Takes into account the number of destroyers per side…yeah.,…
Not only that, you put BOTH T4 destroyers on the SAME side.
Edit: Again the T4 destroyer is on the same side that has more destroyers (granted the enemy didn’t use theirs straight away and got ruined)
Were those Capture the beacon mode? No? So what the problem?
Were those Capture the beacon mode? No? So what the problem?
The second picture is ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
The second picture is ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
nope
[botched post]
nope
Then you can’t see the C beacon behind the respawn timer?
Then you can’t see the C beacon behind the respawn timer?
It can be Domination or Beacon Hunt, but it is NOT Capture The BEacon mode
No such thing in T3, Kosty. Only Beacon Hunt or Domination. And even more - In Capture the Beacons (T4) I still saw 5-6 destroyers each side. Please stop pretending that it’s not happening. In 112 battles in last few days I had 2 (TWO) without destroyers - 3v3 domination one after another. every other 110 games had at lest 30% of destroyers, Majority of that games had at least 60% destroyers.
We just have to accept the fact that devs decided that Star Conflict will be done World of Warships style, with other roles as support for heavies. Probably in a year or so we will get cruisers, heavy torpedoes for fighters (a’la doomsdays) so we will need guards with AMS for flagship protection etc. (and no, current gunships with firestorms are useless), EMP bomb designed to take out cruiser/destroyer shield and disable it for 10 seconds etc. Destroyers are marking end of one era, but I really hope that devs will develop proper playstyle for them. Even in real life - one Harpoon launched from fighter can kill destroyer if it penetrates AAM/AAA screen.
The people who control these changes need to take a good long lesson in giving players a reason to play and separating teirs. Being faced against a team with t4 destroyers makes me want to not play, alongside pointlessly nerfing rewards.
That’s not balance.
No such thing in T3, Kosty. Only Beacon Hunt or Domination. And even more - In Capture the Beacons (T4) I still saw 5-6 destroyers each side. Please stop pretending that it’s not happening. In 112 battles in last few days I had 2 (TWO) without destroyers - 3v3 domination one after another. every other 110 games had at lest 30% of destroyers, Majority of that games had at least 60% destroyers.
Please tell me where i said it is Capture the beacon, or that destroyers are not existent, i’ll by you a car. Or maybe you want me to pay for your reading comprehension lessons?
Renni complaining about having DIFFERENT COUNT of destroyers, not that they are present, he presented 2 examples to back up his idea, and both of them were terrible - because both of them showed only that one team had 1 more player with a destroyer, only one guy had 4 of them equipped, which doesn’t matter cause he only can use 1 at a time, not affecting total count of possibly active destroyers on each side. IF he would have brought Capture the Beacon mode, where TOTAL count of destroyers in ship slots and not maximum ACTIVE in same time matters, than yeah, he would have a point worth showing to developers, otherwise he had a
I understand that some of you are looking for an opportunity to point out where I am wrong, but guys this is just embarrassing, at least spend some time reading what i write, before rushing with half assed assumptions.
How did we screw over of PvP? We added leagues, will add new system of Sector Conquest, added new PvP-maps, and more new content for PvP is coming.
You screwed over People vs People when you made it unbearably hard for me to invite other people to play your game with me. And adding features that makes it hard to progress. (lack of balance, destroyers)
Here is an excerpt/copy paste from a great book I’m reading by Alan Cooper:
Identifying candidates
Because the designers must capture an entire range of user behaviors regarding a
product, it is critical that the designers identify an appropriately diverse sample of
users and user types when planning a series of interviews.
Based on that information…
designers need to create a hypothesis that serves as a starting point in determining
what sorts of users and potential users to interview.
Usability and user testing
Usability testing (also known, somewhat unfortunately, as “user testing”) is a col-
lection of techniques used to measure characteristics of a user’s interaction with a
product, usually with the goal of assessing the usability of that product. Typically,
usability testing is focused on measuring how well users can complete specific,
standardized tasks, as well as what problems they encounter in doing so. Results
often reveal areas where users have problems understanding and utilizing the prod-
uct, as well as places where users are more likely to be successful.
…Having gone out into the wide world to understand your users’ lives, motivations,
and environs, a big question arises: How do you use this research data to come up
with a design that will result in a successful product?..
We solve this problem by applying the powerful concept of a model.
Personas
To create a product that must satisfy a diverse audience of users, logic might tell
you to make it as broad in its functionality as possible to accommodate the most
people . This logic, however, is flawed. The best way to successfully accommodate a
variety of users is to design for specific types of individuals with specific needs.
You get where i am going at
Goals, not features, are the key to product success
Developers and marketers often use the language of features and functions to dis-
cuss products. This is only natural. Developers build software function by function,
and a list of features is certainly one way to express a product’s value to potential
customers (though this is clearly limiting, as well). The problem is that these are
abstract concepts that only provide limited insight into how human beings can be
effective and happy while using technology.
FEED THE HAMSTERS!! The game has crashed 4 times in a row now, for everybody in the same battle!!! No idea what is causing it, have been playing fine all day…
It’s ok now 
Please tell me where i said it is Capture the beacon, or that destroyers are not existent, i’ll by you a car. Or maybe you want me to pay for your reading comprehension lessons?
Renni complaining about having DIFFERENT COUNT of destroyers, not that they are present, he presented 2 examples to back up his idea, and both of them were terrible - because both of them showed only that one team had 1 more player with a destroyer, only one guy had 4 of them equipped, which doesn’t matter cause he only can use 1 at a time, not affecting total count of possibly active destroyers on each side. IF he would have brought Capture the Beacon mode, where TOTAL count of destroyers in ship slots and not maximum ACTIVE in same time matters, than yeah, he would have a point worth showing to developers, otherwise he had a
Kosty, I respect you for what you are doing and I will stop writing now, cause it’s waste of time yours and mine. I don’t need a car, I just gave you some statistics. PvP has changed from PvP to fleet battles and that’s what people are trying to discuss. I saw destroyers in CtB, even one player with 3 of them. Hell, I even saw a destroyer in mostly T5 battle. In 98% of battles there are destroyers now, and if you don’t have a destroyer in one team, usually it’s major disadvantage. Please, don’t give me a theoretical examples how to counter them. Do 200 battles in actual pvp, and see the results (btw there is something strange going on when I see Milf in destro ;)).
I don’t care if I am right or I prove you wrong. That’s not the point. People are just asking one simple question - is the current situation in PvP result of what was designed by developers? Is that how player vs player gaming mode supposed to look like? If the answer is “yes” I see no problem - people can adapt or leave. If “no” it means that something went wrong in the development cycle.
I understand that some of you are looking for an opportunity to point out where I am wrong, but guys this is just embarrassing, at least spend some time reading what i write, before rushing with half assed assumptions.
Is your sadism striking again? Is everyone hating u?Do you feel lonely?
Take a chill pill.
Is your sadism striking again? Is everyone hating u?Do you feel lonely?
Take a chill pill.
Hahaha you can use irony.
You impressed me kosty…you really did.
Did you ask yourselves these questions when you figured out how to explain it to us :
How do you model your users?
What different sorts of people might use this product?
How might their needs and behaviors vary?
What ranges of behavior and types of environments need to be explored?
How do you identify and group your potential customers?
Of course these are not questions for you to answer publicly here, but i want you (people) to consider.
“And of course we can predict” - Doesn’t sound very researchy to me
No you shouldn’t develop based on only that one opinion, but you should respect it and use it. And figure out where it comes from and why.
You screwed over People vs People when you made it unbearably hard for me to invite other people to play your game with me. And adding features that makes it hard to progress. (lack of balance, destroyers)
people say you used to have a somewhat good PvP. You have been very close.
Here is an excerpt/copy paste from a great book I’m reading by Alan Cooper:
Identifying candidates
Because the designers must capture an entire range of user behaviors regarding a
product, it is critical that the designers identify an appropriately diverse sample of
users and user types when planning a series of interviews.
Based on that information…
designers need to create a hypothesis that serves as a starting point in determining
what sorts of users and potential users to interview.
Usability and user testing
Usability testing (also known, somewhat unfortunately, as “user testing”) is a col-
lection of techniques used to measure characteristics of a user’s interaction with a
product, usually with the goal of assessing the usability of that product. Typically,
usability testing is focused on measuring how well users can complete specific,
standardized tasks, as well as what problems they encounter in doing so. Results
often reveal areas where users have problems understanding and utilizing the prod-
uct, as well as places where users are more likely to be successful.
…Having gone out into the wide world to understand your users’ lives, motivations,
and environs, a big question arises: How do you use this research data to come up
with a design that will result in a successful product?..
We solve this problem by applying the powerful concept of a model.
Personas
To create a product that must satisfy a diverse audience of users, logic might tell
you to make it as broad in its functionality as possible to accommodate the most
people . This logic, however, is flawed. The best way to successfully accommodate a
variety of users is to design for specific types of individuals with specific needs.
You get where i am going at, some person at your company should know this stuff. Unless you don’t have someone responsible for user experience.
Once you have identified the main archetypes who plays your game (there might be like only 4), you can easier go on to develop the game targeting these specific types.
But you will not be able to do this unless you do proper research.
Doomb0t, when all of the people looking at -and using the forum see their complaints
and recommendations getting ignored, they are going to get mad.
We don’t see these ‘different people’ you are talking about anywhere.
We don’t meet them when we play the game. So it just feels like we are being ignored. And you get the image of ignoring players.
When someone makes a complaint to you, don’t just answer "as expected" because it’s offensive, and you should USE the feedback you get and identify why it happens, instead of just guessing.
If you (guys) want to be professional, don’t ‘guess’ and ‘predict’ - Do research, and please be transparent in your communication with the users.
The reason you get repeated reactions is not because “that’s how things are” or “that’s because english forum is full of crybabys”
NO - Because you didn’t change the experience so much. Because your methods don’t work. You get criticized, not because you have ‘haters’ but because you are making mistakes.
YES - New features are great, your patch is super awesome in many ways. And i support that.
BUT:
Goals, not features, are the key to product success
Developers and marketers often use the language of features and functions to dis-
cuss products. This is only natural. Developers build software function by function,
and a list of features is certainly one way to express a product’s value to potential
customers (though this is clearly limiting, as well). The problem is that these are
abstract concepts that only provide limited insight into how human beings can be
effective and happy while using technology.
PM me for more info. I will seriously put work into making this a better game. And of course look very much forward to your answer.
If you don’t react to this, i promise i wont care. And if you are so sure you are doing it right, that’s great, and best of luck
That’s not how these f2p companies behave. It’s not in their repetoir to attempt to cater to a wider audience, just the whales that want to have an advantage over everyone else.
That’s not how these f2p companies behave. It’s not in their repetoir to attempt to cater to a wider audience, just the whales that want to have an advantage over everyone else.
i think it’s more complicated
Modules dealing damage, reducing resistances or applying negative effects now also affect various objects:
PvE turrets
open space cargo ships
dreadnought torpedoes
cruiser torpedoes in special operation
Really happy with this, but a question: does this mean that something like the destroyer’s Pyro Emitter now also can damage Emitters, Generators, etc. on the cruiser in special operation?
Fixed assignment progress bugs when using drones
Hopefully this means the bug with the sentry drones and attack drones kills not awarding karma will also be fixed in the near future.
Fixed a bug with self-destructing NPCs
Thumbs up for this, it was so annoying seeing the AI just fly to their deaths in combat recon.
Things that can be improved with the next patch, coupled with some feedback on how to correct these problems:
- I’m quite concerned about allowing Rank 11 destroyers in Rank 9+ matches. There are serious balance issues that should be addressed when it comes to this. As of right now, I see the problem possibly developing one of two ways:
This is really a big issue on its own, i don’t know if this is still possible after the several hot fixes, but if it is still doable, it needs to be fixed. I’ve seen people actually brag about rolling T3 matches with their T4 destroyers, this is the same mentality that got squadding removed.
Things that can be improved with the next patch, coupled with some feedback on how to correct these problems:
- Therefore, I came up with two possible solutions for this:
- Impose a restriction on where pilots with T4 destroyers can only get T4 matches. No predominantly T3 matches.
- Impose a restriction on how many destroyers can be active at any one time per team (i.e. 3). That way, destroyerballs cannot form in the future when everyone and their mother has crafted a T3 and T4 destroyer.
I like the first solution, but just in general i wish we went back to the tier system when it comes to MM. As for the second solution i find this to be one of the better solutions for destroyers implementation, i have a (unpopular) opinion that i don’t really find the destroyers OP, they need fine tuning of course, but not the outright nerfing some people are calling for. I do however think there are waaaaaay to many of them per team in matches and there really should be a detroyer cap per team (this opinion is formed from experience with T3 destroyers, haven’t fought against T4 destroyers yet).
Ripped straight out of my chat log, just a rough idea how i think it can work with having a destroyer cap per team.
‘‘For 9-12 vs 9-12 i think something like 3/4 destroyers should be allowed, 6-9 vs 6-9 should be around 2/3 destroyers allowed and anything below that only 1/2 or none allowed. For example, 2 vs 2 dont really need a destroyer i think. :P’’
It’s not a perfect idea of course, because i have no idea how this would work with the ‘‘Capture the Beacon’’ mode because of the limited lives and then you also have the possibility of players getting salty because they really want to play their destroyer, though in regard with that there’s a similar system in Mechwarrior Online and it seems to work, even if people want to play a particular class of mech they will go with the class of mech that gives them faster search times if they see one class is getting played to much.
Things that can be improved with the next patch, coupled with some feedback on how to correct these problems:
- Still no higher-tier squadding options. Sadly, I still don’t see any pubsquadding options. I understand that one of the likely reasons for the removal of this feature was to remove sealclubbing squads from the lower tiers, but it has reduced potential options to work as a team. I thought that the introduction of USA leagues would mitigate that problem somewhat, but sadly no one queues for leagues in our timezone… Which leaves NASA without anyone to fight but ourselves.
- Therefore, I would like to see the return of 2-mans facing 3 mans/no squads or 3-mans facing 2-mans/4-mans. But not to every tier. Simply reintroduce this feature into T4 and T5. This will allow the veterans to stick to the higher tiers to play against each other, leaving us to mingle with ourselves and out of the newbies’ ways.
Some personal bias from me here, but i personally hope when/if squads get reintroduced in that fashion it will only be for R14-15, during the tier MM days i really enjoyed playing T4 because it had the higher tier gameplay without the amount of squads which you had in T3, which i disliked because those matches usually turned into a 50/50 chance of winning depending on what caliber of squad each team got, when MM itself can already be a bit iffy at times to say the least i never really liked the additional variable squads added to MM.
Having those types of squads just for those ranks also makes sure to increase the chance high experienced ‘‘kill squads’’ will be matched against equally experienced players/squads.
We are monitoring situation right now, as you said it’s not former T3, it’s R9+.
To be fair i think people still use the term ‘‘tiers’’ is because if you were playing when there were tiers compared to playing now you can still quite easily tell when you’re playing what tier, even if technically tiers got ‘‘removed’’.
We will open this for r15 again when destroyer-bots will be ready.
Happy to hear this, even though it was a bit easy at times i still quite enjoyed playing this because of its casual nature during break times or just short gameplay sessions, i especially rather play vs AI seeing i’m not to interested in playing PvP anymore nowadays as i was ‘‘back in the days’’ because of variables that are out of my control, translation; horrible teammates and iffy MM in general. 
So far we are not planning to change this. We left Broker’s task in game and posted this schedule and this list i hope it helps.
I think you could at least remove the really low quality items from the higher ranked (PvP) zones. People (including me ^^) have suggested before already to maybe at least remove the trophy that only gives you 100 credits, Vanadium and Impure Sillicon from the higher ranked zones, those kind of items are just a slap in the face IMO when you’re flying a ship which will cost you several tens of thousands of credits to repair and resupply, a ship which can get destroyed because of the very reason of flying in those higher ranked zones, especially with the destroyer craze the risks increases considerably for going to those kinds of zones.
Maybe also do something with the blueprints, i don’t know if beryllium can be found in mysterious containers, but i do know neodium has been added to mysterious containers some time ago, which means one more item in the loot pool, which means a even smaller chance of finding a particular blueprint you want.
Doomb0t i know you said earlier in the thread not to spam posts, but i had to split up this post in two seperate posts because of the amount of quoted posts gave me a error.
I think one thing that’s happening there is that people are just trying to do the broker task of helping to destroy three destroyers, and don’t care about winning the match. That’s one of the problems with these sort of daily tasks.
This is pretty much the case for me, i do still try to win the actual match though, but i will be on the lookout for other destroyers and if i get the 3 destroyers assisted/destroyed in my first match i will do the rest of my Coil Gun/Messon Cannon progress in vs AI.
Agree with the fact that more than 2v2 or 3v3 destros in a match gets boring instantly.
I also agree with the fact that people haven’t learnt at all how to deal with them. I played exclusively T3 yesterday and what i noticed is somewhat apalling:
- multiple beacon games with destros in both teams, many times outnumbered by the enemy team
- destros are slow > logic > get fast ships and run for beacons while they’re busy in the middle of the map
- people were going to fight the destros across the map, nowhere near the beacons like ‘oh look free candy!’ only to die horribly to 5x destro pyro emitter spam
They did this in every single game. Then we see forum complaints that have nothing to do with balance and other logical things. People somehow formed a mentality that killing the enemy team’s destros brings them a win or something.
Now i haven’t encountered it as bad as you, but stuff like this is were my opionion about the destroyers come from. I’ve seen destroyers just go for kills and getting destroyed within seconds because they think they’re the battlestar Galactica, but i’ve also seen plenty of destroyers play for the objectives (myself included of course :P) and being a general positive influence on the team, to me both killing and flying the destroyers are still at least to a certain extent skill/experience related, in my eyes there are just to many of them flying around in matches.
200GS per anti alien ammo where only slightest packet drop makes you kick out to login screen and takes money…no thanks
This is actually a big reason why i never will buy something like this with actual money/GS, it doesn’t happen daily or something like that, but there have been times were Star Conflict would lose connection for a split second and return me to the login screen.
About the update 1.3.3 :
200 GS ammunition is something that I was hoping never to see in this game. Now I have to be really careful, that I don’t accidentally buy it, when selecting or buying more ammunition.
I wish that there would be a way to disable GS ammunition and resupply in the game options.
For the most part i consider myself polite/constructive when giving criticism on anything, but honestly the fact that they still haven’t removed GS related ammunition/missiles from the automatic resupply is shady as F***, it’s like the horror stories you hear from people who go for a trial period on a porn site and then all of a sudden they’re stuck with a year long membership.
It has been said by other people already, but my biggest issue with this new GS ammo is the fact that it’s not craftable, i mean even duplicators can be crafted. Even if Open Space is pretty ruleless, not having something like this craftable still pretty much makes it P2W, no matter the mode.
About the update 1.3.3 :
AI matches are now changed. This change wasn’t really necessary.
I would rather see that the all ships are fully equipped and upgraded and fully synergized with already existing synergy bonuses. Adding some bonuses only available for the AI, defeats the purpose of learning strength and weaknesses from each ship, even if they are bots.
I even created a [suggestion](< base_url >/index.php?/topic/29615-versus-ai-mode-improvements/) about this.
I quite like this suggestion, maybe a mix of your suggestion and boosted AI like it is now, just slightly less boosted so non-destroyers can also fight on more equal footing.
Even if you had done all them missions for the Broker you wouldn’t have enough, you would be 14 enriched berry short and some neo plates too. But if your happy to wait it out the rest of the Broker missions should give you all you need. Farming for them in OS is just a waste of time, berry is extremely rare, unless something has recently changed.
This is pretty much my stance on T4 destroyers as well, why try so frantically to craft them already when the broker missions aren’t even over yet. The people who have one already farmed like CRAZY for it in the past two days, saved up gold specifically for this, spent actual money or a combination of these methods.
Quoted straight out of my chat log from the very first person that crafted a T4 destroyer (99% sure he was the first);
‘‘took me 1 year for these gold lol, sector reward’’.
Oh please, people are allowed to complain, but on Ru forum you wanna complain you do it in constructive and polite way, while here people just come right out and i quote “everything is xxxx, developers are xxxx, game is xxxx” and blah blah balh. There are always edge cases, there are people banned here and people banned over there, but at least over there people are forced to be people and not allowed to be little twats like here.
If the eastern europeans and russians i’ve come across ingame are a sample of the people posting on the RU forums then ‘‘forced’’ is the keyword here. :fed_lol:
Also, a reminder. Any ninja update or patch, no matter how small, if it fixes something, please add the update information in it.
Yes please, i second this.
Plenty of times i’ve wondered what a hotfix did and never saw any information about it, even in normal patch notes there are sometimes things left out.
It’s free-to-play game, in free-to-play games people are grinding.
I have to STRONGLY disagree with this statement, different development studios can have different ways of developing a game because of things like cultural differences, but that doesn’t mean P2W = grind is the golden rule to follow just because certain games out there are grindy, i’ve played plenty of good/fun F2P games that kept me playing because the core gameplay was fun and the paying facets of the game were visual or something like a XP booster, which just added to the already fun core experience.
Like I said, sometimes failure to reveal certain facts can have undesired side effects. It’s not only me, but people conclude things based on their experience. I am mostly the messenger here.
My opinion is not always my own, but general. If more of them have the same experience, you assume, that something has changed.
I wish that we would have better interaction/communication, when it comes to such issues with the developers.
So, you can assume, that the fault is not only on my side, but on both sides, so I am not the only one to blame for this.
I am sure that you understand, that I only wish the best thing for this game, like most of us do.
Left out the rest of your post because this is the main thing that’s interesting to me.
I personally find releasing information to the players has always been one of the weaker areas of the developers, they don’t really make it a secret themselves that they like to keep information to themselves, so i find it kind of ironic/naïve that these same developers don’t think people will post things based on their own experiences in the absence of information/facts.
As for spreading false information, i can’t comment on his past infractions, but in this case Koromac never said he’s a developer/moderator or something along those lines, so if somebody still decides to believe what he says about something at face value knowing he doesn’t have any official title than that says more about those kinds of people than Koromac’s false information imo.
Why even did they do this? Was it because so many veteran pilots didn’t get these rewards too? So their solution for that was ‘Make it sh*ttier for everyone.’?
The first time i heard about this was ingame and my response was actually laughing out loud, even now 1-2 days later while typing this i’m still cracking a smile because of the absurdness.
I’ve never been to vocal about this because i thought they would either give us some of the resources or they would ignore the issue to death, either way i never really got upset about the whole thing, it would’ve just been a nice gesture if the older R15 players also would’ve gotten some of those resources the newer players were getting. However i was not expecting them to do pretty much a full 180 from what some of the older players wanted, so instead of just giving some resources to the older players, they nerfed the rewards like crazy for the newer players like some spiteful ex you just dumped destroying items you own, just lol.
Congrats devs, i ve never been so close to quiting this game
Although i’ve (constructively) criticized certain areas of Star Conflict in the past and probably will continue to do so, the amount of times i’ve seen people say this and several patches later they will still be posting is quite funny to me, when i’m gonna quit, i’ll just quit.
