In my opinion, simply keep it random between tiers. Then, stop worrying so much about leveling the playing field and crippling good team players to protect poor solo players and start concentrating on things that improve the social aspect of the game. Encourage people to use teamwork. Give purpose to corporations and factions and make it worthwhile for individual players to play with them. Create a [good] introductory tutorial that teaches people the importance of ship classes and their role so they know how to play each type instead of trying to dogfight with an engineer and getting owned. Then you’ll have a game where people stick around because they form friendships, learn how to fly productively and then the whole “poor new solo player gets owned” problem is alleviated.
Perhaps some sort of system that actually encourages veteran players to mentor new players - like a mentorship program with perks would be a good addition.
On break at work so can’t get too far into this - but maybe it would be worth a thought?
-Lib
I think this has just given us our next player patch…
T3 solo heroes suggesting 1v1 duel to compare capability at T4/T5.
Essentially this sentence includes the main reason for T3 players dying so much in T4/T5. They’re trying to solo it. It’s the problem with base mentality and approach to the game.
Give me my squad flying T3 ships, get your solo heroes flying T5s. You’ll lose 9/10 games. Why? Because you can’t play as a team as you should. That is the biggest problem that people graduating from T3 into T4/T5 face. Your solo performance starts to matter far less, while feeling the “flow of the game” and adapting to your teams behavior becomes of paramount importance.
Let me quote you one of NASA officers post on NASA’s forums after he flew with us for a while in T4:
Gear does not matter. It is an illusion.
Apparently he also made another squad yesterday and they trashed ESB’s R15s in R9-R11 ships. Again.
But you can also make excuses that ranks and gear matter. Or you can try trusting people that actually fly low ranks in R15 successfully that gear in fact does not matter. What matters is your ability to adapt to T4/T5 environment, unlearning the problematic behavior patterns you learned in T3 that get you to lose games in T4/T5 and start enjoying winning the top level play without gear or high rank ships.
In the end it’s your choice. The only person that can get you to stop sucking and play better is you alone. Not your corp, your friends, your fellow yes-men on the forums or people like myself who try to push people into higher tiers so there are more people to play with and against. It’s only up to you.
In my opinion, simply keep it random between tiers. Then, stop worrying so much about leveling the playing field and crippling good team players to protect poor solo players and start concentrating on things that improve the social aspect of the game. Encourage people to use teamwork. Give purpose to corporations and factions and make it worthwhile for individual players to play with them. Create a [good] introductory tutorial that teaches people the importance of ship classes and their role so they know how to play each type instead of trying to dogfight with an engineer and getting owned. Then you’ll have a game where people stick around because they form friendships, learn how to fly productively and then the whole “poor new solo player gets owned” problem is alleviated.
Perhaps some sort of system that actually encourages veteran players to mentor new players - like a mentorship program with perks would be a good addition.
On break at work so can’t get too far into this - but maybe it would be worth a thought?
-Lib
I agree with you, and I have done what I can to recruit and train people in the game. Perhaps the free to play aspect is drawing in more undedicated players than have been thought as well, but that’s the nature of the free to play model I suppose.
As for matchmaking, I don’t know what metrics are actually being used here, but from the looks of the results, it would seem that they are very rudimentary and overly simplistic at best; lacking much in the way of measuring actual player skill and prediction, among other things.
… my squad flying T3 ships… your solo heroes flying T5s. You’ll lose 9/10 games. Why? Because
without doubt that would be fact so much so it can be chiseled on a stone tablet and gather a cult to follow it
unfortunately
probably less than 100 out of 16,000 active players can enjoy that claim. that fraction is so small using percentages would do it injustice. therein lies the problem with some of your advce / pov so far I’ve read in the last couple of months.
it comes from the luxury of flying with an elite corporation.
I know because I fly against NASA under tournament conditions and am experienced enough with competition (inc.outside of PC gaming) to spot structured cohesion that goes beyond lets-spawn-complementary-ships-and-stick-together-guis! Sadly that level of teamplay does not exist for the vast majority of the player base.
Because of that - disparity in equipment and performance between powerbands will always be a factor.
Because of that - disparity in equipment and performance between powerbands will always be a factor.
Absolutely agreed. What we appear to be disagreeing upon is significance of the said factor. Myself and most people actually flying T4 find this particular factor insignificant in relation to my performance in battle. Those who come from solo domination that is T3 tend to use it as a good excuse as to why they lose a lot, instead of trying to look beyond the fly on the wall gear factor and at elephant in the room difference in skill and play style that suits T4 factor.
And that quote? Not mine. The person quoted was of the same opinion as most people here that “gear matters, I cba coming to T4” just a few days ago. Now that he actually played it for more then a few games, his opinion changed 180. As do opinions of most people who survive the initial “introduction slaughter” as they adapt to completely new environment.
And for the record: I fly well over half of my games completely solo.
i love how some of you agree with t3 going against t4. Its totally unfair, well then the t3 have to work together to take out t4. i was just in a game with 2 groups of t4 thats totally not fair. especially when im flying a t2 recon and getting one shot deaths. if you do this then im quitting until a patch comes out to fix this. and im seeing t1 join in to with t2 what the heck. wow guys really just put the effort in making new players quit the game instantly. but i do agree t4 should not go against t5 players. fix the matchmaking system i don,t care if t4 cant find a game in t4 pvp i will gladly play pvp when i have a t4 with other t4 players. right now im grinding pve because i cant stand it. and no i do not usually play alone so you don’t talk as if i dont play teamwork
Those who come from solo domination that is T3 tend to use it as a good excuse as to why they lose a lot, instead of trying to look beyond the fly on the wall gear factor and at elephant in the room difference in skill and play style that suits T4 factor.
i will only repeat myself ONCE:
i can maintain a 1.3-1.4+ W/R flying solo… that’s with just random gear while levelling up my T2s and 3s.
the point here being that:
flying randomly, i will win almost 60% of the time (and i can boost that to above 60 if i actually try)
flying in a squad i could win 70% of the time or more.
flying in a squad with gear, and i will win 90% of time…
i hope the problem has now been made clear.
gear provide a 50-100% advantage within a tier’s rank spread. tier-spread provides even more…
furthermore, some of that gear is not even available, and must be obtained through luck, countless months of play time, and GS.
you seriously want to reward players with POWER? no problem… i can guarantee all your new players will reward you with leaving the game… :\
you shouldn’t be providing experienced players with a tool they can use to surbstomp new players… skill should be the only deciding factor… which they all claim that it is… so… i’m sure they won’t even mind!
The teamwork as known at T3 and below, and teamwork as known in T4 and above are very different. To talk about T2 and T3 teamwork as something that even resembles T4 teamwork is akin to saying that T1 and T2 has all the modules that T3 has.
i can maintain a 1.3-1.4+ W/R flying solo… that’s with just random gear while levelling up my T2s and 3s.
the point here being that:
flying randomly, i will win almost 60% of the time (and i can boost that to above 60 if i actually try)
flying in a squad i could win 70% of the time or more.
flying in a squad with gear, and i will win 90% of time…
i hope the problem has now been made clear.
gear provide a 50-100% advantage within a tier’s rank spread. tier-spread provides even more…
furthermore, some of that gear is not even available, and must be obtained through luck, countless months of play time, and GS.
you seriously want to reward players with POWER? no problem… i can guarantee all your new players will reward you with leaving the game… :\
you shouldn’t be providing experienced players with a tool they can use to surbstomp new players… skill should be the only deciding factor… which they all claim that it is… so… i’m sure they won’t even mind!
Translation: You don’t like progression based games. You also tend to project your lack of skill into lack of progression, rather than attribute it to the real reason, the lack of skill.
Obvious question: why are you playing one and whining about progression?
The teamwork as known at T3 and below, and teamwork as known in T4 and above are very different. To talk about T2 and T3 teamwork as something that even resembles T4 teamwork is akin to saying that T1 and T2 has all the modules that T3 has.
i give up. you are hopeless…
you fail to see logic where it exists.
in fact. i bet it’s just ignorance.
you rely on these items, otherwise you wouldn’t be able to win a game.
let me see, joined mar 2013, only has mk2 items… yup beliebable…
i’ll say one other thing for the record here about ‘gear grind’.
as i already mentioned before… this belongs in a open world mmorpg… not a class-based shooter… it has no place in one. at most it should have minimal impact on balance.
you can’t have a gear grind without a solid PVE experience… and quite frankly, fighting scripted enemies in repetitive maps is not that.
i can illustrate it using a recent example: BLR - blacklight retribution.
they created a zombies PVE mode… the problem is there was only one map and it was exponentially boring after just 10 games.
the only thing it effectively did was split the community into PVE and PVP… so there were less PVP games available…
and eventually, as people got bored of the PVE, they started leaving too… so the game slowly died…
I actually poked my head back in here on the forums to see the recent changes at the behest of one of my customers. I’m sadly not surprised or amazed by the continuing trend of changes. So many before me have pointed out details so I’ll simply say this… The dev team appears to be technically skilled in their area’s of focus, but as a whole they come off as amateur, or without focused leadership, at best. Your changes are rarely popular on these forums, yet touted as “positively” received in some other mysterious place. When one searches for this majority of positive feedback on your other forums none can be found, but is explained that your team is receiving said feedback via pm’s an ingame… ludicrous.
I’m now actively steering my gaming customers away from your product, while using it as a prime example of a great idea with poor execution. This may sound harsh, but having followed this title from .6 onward, I feel it’s apt. Many will not agree an I respect that. I hope your company makes a turn around however unlikely that may be. I’d consider re-installing Star Conflict on our pc’s for gaming customers should the feedback that’s readily visible from the majority start reflecting positive reception. Your recent changes toward team size, and pointing to custom games as a work around is… baffling. The trend of touting a game design concept then removing or severely restricting it has become the norm far too often.