This thread covers the ship tree layout, the issues I feel it suffers from in regards to implants, reward bonus percentages and ship choice and offers my ideas for possible solutions.
I scanned through the topics but couldn’t find anything on this, which is surprising, so forgive my ignorance if I’ve overlooked a thread.
I like the overhaul of the ship tree, ship roles etc, however I dislike how the ‘tiers’ currently work in respect to both implants and the 80/95/110/125% reward bonuses and the availability of certain ships.
Before I continue I’ll point out that I’m a gamer that gets bored fast and likes to swap between ships/equipment regularly to keep things fun, I appreciate that not everybody is yet I believe my ideas won’t cause any issues for those people. I’m also not against premium pay2play, I’ve contributed, so long as it is essentially a shortcut with passive perks (like free repairs) and it isn’t forced or required at any point within the actual gameplay itself.
**Get to the bloody point mate (scroll down)
The further I progressed through Star Conflict the more I realised T4 just isn’t happening, so I have started to build up my T2 and T3 assets so that I have more to choose from in those tiers. That for me = more fun. I also chew pole when it comes to saving up and at 8 million I just cannae be fussed.
When I go back to choosing my ships to play in these tiers, I always choose the T2-3 or T3-3 ships, because of the extra credit bonus, module slots and implant I receive. However I feel this limits me quite a lot as to what I can choose to play as, I will elaborate. (you can skip these if you already feel me, bro)
For example , tier 3 Jericho. Their two best intys are the Ricasso a T3-2 and Kris-AE a T3-3. The Kris-AE is an ECM, it performs well and takes advantage of all the T3-3 perks. Yet, if I’d like to play covert ops with Ricasso, I have to suffer the roll back - 1 less passive mod, 1 less implant and 15% less reward bonus.
Another example could be Freddy; “I’m Federation Freddy, and I’d like to play engineer to support my team with my Anaconda! However, I lose a passive module slot, implant and 15% rewards! I feel violated every time I play healer!” Freddy currently has two choices, he can spend days grinding the Cerberus 2, or get out his card and buy a Alligator MK-III. (guilty)
One final example because I think this one really needs a mention - T3 Federation tackler. The T3 Wolf-M gunship is great, but again if I want to play T3 tackler, I have to use the T3-1 Silent Fox, or buy a Parallax, or the next best thing is a T3-2 Jericho fighter. Sooooo, the only T3-3 Tackler is a premium ship. Oh I almost forgot the bear, which comes in a £50 bundle on steam. I’m not sure if this is intentional, but if it is then shame on yooooooou.
My point is that we have all of these new roles, yet I feel as though I am being funnelled into certain ships regardless of their roles because it benefits me to do so as an individual. However, I know full well this mentality is not teamplay thinking and at some point it may restrict or diminish the team as a whole due to the lack of painter/repairs/spydrone yada yada.
**Here’s my list of ideas (Helloo!)
1) Unlocking higher rank ships could give permanent benefits to preceding ships within corresponding faction and tier
Example; once you achieve T3-2 in Federation and buy a T3-2 ship, all of your tier 3 and only T3 Federation ships become 110% rewards. Again, when you achieve T3-3 and buy the T3-3 ship, all of your T3 Fed ships will become 125%. Or it could be split intys/fighters/frigates but the same rules will apply. This could also apply to the modules that unlock on T3-3 ships and of course applies for other tiers.
What this should solve is feeling penalized for choosing a T3-1 or 3-2 over a T3-3 when the team could really use the buffs/debuffs that ship has to offer. This should increase flexibility on the individual and increase the range and variety of ships that are going into matchmaking and consequentially improve things for the entire team.
Implants I feel are either too good or should effect the entire tier and not isolated to their rank and above. Honestly it’s because I cannot stand losing 20% afterburn speed because I want or have to use a lower rank ship.
3) Mo’ ships.
More ships in each tree I feel would really improve things.
Jericho have: ECM, covops, long r, guard, tackler, command.
Fed: covops, recon, engi, guard, tackler, gunship.
Empire: recon, ECM, long r, engi, gunship, command.
This system seems balanced to me, I like it, in order to unlock each type of ship role you must progress with two factions.
However, some end of tier ships’ roles are T3-2 like the Anaconda, Elf, Ricasso so they become less desirable. Some are T3-1 like the Hawk Eye and Silent Fox.
This could easily be fixed by just adding more ships, upgraded versions of the T3-2 or -1.
Otherwise you are left in a situation where you must spend days of grinding another faction for one ship or you are required to pay money.
I don’t have a problem with pay to play, in fact I find a lot of f2p players pretty damn pretentious based on their outlandish demands these days, but I do disagree where this game twists your arm a bit, example; a fast tackler, or a T3-3 tackler, you have to buy a Parallax, or a Bear, because that is all that there is. In fact, read on at 5)
4) Upgrade ships
This circumvents 3) but I think it’s a cool idea, its my favourite and I’ve seen people asking for synergy to have more function. Easy. when you max out your synergy, you can upgrade your ship from T3-1 to T3-2 and then T3-2 to T3-3, but it caps at it’s tier so this wouldn’t benefit T2-3, 3-3, 4-3, aside from what it does now, maybe cosmetic unlocks or the 5th module slot for speed mods?
5) Premium ships a bit more exotic, just a little
So now that certain roles are tied to their factions, why not mix it up with premium ships? That could be the benefit of contributing monies to the game, having a Jericho engineer, or Fed command etc.
But instead of pissing people off and drastically changing the premium ships, it would probably be more sensible to just add a few more.
I think that’s it. Feedback with ideas and constructive criticism are appreciated and if I’ve missed something go ahead and point it out.