Star Conflict 1.6.3 (Discussion)

[3835727]

1 hour ago, SoulDeliverer said:

I recently came back and was loving the improvements. Made me want to stick to the game again. Now you hit me with this. I log in this week, get one of the newest-ish mission(pve). I ended up being quite too weak, few shots for the bots(new lvl system, we picked too high i guess, randoms) killing me. So it cost me about 300k per missions we ended up not being able to accomplish. I got broke. Lost millions. Along 15mins minimum of my time to lose credits and play to lose progress in some way.

At the current exchange rate, if you want to put a monetary value on it, it’s around 37 gold lost per 300k creds repair.

 

I came back and the game was worth the effort(getting the top end stuff), days after…that happen. Can i turn off that respawn in pve? Or you could keep repairs but duplicator system for respawn? ( I know we still can use dups but idc, i already lost 300k once a squadmate Dup me, because he cannot before my spawns are used, anyway).

 

But other than that, like i said, loved the stuff since. Only downsides, getting tai kin is still complicated, and getting Waz Got past rank 8. You did well on how to obtain the Hybrid destroyer. That’s the way to go.

Keep a trash premium in your lineup so that when you die and don’t wanna pay for more lives you can just use it. The respawns won’t cost you anything and you’re still technically part of the game.

Phase 1 task 25 will get you a free Premium ship of your choice so I’d suggest going for it.

[xXThunderFlameXx]

18 hours ago, Oceandust said:

I knew you were gonna make excuses. 

 

First of all it doesn’t (really) matter whether it’s 1% or 100% of the player base as long as you cannot link the decrease of player numbers to the platform itself. 

You’re free to do the necessary research yourself. Check google trends or any other search engine and you’ll see the exact same trend you see in the steam player charts.

If you even want to take the most precise approach just check every weekly leaderboard and keep track of the active player number over time.

 

You are part of this problem; you neglect people’s voices and take their credibility while they are pointing out a major issue in this game. But hey, people have been saying it since 2015.

Yep, because pointing out that the game playerbase is decreasing(as it does on pretty much every game past a certain point), will definietly have the devs flick a switch that will make the game skyrocket in player numbers again.

 

As a matter of fact I have not been dismissing anyone’s complaints about the game, and on some occasions I even tried to explain it in case it was a misunderstanding.

 

So my question is, what do you consider to be the requirements a game would have to be dead? Because as long as it receives updates it’s very much alive to me.

[83540056]

18 hours ago, Arakhar said:

The only thing that steamcharts link shows is that hardly anybody plays the game via steam. Big surprise.

The numbers don’t really matter. What matters is the slope of the graph depicted. It shows a steady long-term decline of player numbers. So in the end as long as you can’t find an exact reason why it should only affect players who use the Steam platform to play Star Conflict (for example by showing that Steam has an above average server downtime or something similar that disable/discourage people to play the game) it’s applicable to the entire player base. 

 

Even though it’s speculation, I’m pretty sure we’d see the same overall trend if the publisher were to release the non-Steam charts.

 

18 hours ago, xKostyan said:

Fixed it for you.

People were saying that game is dying or plain dead even before it went public, and yet here we are, 7 years later

Well the numbers support the claim that the game is (slowly) dying. But hey people, keep bringing up that delusional argument ”)

 

41 minutes ago, xXThunderFlameXx said:

Yep, because pointing out that the game playerbase is decreasing(as it does on pretty much every game past a certain point), will definietly have the devs flick a switch that will make the game skyrocket in player numbers again.

 I haven’t been around here long enough to be able to tell you what game design decisions may have caused players to lose interest in this game. All I can say is that it happened over time. 

To be completly honest with you I can’t tell you a secret formula that’ll correct this trend; it’s also not my job, the devs have to think which of their game-design decisions (or indecisions) may have caused player dissatisfaction. The basis of every problem solving process is acknowledging there is one to begin with.

 

55 minutes ago, xXThunderFlameXx said:

So my question is, what do you consider to be the requirements a game would have to be dead? Because as long as it receives updates it’s very much alive to me.

I cannot answer that question because it’s unique in every game. 

From my point of view, being somewhat of a new player myself. the game lacks diversified content and once beyond a certain point the game play possibilities become very repetitive. May be different for you but this is just my personal opinion. 

 

PS:

Before someone questions why I’m still playing this game (even though that’d be an invalid argument); I’m only here because my favorite game died because of the dev’s negligence for the issues the game faced and this is the only game I was able to find that comes close. I just cannot let go of the past. 

 

[xKostyan]

3 hours ago, Oceandust said:

Well the numbers support the claim that the game is (slowly) dying. But hey people, keep bringing up that delusional argument ”)

Every single game is on this slope, if you wanna make a case, perhaps you should look into trends, perhaps point towards steep drop offs/spikes and correlate that to certain content releases/game changes.

So far what you are doing is trying to backup your statements with unrelated or broad data, that does not support your claims in anyways. It’s like saying that you are dying, hence you are doing something wrong with your life. Probably, both of those statements are true, but is one proving the other?

[6142147]

On 9/8/2019 at 12:31 AM, TheDarkRedFox said:

Keep a trash premium in your lineup

 

Thanks, i should have thought about that, mm also changed since so i can use low rank with r16. And if i can play on Mondays, there is some gold to be made.

[TheDerpNukem]

Ded gaem argument has been around for years - at this point it can be instantly dismissed because there is still a loyal playerbase. If there are players the game will remain.

[30908259]

Pilots! Starting October 24, the system for obtaining a premium license will change:

Premium licenses can no longer be purchased for galactic standards.

A premium license can still be purchased at the official game store.

 

Wait a minute, what… ?! Noooooo no no no this is a horrible idea for whatever reason. Please let us continue to purchase licenses with GS. It’ll do more harm than good if this is changed…

[73264156]

Seriously guys, no new content but that???

 

Premium licenses can no longer be purchased for galactic standards.

 

RIP Star Conflict, the next step towards the grave!

 

Load yourself what better times think the player base is good, such as new content etc. with such a miserable attempt to squeeze the last little money from the people you shoot your own leg.

[2165807]

Sector Conquest dreadnought got changed.

 

Federation got it’s shield Regen set to a third of before  (0.9 -> 0.3), while Empire (0.9 -> 1.3) and Jericho (1.23 -> 1.8) got buffed.

[7237187]

This is absurd. In my currency I can buy license for 90 days CHEAPER without any discounts with GS than for 60 days on their website. It’s over 50% price increase. WTF is that?

Considering the fact that one would buy GS on discount, then license on discount(let’s ignore trade for a moment) this will be over 140% price increase for license. License is already extremely strong(100% credits and experience) and basically a mandatory thing to buy to get any reasonable progress in that game.

Instead of getting better, the game gets more absurd(price increase of mineral containers, repair cost increase, huge flat price for OS respawn, Ze’Ta requirements which enforce trading which is a free GS burn for Gaijin etc.).

 

 

[TheDerpNukem]

Well not much to say on this update as it is basically the unlocking of some of the ‘early access’ content.

 

Temple of Last Hope

This mission has gotten significantly worse since I last played it. Enemy EHP is far too high, healing is far too slow on the objective and the objective still has far too smaller health pool.

I’d advise against queueing for this mission unless you have high/maxed PvE levels.

 

Dream land

This sector is effectively the meat of the update - as now everyone has access to it and the associated progression boosts (of sorts).

Although I have _ some _ feedback there isn’t much to run with as the sector hasn’t been available to me for an extended period of time nor have I been documenting everything going on whilst I’m there.

 

Feedback

The choice to have PvE mode enabled on the sector at all times seems poor as drops from Ai can be picked up by anyone unlike the rest of OS.

-Perhaps have PvE mode disabled (PvP sector) until Wood louse spawns in which it is globally enabled across all instances.

Elite protector units are far too tanky and spawn far too frequently when the Enclave base is extended/Wood louse is present.

-Lower the EHP of their bastion field and change how they repair Ai.

Often tasks will spawn which are impossible to complete due to missing objectives (No Wood louse spawn, Enclave base has reset)

 

Observations

The Allied base (empire outpost) appears to expand with player influence and the Enclave base appears to reset upon defeat of the Experimental Destroyer (Wood louse).

Contrary to my prior observation Food vans only have regular drops and use the Brokk’s april fools skin with a fighter model and Interceptor explosive modifier.

All enemies have a chance to drop Monocrystals and Iridium - just very rare.

The credit bonus for Beacon captures seems to be bugged or based off the influence of the host of the instance (the first pilot to show up there).

There is a main weapon damage | hull shield resistance | active module parameter bonus which also seems to be tied to player Influence.

Pirate stashes exist in this sector

Mysterious containers do not

Wood Louse’s tempest launcher missiles (torpedoes as discovered) can be shot down by AoE damage such as the Pyro emitter.

The Allied station with provide sensors for the surrounding area regardless of distance to it.

Wood Louse’s tempest launcher missiles (torpedoes) can navigate obsticles.

There is a random chance for a “Hostile Mercenary” to spawn. Upon defeat these units will drop a container with over 1 million credits.

 

Bugs that require investigating

Hindenburg supercharge interaction with Custodian/Protective barrier

 

Other notes

The Plasmatron buff is far from what it needed.

The weapon requires a projectile speed increase, not a damage buff. The damage is fine.

[ORCA1911]

Nice wholesome feedback derp 

[TheDerpNukem]

Well I tried to swear a little less. I’m like half a centimeter from a mental breakdown from trying to use plasmatron in pvp.

[3835727]

Still waiting on Halloween content

[rakza]

I don’t understand the change on Plasmatron.

 

Why buff the damage, knowing the secondary outcome will be increasing the self Damage Portion?

That makes no sense if the weapon isn’t enough popular for Custodian’s Players.

The charging is long enough and the were Damage good enough if its users were properly placed.

 

Defence Algorythm is now just a worst version of any Multiphase Shield Adapter.

3 seconds more active time than a Multiphase Shield Adapter. That’s all and still the Multiphase Shield Adapter with a proper implant have the merit to remove one negative effect (Mobility/Energy)

The Hull repair is clearly Bad. 2250 hull points in 8 seconds for a Guards with 20K Hull?

I don’t see the point of the whole change.

 

Regarding the Protecting Barrier :

M’kay.

 

[ORCA1911]

Thank you for your feedback, a new thread will be opened soon™.