Rapid fire plasma and rapid fire Railgun do not have Overheat.
RFP is a PVE weapon. Have fun trying to land a single hit with them on any half decent interceptor. Their range is like 200m more than Pulse Lasers, wow. I’d rather go with Assault Plasma.
Take a look at my kill rating in game. It’s down about 70 points or so from frigball meta resurrection but it still shows what “that xxxx RFP” can do in hands of someone who isn’t terrible. You can also go around these forums or in game and ask people who fly T3. A lot of them got to be on receiving end of my ships. It rarely ends well for the victim.
RFP are primary weapon on my ECM. They rape and destroy interceptors with and without stasis. If they do not in your hands, the problem is not the weapon. It’s between keyboard and chair.
The reason why I use RFR on CO is because of insane alpha strike coupled with orion. ECM is more survivable and usually needs a lot more time on target to get the kill. As a result, RFP is a better choice due to significantly higher dps over longer periods of time (and the fact that missing isn’t nearly as critical - you can spray if needed). Essentially they give (or more accurately gave before this patch) me ability to be actually threatening to guard frigates and annoying to engineers in terms of damage output. No other weapon in the game can do the same.
The final PvP only advantage of RFP is the smallness of projectile in terms of visual representation. It’s very difficult to derive the firing angle from looking at RFP shots hitting you. Assault plasma is very easy to derive the firing angle from watching it hit you for example, as are most railguns. Lasers are obviously the easiest.
Are you really sure you want to bring rating into this one?
4k crits from Stab Rails and 5k crits from RFR are big alphas, I don’t think a lot of low damage shots fired very fast qualify as an alpha.
The size of the projectile is what I think makes it so hard to land hits with them. I won’t deny that RFP look good on paper, but whenever I hear their sound I’m relieved they are not Pulse Lasers, or Stab Rails, or RFR. How many times have you been killed by RFP?
RFP are primary weapon on my ECM. They rape and destroy interceptors with and without stasis. If they do not in your hands, the problem is not the weapon. It’s between keyboard and chair.
The reason why I use RFR on CO is because of insane alpha strike coupled with orion. ECM is more survivable and usually needs a lot more time on target to get the kill. As a result, RFP is a better choice due to significantly higher dps over longer periods of time (and the fact that missing isn’t nearly as critical - you can spray if needed).
I don’t think a lot of low damage shots fired very fast qualify as an alpha.
The size of the projectile is what I think makes it so hard to land hits with them. I won’t deny that RFP look good on paper, but whenever I hear their sound I’m relieved they are not Pulse Lasers, or Stab Rails, or RFR. How many times have you been killed by RFP?
I think Arpacolas confuse what luckyo said about the alpha of RFR for RFP.
I personally dont use RFP, but i dont play ECM either, and i think ECM makes great use of RFP or a heavy plasma for the sheer dps.
this is just laughable, not only is it far more annoying to do a non-sector conquest realistic, you actually need 8 people! good luck waiting 20 mins and having people join willing to wait that long!
On the Contrary… I love this! This guarantees you have at least 4 people per team, (which should happen anyway) and it allows for two full squads to go head to head… I like it.
How many times have you been killed by RFP?
I must look out for you. Show you how it works.
But yeah, he wrote RFR as mentioned.
Crazy however, since I prefer RFR on ECMs - because their main goal isnt hunting, but sheer annoyance and damage - and RFP on Covert Ops - because at high speeds RFR misses are too fatal to recover from, and RFP has a slight distance advantage while aiming because of the projectile speed.
On the Contrary… I love this! This guarantees you have at least 4 people per team, (which should happen anyway) and it allows for two full squads to go head to head… I like it.
It might be, because his settings are “Standard”, meaning he plays an “official” game (with loot) - it might work with custom settings (so non-standard rules) ?
I love Realistic now in the loop. They can be very short in T3 tho. 
I’m going to keep saying this until someone on the Development team takes a hint: Nobody wants mixed tiers.
Correction: Nobody you should be listening to wants mixed tiers - the bulk of your player base do not give a crap about whiny Russians who’ve been here since closed Beta and want to farm T3 in their pure blue-purple Tier 4s.
So, do you want us to listen only to you, personally and leave all others out of equation? Wouldn’t that be a game making for one person only? That is a bit strange, and if we are not wrong this is also called favoritism (or discrimination pick whatever you like). And we do not pursue this practice.
You claim that we listen only to Russian community and not your ideas? Well, the thing is we are listening to all of our _players _and we are not doing it on a _racial _basis.
When you say that you want realistic out of the que it doesn’t mean all of the players want the same as you do - as you can clearly see in this very thread there are not only Russian players who liked and wanted realistic in Sector Conquest que.
I love Realistic now in the loop. They can be very short in T3 tho.
And again - if you only want to play arcade, use Custom Battle menu, now that players have gotten used to that instrument a bit, it is easier to find a team.
Sector Conquest is a Conquest and it should give players as much variety as possible.
That said, we should add - we _do want _to accomodate the needs of all of our players, yet sometimes a hard choice should be made. And when it is so, we are also trying to provide a remedy for all of those who may disagree. In this particaular case it is a Custom Battle instrument.
Lol, intys are completly unkillable now if a heal engy is nearby.
I shot a recon into 25% armor, 3 sseconds later he was back at ful lhealth, this is even worse than before!
Yes, we have reports on that matter. And also on the matter of hiding modules inside the textures. As it can happen, and as it was written - the “big game” often brings about changes to what can be seen in local tests. We are already working on solution to this.
Anti, I did devise a list of things that the community in general wanted to see added/tweaked. It’s not wholly comprised of my ideas and includes a couple of player-based ideas. I can link you if you so desire.
Anti, I did devise a list of things that the community in general wanted to see added/tweaked. It’s not wholly comprised of my ideas and includes a couple of player-based ideas. I can link you if you so desire.
Sure! That will be helpful, if there are some new entries I will make sure to add them to the feedback reports =)
upd. Already have this list read. Thanks for your consideration anyway!
Anti, i’ll say this again:
The custom battle menu doesn’t work for what you guys intended it for.
Why would I start a map there if I can basicly instantly start a map in Sector Conquest?
Not to mention the only things I see in the custom battle list is PVE. PVP maps show up for a minute then dissapear because no one joins.
The old system worked just fine and I really don’t understand why you removed Sector Conquest/Arcade/Realistic and made it all Sector Conquest.
I would do arcade, and when I got sick of the large battles for a while I would do realistic with 1 v 1 with bots, and I had a ton of fun those rounds. But now when I do realistic it’s 12 v 12 and honestly, that is just boring.
If you would make it possible to do a realistic map with bots while also keeping the rewards, I think Custom Battle might be used slightly more for Realistic, but as it is now, no one uses it I believe.
Well, as I am tirelessly repeating - there are lots of things in work at the moment and we monitor the situation with all of the recent and old changes. Some, that are ‘bigger’ take time to be fixed, some, like balancing are a bit easier to work with (not always though). But we see them and work on them, maybe not as fast as some of you wanted, but there are other factors playing their role in this. Like we’ve heard your wishes on more free kind of gameplay or that engies are OPd again or revamping of long range, or that some other ships need to be boosted and many other things, and we listen to them very carefully and think on how this can be implemented… or can/should it be done at all.
You don’t have to listen exclusively to me, but let me show you why you should on the tier front.
I quit playing Space Marine on PC because certain players were unkillable. They had equipment and skills that meant I would be headshot the instant they got line of sight on me. My friends have left for the same reason.
Now what do you think happens when you mix tiers? When I lose to a fellow T2/T3 pilot I shrug and say “meh, it happens.” When that opponent is in a tier above me? That pisses me off. I get pissed off because his ship has abilities mine does not, and/or was developed for a very different style of play. Again, I have friends who have quit Star Conflict who tell me a big factor is how they get ganked by T3 pilots despite not being anywhere near able to fly T3 themselves.
It’s a circular problem that you only have yourselves to blame for.
1: T4 has virtually no players, so T4 ships begin to appear in T3.
2: T3 pilots begin to quit or move back to T2. T3 now has fewer pilots.
3: T3 ships appear more and more in T2 matches, causing T2 pilots to quit or stay in T1…
Yes, it probably sucks to be one of the old guard Russians who has a maxed out Rank 12 squadron they can’t fly, but if Tiers are locked AS THEY SHOULD BE they can always find opponents in T3. Moreover, because it’s easier to get pure blue ships in lower tiers, these pilots are more likely to be facing pilots with equal synergy and/or loadout.
In short, their victories would be through being a better player, rather than having ships too powerful for the game mode they are in.
So how about you do what I and the majority of your non-Russian, non-Rank 12 pilots want and put back the hard caps on tiers? Yes, it might increase matchmaking time, but isn’t thaty better than having matches that make people angry at the game due to its imbalance and convince them to stop playing?
More to the point, if you didn’t make it so damn hard and/or expensive to get to higher tiers we would see more people reach those tiers… Which again means shorter launch times.
I say if they want to use mixed tiers, let them, just give us an option to choose. If I want to play mixed tiers, let me. If I don’t let me. All it would take is a checkbox.
Also, to correct you, Antibus: I did not say I wanted Realistic out of the queue. I do, however, think Realistic is unfair as it is biased in favour of people with a fourth ship slot. Having allies who matchmake with a single ship does not help either. I support the idea of changing Realistic so that only three of your ships can be used. This would reduce the farming potential of higher level / paying pilots.
Now, on the custom game front… I can’t say for sure why so many people preferred Arcade, but I can say unequivocably and with absolute certainty the following: custom is a ghost town, just as I predicted!
Custom mode is only really of any use if you have arranged a match ahead of time. Maybe that’s what you wanted, but my impression is your playerbase wanted a way to get games of their choosing. You can’t get games in Custom.
My solution here is simple (to explain at least). Return Arcade, but keep Custom.
Arcade would have selectable options when you matchmake for game mode, allowing players to deselect modes they do not want to play. Matchnmaking would then put them into the first available Sector Conquest match that meets their criteria. PvE could likewise be handled by Arcade.
This seems the best of both worlds. It means the Sector Conquest player base is not diluted too much, it let’s people skip modes they don’t want (this was what made me like the idea of Custom - I hate detonation!) and they can use Custom if they want to practice unranked or have a private corp vs corp match or something.
So, do you want us to listen only to you, personally and leave all others out of equation? Wouldn’t that be a game making for one person only? That is a bit strange, and if we are not wrong this is also called favoritism (or discrimination pick whatever you like). And we do not pursue this practice.
You claim that we listen only to Russian community and not your ideas? Well, the thing is we are listening to all of our _players _and we are not doing it on a _racial _basis.
When you say that you want realistic out of the que it doesn’t mean all of the players want the same as you do - as you can clearly see in this very thread there are not only Russian players who liked and wanted realistic in Sector Conquest que.
And again - if you only want to play arcade, use Custom Battle menu, now that players have gotten used to that instrument a bit, it is easier to find a team.
Sector Conquest is a Conquest and it should give players as much variety as possible.
That said, we should add - we _do want _to accomodate the needs of all of our players, yet sometimes a hard choice should be made. And when it is so, we are also trying to provide a remedy for all of those who may disagree. In this particaular case it is a Custom Battle instrument.
Yes, we have reports on that matter. And also on the matter of hiding modules inside the textures. As it can happen, and as it was written - the “big game” often brings about changes to what can be seen in local tests. We are already working on solution to this.
We don’t want you to listen to a single pilot. We also don’t want you to listen to a single forum. The Russian community might be ok with the current matchmaking system, but that’s because it favours THEM, it favours THEIR gameplay. It’s not a racial/regional basis, it’s what we see. We see this community ignored for all it’s worth, all the ideas and feedback tossed out the window, all discussions, quite possibly, ignored or vaguely read by upper ranks because they don’t follow their ideas of world domination.
Players aren’t saying they want Realistic out of the queue, they’re saying tehy want Realistic out of Sector Conquest, leave it like it was before. Justifying this by “oh, you can just put Arcade matches on the Custom Battle screen” means jack xxxx all. Why? Because NO ONE uses it. Why wait half an hour for 8 pilots to join a single fight when you can just queue on SecCon for 2 minutes and you’re in a match? It’s friggin ridiculous and completely useless. “Oh, but it’s new, people will get used to it…” No. They won’t. Because they do not use it. Because it’s pointless and useless. My suggestion for this is to, literally, remove Realistic out of SecCon, make it full Arcade and put Realistic on Custom Battles.
Very few people know how to play on Realistic matches and it gets even worse when they, by some blind miracle, bring a single ship into battle. What? You couldn’t afford to put another 2 ships in there? Afraid the bogeyman is going to eat them or something? People are so ill-prepared for Realistic matches they just ragequit the match after not being able to respawn or call their team mates useless bums for not winning. This after they all committed seppuku with their one ship because they had no idea wtf they were doing. You might argue that this was down to pilot skills but, if that’s true, good lord, we have some REALLY incompetent pilots in T3 ships.
Giving pilots variety in SecCon is fine and dandy. So either stick to full Arcade or full Realistic on that. And leave the other set of combat type to the Custom Battle thingy.
That’s not how you test things. You’re supposed to have a separate test server with a handful of willing pilots to test EVERYTHING available in the game. Their stats should be fully controllable by the devs so the pilots end up testing what the devs really want to test, not release any and all changes out onto the world and say “we’ll see how it goes”. Because that’s been the current train of thought. And that has already lost them half their active pilots.
Well, as I am tirelessly repeating - there are lots of things in work at the moment and we monitor the situation with all of the recent and old changes. Some, that are ‘bigger’ take time to be fixed, some, like balancing are a bit easier to work with (not always though). But we see them and work on them, maybe not as fast as some of you wanted, but there are other factors playing their role in this. Like we’ve heard your wishes on more free kind of gameplay or that engies are OPd again or revamping of long range, or that some other ships need to be boosted and many other things, and we listen to them very carefully and think on how this can be implemented… or can/should it be done at all.
No, balancing is NEVER easy to work with because, unless you completely missed the last few patches, things are NOT balanced. At all. At least not in the way the devs intended them to be. Unless, of course, the intended objective was complete and utter chaos.
We’ve been saying Engies were OP’d since they existed. ZERO feedback was heard on that matter and things went their own way (nerfing the heal range was the only thing done about it, which was quickly restored).
Listening to a specific group of the community instead of EVERYONE is bad. Don’t be like Blizzard. Be smart and intelligent. The last couple patches show exactly the opposite, however. Zero xxxx have been given to the community’s appeals on any matter (at least from THIS community on THIS forum) and, every time a change has been implemented, it’s only gotten worse. And this, despite what you might think, are not MY sole thoughts. They share the grand majority of this community.
No, balancing is NEVER easy to work with.
Listening to a specific group of the community instead of EVERYONE is bad
First. You are saying this as if we are unaware of that :what: . You seem to misunderstood me - balancing is hard, no doubt, but means to work with it are a bit more… availible and operative, than fixing of bigger features. That is what I was trying to tell you.
And again, we monitor situation constantly and, as you can see, with almost every patch we are fixing some things in balance and in other aspects of the game.
Second. My whole post were on that topic. We are listening to all of you! It is just that so many people are disconent with the notion that their desires in particular are not accomodated.
Or rather, trying to listen to all of us.
Guys, look. I made a fake 0.8.5 patch thread SPECIFICALLY for incorporating most player concerns. If you really wamt to help, I suggest you go there amd give feedback on some of the changes so Error, Anti and the others cam actually see of that would be the right way to go about fixing some of the discrepancies!
This isn’t shameless self-promotion, either. I’m doing the best I can except for being part of a consultant team to help the devs out by making a list of what will patch up the holes. Instead of mindlessly complaining, I’ve tried to create solutions that would appease not just us, but the Russians as well.
First. You are saying this as if we are unaware of that. You seem to misunderstood me - balancing is hard, no doubt, but means to work with it are a bit more… availible and operative, than fixing of bigger features. That is what I was trying to tell you.
And again, we monitor situation constantly and, as you can see, with almost every patch we are fixing some things in balance and in other aspects of the game.
Second. My whole post were on that topic. We are listening to all of you! It is just that so many people are disconent with the notion their desires in particular were not accomodated.
I do say it as if you were unaware of it because that’s how it feels to us, the community.
You think the devs could, yanno, give US detailed patch notes instead of “ghost fixes”, as well? We’ve been begging for that ever since 8.0 (at least I have) and I, for one, am tired of seeing patch notes completely absent details that WE might see as important for positive feedback, instead of hearing us whine like a 5 yo kid on the market throwing a fit over the toy we’re not getting. “Monitoring the situation” isn’t how you do things, either. Things are meant to be tested off-game so this whole mess doesn’t happen constantly.
The point isn’t making everyone happy, it’s making the vast majority happy. Currently, it’s the other way around, the vast majority of pilots want to grab the devs by the scruffs and shake them into doing something to fix the game.
Edit: damn you, Censored, it was a good joke…
Look, Anti, I’ve said this before… people like me are vocal about this game because we see what it could be, and that’s the game we want.
I think you need more transparency. You took away Tier Caps back in 0.8.0 I think… but you never told us why. That is the mistake you have made time and again; there is never a “why”.
You won’t give us back tier caps - why not?
You haven’t changed the ship tree despite people offering countless, obvious alterations or pointing out gaps in progression - why not?
You don’t like Arcade - okay, you did sort of explain why here, and I’m a little mystified as to why people wanted it so bad myself… I guess this one is a bad example, moving on.
The point is, information is useful to all sides. When you make a major change that has no explanation - especially as nobody in the English speaking forums seems to have brought it up or been particularly vocal about it - this generally leads to one of two reactions; “Gaijin don’t give a crap about their players!” or “Gaijin are listening to their precious Russian elites again!”.
I know you probably feel a lot of loyalty toward the people who’ve been with you since closed beta, and it is a valid concern as to what do you do with players who hit that Rank 12 ceiling, because they’ll hit the Rank 15 ceiling not too long after launch. However, official and unofficial polls suggest that Tier 2 is the most popular (and based on matchmaking times, most populated) tier, followed by either 1 or 3 depending on who you ask. I can see why; Tier 2 has an interesting mix of up and coming players, and “old guard” who stay for one reason or another.
Maybe you don’t want people like me lingering on in Tier 2, but I see no incentives to move up because you’ll just throw Tier 4 ships at me if I do, and I’d rather get pissed off at fighting T3 ships in my maxed-out T2 than get pissed off fighting T4 ships in my not-maxed-out T3. Of course, this isn’t an issue with this specific patch…
…but an issue with every patch? communication! Seriously, I think you would get more and better feedback if you can get as much information to the players as quickly as possible - what you plan to change, why you plan to change it, why the old way did not work and how you predict this new change will work in game.
Like I’ve said over the Pirate DLC fiasco, this is a game I would like to support, and it feels like you go out of your way to make that hard to do. It’s true of the additional content you release for people not to buy, and it’s true of the development feedback system.
Patch notes have been updated: “Pirate” ships.