Star Conflict OBT v.0.9.9 Discussion

It’s been that way before as well. Actually ever since desert eagle was introduced. After roles were introduced, bear became kinda OP as well. Dragonfly was the only one that wasn’t clearly more powerful than others of its type because empire just had a better command ship due to racial bonuses.

I… have no idea. I was here roughly a month before the ship role revamp. Enough to get my Prom2, which was my ONLY T3 ship at the time, so I rolled with that and started purchasing other ships along the line.

The Dragonfly is the most “Balanced” Command ship as a premium. (Just look the difference between It, the Strong and the Katana S)

 

Desert Eagles and Bears are a little bittle overpowered.

I’ve fought that war several times, already. So has Jasan and any more number of people who think it’s unjust. The devs either just don’t give a toss or haven’t heard of it from feedback relays.

 

If this post gets deleted, I guess we’ll know the true answer, heh?

 

In any case, the Fed/Empire Fighter lines ARE P2W, ever since the passive mod changes… I’m not surprised.

 

I’ve talked personally with Error and he told me he would do his best to fix this kind of things. He’s a nice guy and I hope a senseful change, not sure if soon but this xxxx tree must be changed soon or later.

The Dragonfly is the most “Balanced” Command ship as a premium. (Just look the difference between It, the Strong and the Katana S)

 

Desert Eagles and Bears are a little bittle overpowered.

Nope. The Dragonfly is actually one of the worst because of the Capacitor/Shield layout. Currently, I’m leaning towards Prometheus (R8) and Strong (Prem)

 

I’ve talked personally with Error and he told me he would do his best to fix this kind of things. He’s a nice guy and I hope a senseful change, not sure if soon but this xxxx tree must be changed soon or later.

The devs only VERY RELUCTANTLY have changed a little bit of the tree, which was simply to add development lines from and to certain ships, something that could be done in 5 minutes, tops.

I’ve talked personally with Error and he told me he would do his best to fix this kind of things. He’s a nice guy and I hope a senseful change, not sure if soon but this xxxx tree must be changed soon or later.

Error isn’t a dev. He’s just an official/unofficial (I’m actually not sure if he’s getting paid) community manager/QC guy/head GM.

 

He has little power in terms of actual development. All he can do is tell devs what’s going on. Implementation of his advice is up to the devs, and as we’ve seen many times before, they don’t really care all that much for feedback.

 

I imagine that must be a pretty frustrating position to hold.

Nope. The Dragonfly is actually one of the worst because of the Capacitor/Shield layout. Currently, I’m leaning towards Prometheus (R8) and Strong (Prem)

 

The devs only VERY RELUCTANTLY have changed a little bit of the tree, which was simply to add development lines from and to certain ships, something that could be done in 5 minutes, tops.

This is incorrect. The change was done rather fast - we have collected your feedback (one or two players’ feedback is not enough to do the progression changes, unfortunately) and then changed the links for ships.

Changing the tree positioning is much more problematic though, as this could potentially cause quite a lot of difficult situations for players. If it is ok for you personally it doesn’t mean it would be ok for everyone.

Moreover, this would require change in the Premium ship positioning, which is not the thing we would like to do either.

However, I will once again bring this matter up. Thank you.

So… since this is update 0.9.9, is the next one going to be full release 1.0.0?

 

Or are there enough tweaks and balance issues that still need to be fixed, are we gonna see a 0.9.9.1 or 0.9.9a update?

So… since this is update 0.9.9, is the next one going to be full release 1.0.0?

 

Or are there enough tweaks and balance issues that still need to be fixed, are we gonna see a 0.9.9.1 or 0.9.9a update?

here is a crazy idea 

0.9.10

here is a crazy idea 

0.9.10

 

Too confusing. Looks like 0.9.1.0 if you’re drunk. Then everyone cries “rollback!” and the servers crash. Terrible idea.

Too confusing. Looks like 0.9.1.0 if you’re drunk. Then everyone cries “rollback!” and the servers crash. Terrible idea.

thats not an idea, this is how counters work

You are, without a doubt, the most disagreeable Canadian I have ever met.

This is incorrect. The change was done rather fast - we have collected your feedback (one or two players’ feedback is not enough to do the progression changes, unfortunately) and then changed the links for ships.

Changing the tree positioning is much more problematic though, as this could potentially cause quite a lot of difficult situations for players. If it is ok for you personally it doesn’t mean it would be ok for everyone.

Moreover, this would require change in the Premium ship positioning, which is not the thing we would like to do either.

However, I will once again bring this matter up. Thank you.

To be fair, the only thing you’d have to do with the Premiums is change their position in the map in the same rank. Just nudge it up or down, there is more than enough room for those things to happen. Ie, T3 Federation. Just nudge the Sai above the Kite and drag the Bear to below the Wolf and the line coming from the Silent Fox. It’s not rocket science, although it does involve :effort:

 

Changing the tree positioning requires a lot of thought in balancing, it’s something that shouldn’t be done lightly, we all know that. However, we’ve been asking for these changes ever since this tree was MADE in 0.7.

 

Yes, let’s ignore the feedback of a handful of pilots that actually know what they’re talking about, considering it’s just 2 in 5 thousand. Surely, if these 2 people say something, the rest of the gaming community entirely disagrees…

How the hell can the Devs need to “gather more feedback” when almost every ship tree progression rework has revolved around the core concept of “Primary, Secondary, Primary” ship progression within each tier?

 

Seriously, this is the only thing the community seems to be united on - that each tier should have nine ships per faction, three ships per rank, with the premiums then placed into the system (but all being effectively “top” of their tier).

 

Everyone knows this is how it should be. Everyone wants it to be laid out that way… and yet you still need more feedback? From who? The Pope?

 

And are you really going to say that only “one or two” people wanted progression from Hydra 2 to Styx? I’m guessing that by that you mean that only 1-2 players bothered to find your address and smash down your door so they could scream “FIX THIS DAMN PROGRESSION!” into your earholes so loud half the dev team now wear hearing aids. A LOT OF PEOPLE WANTED THIS! You just didn’t bother to ask them, or listen when they tried to point it out.

How the hell can the Devs need to “gather more feedback” when almost every ship tree progression rework has revolved around the core concept of “Primary, Secondary, Primary” ship progression within each tier?

 

Seriously, this is the only thing the community seems to be united on - that each tier should have nine ships per faction, three ships per rank, with the premiums then placed into the system (but all being effectively “top” of their tier).

 

Everyone knows this is how it should be. Everyone wants it to be laid out that way… and yet you still need more feedback? From who? The Pope?

 

And are you really going to say that only “one or two” people wanted progression from Hydra 2 to Styx? I’m guessing that by that you mean that only 1-2 players bothered to find your address and smash down your door so they could scream “FIX THIS DAMN PROGRESSION!” into your earholes so loud half the dev team now wear hearing aids. A LOT OF PEOPLE WANTED THIS! You just didn’t bother to ask them, or listen when they tried to point it out.

Everyone? Do you have a poll conducted, on forums, to be sure that your words are indeed correct? How many people agree with you? How many people have told us about that? How else would we get enough feedback with solid arguments, if there is little actual data?

Once again we would like to remind you: If you have a suggestion, organise a poll with it, so that we could see that there’s not just you willing this to be introduced.

Yes, I can see how that would be a problem. If only there were some way for you to gather that information from players who are in game. If only you could propose a simple question like “does the Empire need a link between the Hydra-2 and Styx?” and then have a system whereby players could respond in a clear, easy to understand way, like clicking a “YES” or “NO” button. You know, sort of like the system used in polling stations.

Such a theoretical system could be left to run for a week or two to compile the information, and then, theoretically, that information could be further reinforced by a similar system employed elsewhere. A sort of virtual meeting place, or “digital forum” if you will. Hypothetically, such an arena would allow people to respond much as they would in-game, but provide more detailed replies; specifying why they do or do not want the change, or proposing variations.

 

Alas, it seems no such mechanics are available to you, so you’ll just have to take our word for it.

Yes, I can see how that would be a problem. If only there were some way for you to gather that information from players who are in game. If only you could propose a simple question like “does the Empire need a link between the Hydra-2 and Styx?” and then have a system whereby players could respond in a clear, easy to understand way, like clicking a “YES” or “NO” button. You know, sort of like the system used in polling stations.

Such a theoretical system could be left to run for a week or two to compile the information, and then, theoretically, that information could be further reinforced by a similar system employed elsewhere. A sort of virtual meeting place, or “digital forum” if you will. Hypothetically, such an arena would allow people to respond much as they would in-game, but provide more detailed replies; specifying why they do or do not want the change, or proposing variations.

 

Alas, it seems no such mechanics are available to you, so you’ll just have to take our word for it.

I will ruin my 2500 post count for this(Atleast I can keep on posting now) since Antibus is on his “attitude mode” again.

The last time they did a poll that mattered was with the matchmaking, remember?

Want mixed tiers?

16% - yes

60+% - no

~20% - dont care

 

They did it anyway. The devs don’t care for their polls.

 

Antibus, are you really THAT daft? That after the 10 or so threads we made about our feedback on this game, and EVERYTIME we pointed out the TERRIBLE ship tree that you still IGNORE YOUR ENTIRE FORUM FEEDBACK?!

And you really wonder why people like me have had it with this game?

Everyone? Do you have a poll conducted, on forums, to be sure that your words are indeed correct? How many people agree with you? How many people have told us about that? How else would we get enough feedback with solid arguments, if there is little actual data?

Once again we would like to remind you: If you have a suggestion, organise a poll with it, so that we could see that there’s not just you willing this to be introduced.

Yes, let’s conduct a poll in a place where SOLELY NASA pilots post in. That’ll work flawlessly for our efforts, but it’ll be utterly disregarded by you lot because “it’s too biased”, despite it being the reflection of the truth.

 

You want proper feedback? Why not check the logs, I’m sure those give you the exact info you want. Oh… wait… that’s not right… It’s a feedback method, so it must also be biased, yes? Well, it must be because, in the last few patches, the game has been dumbed down so far, it’s not even fun to play it if your DSR (you know, that one single stat that matters the most above all else, but says precisely jack xxxx about an individual’s skill) is anything above 1000. The only improvement made was tactical squad play against randoms. Yet, you have to jack those squads up TWO whole Tiers to make it “balanced”. Lemme tell you right now… T1 vs T3 is anything BUT balanced. Go check the logs yourself, I’m done sending them, there’s no point in sending any, NO ONE CARES!

 

Yes, I can see how that would be a problem. If only there were some way for you to gather that information from players who are in game. If only you could propose a simple question like “does the Empire need a link between the Hydra-2 and Styx?” and then have a system whereby players could respond in a clear, easy to understand way, like clicking a “YES” or “NO” button. You know, sort of like the system used in polling stations.

You what? Giving free GS to people? You madman!

Too confusing. Looks like 0.9.1.0 if you’re drunk. Then everyone cries “rollback!” and the servers crash. Terrible idea.

 

 

*sigh*

 

We had this before. 

 

[http://forum.star-conflict.com/index.php?/topic/19015-star-conflict-obt-v-0713/](< base_url >/index.php?/topic/19015-star-conflict-obt-v-0713/)

 

Having a 0.9.12 and more is totaly plausible before they decide to make it 1.0.

 

P.S.: sorry for interrupting the heated argument. 

 

Oh, and since we were debating the whole Strong/Dragonfly thing, someone asked what he should get instead, I totally recommend Katana S, it has the most energy slots of all, better than any premium. There is a also a good build for the empire command as well, if you can get that.

 

Anyone still remembers the time when Strong was worth it? Those were the best times ever. Bringing 8 nukes on the field in it… now THAT was fun. Totally worth it. And that was the time when nukes were still terryfing, now it’s more like a little bigger space f.a.r.t. I remember that was my first post on the forum, when they changed missiles slots to Strong, removing it’s unique feature. I got a response back with “tells about your skill” for that. I have a feeling that guy got nuked into oblivion a few times, he really must not have liked the ship, lol. I’m sure he would abuse it if he had it, it’s just those forum warriors… They’re all over the place :confused:

Too confusing. Looks like 0.9.1.0 if you’re drunk. Then everyone cries “rollback!” and the servers crash. Terrible idea.

Time until you look at patch forums and realize that 0.x.10, 0.x.11 and so on has been done before in 3…2…1…

Changing the ship tree should generally be a hard choice, just like changing module slots.  We got the Hydra 2 -> Styx route now, at least.  I think that’s more from the devs actually understanding that an LRF and an engineer are just such different play styles.  Empire’s T3 gunship being an R7 ship has been a complaint for a long time but it’s yet to change.

 

Who knows what version number will become release.  Version numbers mean nothing without a convention.  Odds are the next patch will be 0.10.0 instead of 0.9.10.

 

It is kind of interesting seeing Zerk1’s post from April about MM.
 

rage about what?
Usual Russian matchmaker report contains:
"My t2/t3 against their t3/t4, but we won. Fix mixing tiers. "
 
This is not constructive. Higher tiered opponents usually has lower skills. And this is the main cause of mixing different tiers.