Star Conflict OBT v.0.9.8 Discussion

Mercenary Center Patch Discussion
661

Just some thoughts about squads and increased MM.

 

I’m used to play with another friend who has already some idea how the game works. We almost always play rank 6 ships and we get into rank 4-8 games or 5-10 matches. It is a bit painful to find tier IV guards or cov ops, but aside from that, is not that hard to get nice exp and credits.

 

BUT (and this is a big but) yesterday we managed to convince two more friends to play this game. We made a 4 men squad, all with rank 1 and rank 2 ships. And we got in rank 4 - 8 and 5 - 10 games!!! Tell me what a new player with a Hercules or a Zealot can do against a tier 3 cov ops, or even a tier 4 LRF, which can instapop you.

 

It was no fun, and we begun playing PvE, because:

  1. It is no fun for a new player to be sealclubbed to death.
  2. Our team was in a severe disadvantage, having four tier 1 players while the other team were all tier 3, 2 tier 4 and 1 tier 2.

So please, we understand the reasons for the modified MM for squads, but have in mind that new players also play in squads, and for them, it is a big deterrent to play against such high tiers, and it is impossible that skill alone will cover a difference in two tiers.

 

As I said in other post, why don’t just make MM so they match squads of the same tier in each team, instead of this?

662

 

1- Improved HUD

2- Ships customization

3- Improved ships tree

4- Reduced repair costs

5- Reduced prices on T4 ships

6- Improved Looting system

7- New weapons

8- Improved display of statistics after the battle

These are the things remembered in the first minutes. These are the things that were changed thanks our pilots’ feedback. There are many more examples of those too.

  1. Only needed “improving” because you broke it. We still can’t get the old HUD back, despite people asking for it.

 

  1. Which is purely cosmetic, and was terribly implemented. It was a cash-grab, and the only reason we got it at all was because someone in accounting said “Oh, we can make more money off of this!”. If you really put this in for the sake of the players, then you wouldn’t be jacking up prices on the most popular colours; you’d be adding more of the colours people ask for but aren’t included yet!

 

  1. Someone has made one of those famous “Negative becomes Positive” translation errors again… the ship tree has not improved. The old (0.7.x) ship tree was better than what we have now. We, the players, have repeatedly asked for a ship tree that is more like the Tier 5 progression. We argue about specifics, but generally speaking we are united in the idea that each tier should go “Primary ships - Secondary Ships - Primary Ships”, with Tier 1 getting unique progression due to not wanting to let players start with frigs or interceptors. There has never been any indication the development team has listened to, or cares out, our opinions on the ship tree.

 

  1. Which you balanced by upping ammunition costs, decreasing quality loot, decreasing PvE earnings, removing contract earnings… “listening to the players” doesn’t count if the developers go out of their way to render the improvements null and void.

 

  1. That’s just about the only valid point in this list… and yet, despite this concession, popular opinion is that it takes too long to go from T3 to T5.

As an aside, this does not mean we want faster progression across the board; the fact most T3 Engineers don’t even know how to equip and use healing auras is proof that you need to slow down progression through T1 and T2.

 

  1. Again, “improved” is dubious. You “improved” it by turning it into a cash grab scam where people pay to not get loot. The current system is still inferior to the old 0.7.x model of “when purple loot drops you get it for free”. The current model is only improved compared to the broken system that nobody asked for and resented for its entire lifespan.

 

  1. Which, again, nobody actually asked for. Or if they did, they certainly didn’t ask for the old ones to be taken away. When you totally stripped out the entire weapon system you weren’t doing it for the players. You even said as much - it was done so the devs could more easily balance the weapons.

I’m not saying that was a bad update, but it’s pretty clear that this update happened because the developers wanted it, not because the players did.

 

  1. Okay, that one I can give…

 

…so what does that actually give us that was really a “player” suggestion? A bit of post-game feedback and a cosmetic system that was implemented, unfinished, as a cash grab and is now only tweaked when the accountants decide they want to take more money off of us.

 

Sorry, Antibus, but this is not “listening to the players”.

 

When we get the ship tree we want, that will be listening to the players.

 

When we get fixed tiers, that will be listening to the players.

 

When T1 and T2 take longer to beat so that players can’t rush into T3 and higher without learning the game while at the same time making it easier for people who do learn the game to advance out of T3 and access end-game content… that will never happen, because the Devs don’t balance on a tier by tier basis, so let’s just say “when developers balance individual tiers and not make sweeping changes”, then that will, once again, be listening to the players.

 

 

I know that you don’t have the power to make these changes, Anti, so don’t feel like I’m attacking you directly. My ire is pointed at the people sat in front of computers coding away and utterly ignoring what people actually want from their game.

663

Just some thoughts about squads and increased MM.

 

I’m used to play with another friend who has already some idea how the game works. We almost always play rank 6 ships and we get into rank 4-8 games or 5-10 matches. It is a bit painful to find tier IV guards or cov ops, but aside from that, is not that hard to get nice exp and credits.

 

BUT (and this is a big but) yesterday we managed to convince two more friends to play this game. We made a 4 men squad, all with rank 1 and rank 2 ships. And we got in rank 4 - 8 and 5 - 10 games!!! Tell me what a new player with a Hercules or a Zealot can do against a tier 3 cov ops, or even a tier 4 LRF, which can instapop you.

 

It was no fun, and we begun playing PvE, because:

  1. It is no fun for a new player to be sealclubbed to death.
  2. Our team was in a severe disadvantage, having four tier 1 players while the other team were all tier 3, 2 tier 4 and 1 tier 2.

So please, we understand the reasons for the modified MM for squads, but have in mind that new players also play in squads, and for them, it is a big deterrent to play against such high tiers, and it is impossible that skill alone will cover a difference in two tiers.

 

As I said in other post, why don’t just make MM so they match squads of the same tier in each team, instead of this?

 

You are once again forgetting that MM starts its calculations from the highest ranking ship in the battle slot. If you wanted to fly with your friends and not ‘sealclub’ them with T4, you could just use same ships as they did.

664

About the increased loyalty grind:

 

lets say I was Rank 12 with a given faction pre patch. 

 

To reach lvl 15 i need 205k for lvl13 530k for lvl14 620k for lvl15 = 1355k

That amount on loyalty allows me to buy at least 10 different MKIII modules for Credits.

 

If I use 1355k now I can upgrade 1355/180k=7,5 = 7 Modules for free. After that the grind starts over again. 

 

Getting credits to buy MkIIIs is by far the easier way, since I get income every time I do a battle. 

Loyalty on the other side cant be “farmed” like credits, due to the cooldowns, 3 contracts max, etc.

 

At my “grinding rate” It took me about 1,5 Months to reach loyalty Rank 15 with a faction (had all on lvl12 pre 9.0), after that time i was able to buy as many MK IIIs as I wanted (of them) unless my credits were insufficient. 

 

If that isnt suffice to explain how much more grind were now looking at, i cant help…

 

As adjustment I would recommend that the mkIII-prices are adapted so that you can at least buy one of them every time you finish all contracts with your faction.  

665

well I would like to see some playerbase increase.

there is absolutely no promo for this game going on internet…

cause no matter how u balance or fug up patches - 2k players in primetime wont do it

666

That is not correct. We would like to point out, that progression speed was actually increased in the last patch. Synergy gain cap was removed and now you can get more synergy from the battles if you perform better. 

 

Is it so? Lets assume theoretical scenario, where you need 10 apples, and 1 billion oranges to advance to the next level (in some undefined game). You get 1 apple and lets say 100 oranges for each win in this theoretical game.

 

It becomes quite apparent, that no matter if you get apples faster, you still lack oranges and cannot advance until you collect those 1 billion oranges too. (oranges = credits).

 

 

Naturally you now point out, that surplus apples synergy becomes (partly) free synergy to carry to next ship(s), and in that you are correct. But that only deepens the difference in the future, and makes it almost obsolete when thinking about progression only. One might think, that the grind is still a bit deep, as you increased progression speed of an item, which is not the most needed item for progression.

 

No matter how many separate “currencies” the game has, the deepness of the grind becomes mostly from the most needed currency to grind, and that is credits in Star Conflict. You need credits to switch contract faction. You need credits to buy and upgrade modules (or wait and get lucky with green upgrades). You need credits to buy a ship. Implants. Repairs. Ammo. And lot of other credit sinks in the game too (which are more or less optional though).

 

Mathematically, due to surplus synergy being partially free to assign, removing the cap did help the progress, but the percentage of the effect must be quite small. I say “smoke and mirrors” on that progression speed increase -claim.

 

 

But I do understand the business economics model of the game; you can always buy credits with real life money. Just wanted to point out this different view to the (imho faulty) ‘faster progression’ -statement.

 

Do note that above is written only from progression and grinding point of view: Please do not increase synergy requirements, I’m not claiming that it is too easy to get synergy. It is nicer to fly with maxed synergy ship (to grind the needed credits for next ship).

 

Loyalty vouchers are other grind, but I won’t go into those in this post, as they are not that required to play (one can play without having all Mk3 modules (e.g. unless one has OCD)).

667

You are once again forgetting that MM starts its calculations from the highest ranking ship in the battle slot. If you wanted to fly with your friends and not ‘sealclub’ them with T4, you could just use same ships as they did.

Sorry Anti, but you didn’t read. ALL OUR SHIPS WERE RANK 1 and RANK 2. I’m not stupid.

 

The ones sealclubbing were the guys in the other team.

668

Besides the grind…

 

For me it feels like the MM punishes me for squadding up with PPL. 

Completely ignoring the fact that socializing is the main ace in the hole of every MMO. And you punish it? You want your game to die, right?   

As result I fly alone nowadays and even here MM screws me a lot of times, since I must compensate for tier-rushers. 

Due to the new dimension of grind there is no incentive to advance even further.

 

So, how can I have fun now, if I feel getting punished by MM if I squad up and have nothing left to advance? 

Also balance is still not archived and thanks to the recent nerfs on survival modules even some random-dude can have a luckshot on me. 

On top of it, the game feels slow. Battles were fought on insane ranges rendering most fighters and inties useless. The speednerfs took away even more survivability from them. 

Go frig like the rest and enjoy boring gameplay? 

How can that be fun?

 

I know the reasons for it. I posted them and my post got deleted (I didnt swear at all btw.).

 

after all, I want that game to be a success, would I write here otherwise or would I be that enraged?

 

So if you really want to listen to your playerbase: Ask them! Ask the uncomforting questions, like: Do you like the shiptree? Do you like the MM? etc. And let them explain their opinions and make Polls for it. After that react accordingly. 

669

If anything, I’d like to see MORE corp play in T3!

Seriously, T3 needs to go back to being intimidating for the rookie. The attiude should be “squad up or learn to fly solo” in T3, and since the Corps won’t touch pilots who can’t even fit their classes core modules, the n00bs will either tier back down or shape up.

Either way the game is improved. T4 and T5 are shielded from useless pilots, and useless pilots spend more time learning to not be useless. Win-win.

670

 

  • Improved HUD

  • Ships customization

- Improved ships tree

  • Reduced repair costs

  • Reduced prices on T4 ships

  • Improved Looting system

  • New weapons

  • Improved display of statistics after the battle

These are the things remembered in the first minutes. These are the things that were changed thanks our pilots’ feedback. There are many more examples of those too.

 

When will THIS be fixed? The sole reason I do not have viable empire engineer is that I am FORCED TO GRIND SIX  LRF just to get the first viable engineer.

 

The first 3 are OK. Can be done in 2-3 days of free synergy, but having to level up the next 2 takes 2 days per ship WITH license and 10 hours of playtime for each day. 

Why are you FORCING me playing Sniper when I want to play engineer ?

 

dXV83.jpg

671

When will THIS be fixed? The sole reason I do not have viable empire engineer is that I am FORCED TO GRIND SIX  LRF just to get the first viable engineer.

 

The first 3 are OK. Can be done in 2-3 days of free synergy, but having to level up the next 2 takes 2 days per ship WITH license and 10 hours of playtime for each day. 

Why are you FORCING me playing Sniper when I want to play engineer ?

 

dXV83.jpg

You can always play Fed engies…

672

You can always play Fed engies…

Fed Engineers? I’d say they’re made of paper, but even paper can break them in half.

673

I am agreeing with much, if not all of what is being said here about lack of progression, because even with a license, I am not progressing how I used to, or how I would like.

 

So, as small a gesture as it is, I am not spending another pound for GS for this game, until I am satisfied that I am getting value for my money spent.

 

I do not expect to pay to win, I am glad this game does not allow that. (Before someone twists my words to mean something I do not mean at all.)

 

(It’s not much, but I have easily spent £100 - £150 on this game in the last 2 months.)

674

When will THIS be fixed? The sole reason I do not have viable empire engineer is that I am FORCED TO GRIND SIX  LRF just to get the first viable engineer.

 

The first 3 are OK. Can be done in 2-3 days of free synergy, but having to level up the next 2 takes 2 days per ship WITH license and 10 hours of playtime for each day. 

Why are you FORCING me playing Sniper when I want to play engineer ?

 

dXV83.jpg

Thank you for your feedback and petition, we will look into it!

675

Sorry Anti, but you didn’t read. ALL OUR SHIPS WERE RANK 1 and RANK 2. I’m not stupid.

 

The ones sealclubbing were the guys in the other team.

was there Any top t2?

676

was there Any top t2?

We went in rank 4-8 game so we have half tier 2 and half tier 3 in the other team. And in one match we got into rank 5-10 but was because one of us got a rank 3 ship. Even then, facing tier 4 ships in a tier 1 is hilarious.

677

Sorry if this is a repost of something, but screw reading through 30+ pages of debate to find out if it is.

 

My one, and really only, gripe with this patch is the loyalty system. I’m fine with the idea of the upgrade system; I’m just about fine with the Mk1 and 2 prices, and the artifact prices are fine by me as well. The loyalty can only be described as a royal fuckup. Not only are the prices way out for what contracts give, but some of us hadn’t maxed, or even done any of some factions before the patch. I want to upgrade my bubblegun on my T5 to mk3. To do this I need 270,000 loyalty, with Armada, of which I have none; in fact, I have no Fed ships at all, and contract level is tied to faction level, which is ships. Why the flying xxxx do I have to grind through Fed ships from rank 1 if I want to earn the loyalty for a T5 weapon in less than 450 games, if they are all wins? (450 being the number of times 600 goes into 270k.) It seems the only legitimate option is GS, but I’m not pouring any money into this game the way it has been and seems to be continuing going.

 

I’m not expecting this thing to be given to me for free, but can we at least have the old contract level by loyalty earned system back; or limit your contract level with other races to, say, half your highest faction rank. Look at this as a new player: if they want blues at T3, it will either take them an age to get each one, or it requires them to grind up ships they don’t really want just to get a mod or 2 that they do.

 

Fix it.

 

/rant off

678

About the credit income…

 

For a T3 ship we need what, about 700k credits to get a MK2 module. Each PVE battle gives us (with license, without R15 implant and without DLC’s) roughly 310k. So we needed at least 2 battles (assuming we get some trash worth the effort to make it up to 350k per battle) to buy a module. But now, if something purple drops, lets say, an upgrade for some ship you havent leveled enough to T3 or T4, you want that module to be purplelized some day, so u get it, but u have to pay a monstrous 310k credits for it, so u took a R7-R15 PVE boring mission and done it for pratically 0 creds, since u have to refill ammo later. So, we have a massivelly decrease in credit gain, and now we need a fuckton of loyalty also to be able to use that shiny upgrade kit. So in the end we have been F ked without lubricant so hard that i for one have only entered the game to do the daily PVE to get a free purple (but hey, i dont get money at all if i get that purple).

679

Devs are most likely listening. They just react in a way that we the forumgoing playerbase really don’t like.

 

But they most definitely are listening. One doesn’t exclude the other. Nothing in “listening” suggests that they will do what we want them to.

680

We went in rank 4-8 game so we have half tier 2 and half tier 3 in the other team. And in one match we got into rank 5-10 but was because one of us got a rank 3 ship. Even then, facing tier 4 ships in a tier 1 is hilarious.

I can’t speak for lower tiers, but before the “lolguards” R9 ships in a squad had a very good win chance against average R15 players.

 

I was solo grinding as R10 and R11, and I had few problems. Give me a 4 man R9 squad of friends (most of whom sadly quit a couple of patches ago) and pre-lolguard patch and I’d have your solo/bad squad R15s crying in a corner after a few games.

 

The problem with lolguards is that they just have so much meat on them passively, that T3 weapons can’t punch through them fast enough even if you stack gunships on your squad and ion the regen module. Other ships remain more or less killable, though imperial engineers are arguably too tough after scaling HP buffs that came a few patches ago.