat)
you got a point, sir.
46 minutes ago, Spongejohn said:
Limiting their numbers per battle doesn’t mean that players will not be able to use destros,
yeah but unfortunately, equipping a destro this way kinda forces you to take it. While it may work a while to get players used to not overuse them, does it fix those all-destro tournament battle situations truly? Does it help balance them?
It might be a solution for now, but on the long run, it has to get a bit smarter, I’d say. Maybe you should not pick them at all, just call em in. Destro-fall. Maybe it can be solved with point rules.
So for me 2 seems indeed a bit low, it would mean, both have to take it, while 3 at least allows 2:3 - 1:2, but still has the 1:3 or 0:3 scenario as worst case.