Hi,
I think it would be good for the PVE population if the missions in PVE could be selected with tickboxes, so you don’t end up doing the same mission all over again. Currently PVE is approximately 80% fire support and I don’t think that presents the best possible experience for a lot of people playing PVE. Being able to opt out of certain missions instead of having to specify the mission, or select a “random” one that ends up with the same mission ~80% of the time, would make PVE have more variety while still letting the people who endear fire support to play that mission with people who feel like they want to do it.
Thanks for reading,
Xaos
edit: durp, wrong forum, I have no idea how to delete this
It should go into suggestions, but its probably fine here as well. I would make it easier and allow selection of maps you DONT want to play from PVE: i would personally select fire support and defense contract inmediatly if this would ever be implemented. I agree for all you are saying, it would do very good for the playerbase that plays PVE often, since current options are way too radical: either queue for all maps, or just for 1. Since im often bored of playing FS, i randomly click any other map…if queue time takes too long, i cancel queue and select another random map…untill i get a game. That for sure prevents me from joining certain games i would agree playing (anything but FS and defense contract). It would speed up queue times certainly.
I agree.
But sometimes it takes forever to find a game so I don’t get too picky. But I am so bored of Naberia Complex. People still manage to die to those rogues at the start…
Check boxes wont fix the issue, which is that FS is the most efficient PvE to farm. I think rotation of like 2-3 PvE at a time frame would create more viraety. Still it wouldnt hurt to balance all scenarios.
You can always select which PvE mission you want to play from the “Pick Scenario” screen, but yeah - checkboxes would be fine ”)
23 hours ago, xKostyan said:
Check boxes wont fix the issue, which is that FS is the most efficient PvE to farm. I think rotation of like 2-3 PvE at a time frame would create more viraety. Still it wouldnt hurt to balance all scenarios.
I agree that the underlying problem is that the missions are unbalanced. I still think that being able to choose the pool of missions you’re willing to do is an easier solution, because it doesn’t require rebalancing of the missions themselves from the start. On the contrary in the long run the statistics could be used to tweak the less played missions to have better rewards to entice players to play a variety of missions.
How would the rotation be implemented though? After completing a pve mission, do you get a cooldown timer for the mission that gets reset to 0 after 1 or 2 pve completions after that? Or is it a predetermined set of missions or…? I mean on paper it sounds like a better system than what we currently have, but it might come with a few bad sides for most people concerned as well.
Xaos
3 hours ago, thakorian said:
How would the rotation be implemented though? After completing a pve mission, do you get a cooldown timer for the mission that gets reset to 0 after 1 or 2 pve completions after that? Or is it a predetermined set of missions or…? I mean on paper it sounds like a better system than what we currently have, but it might come with a few bad sides for most people concerned as well.
More or less like the previous queue system…
1 hour ago, Papitas said:
More or less like the previous queue system…
I’m not sure what system you’re referring to, I’ve played for 20 months or so and most of the time was spent adapting to the system and only now that fire support and defense contract came up I felt like the system has been an issue.
I’m really happy I’m not alone with my grievances and that we’re all talking about making the game better for everyone. Maybe a dev will eventually look at our discussion and do a cost-benefit analysis on the issue and that is pretty much all we can hope for.
Xaos
Its a good idea, some people dont mind which but have a few pref and want a shorter q to get them.
For grinding sake it seems that it would be mostly defence contract and fire support if you go random, but if your sick of these then simple deselect option would be good.
I dont pve much anymore but it would be useful for some who do, complains bout q time then increase ya selection.
More options and not less, even if that option is to limit the possibilities.
Same thing happened again today. Basically the only missions I could do were fire supports. Devs, please, do you understand why this is not a good idea if you intend to keep players playing. You have a single mission that is basically overshadowing everything else in terms of rewards and the pve playerbase is suffering a lack of variety in gameplay as a result. Please, give players more freedom to choose what they are willing to do.
-Xaos
I believe that the predominance of Fire support over other maps is the rewards as many others have stated before; people see the outcome as the loot atempts received and *potential* completion time. Why potencial? cause “if i get a good team i can get it done faster than any other map”, and attributions come in the next way no matter if the player is good or afwul: “if i win, i did well along my team”, “if i lose, i did well but my team sucked”. And then you got these kind of players that die in the first 30 seconds elaborating all kinds of attribution like: “my team left me alone”, “its impossible to survive in this ship” (but they dont realise other players fly slower ships and stay unharmed), etc. Explanations that lead the responsibility to someone else but themselves. And now, what role fulfills the difficulty? NONE, that kind of players already made a whole explanation that goes over the difficulty and personal performance. So, adding extra difficulty will only make them think “my team mates are worse and worse”, instead of “this is too difficulty for me, ill try something easier”.
Aaaand we also got players that let themselves be carried every single time and care little to none on what they can do to help the team.
And on the other side we have finally good players that know this is the map that grants best rewards in less time (and they achieve it cause they have the skills and gear), that dedicate to get the best of this advantage, killing the fun when playing the same map over and over…and dragging players that arent in the squad with them to play the same map.
So, in order to make all maps a valid option, nivelate the rewards you get per minute…at least make the same loot atempts for Fire support+defense contract and all the other PVE maps.
38 minutes ago, thakorian said:
Same thing happened again today. Basically the only missions I could do were fire supports. Devs, please, do you understand why this is not a good idea if you intend to keep players playing. You have a single mission that is basically overshadowing everything else in terms of rewards and the pve playerbase is suffering a lack of variety in gameplay as a result. Please, give players more freedom to choose what they are willing to do.
-Xaos
Why won’t you just select other missions then? In higher tiers they require proper ship setup, so I cannot imagine going i.e to Crimson Haze with setup from Fire Support and vice-versa.
30 minutes ago, niripas said:
Why won’t you just select other missions then? In higher tiers they require proper ship setup, so I cannot imagine going i.e to Crimson Haze with setup from Fire Support and vice-versa.
On 8/9/2016 at 1:58 AM, Papitas said:
current options are way too radical: either queue for all maps, or just for 1. Since im often bored of playing FS, i randomly click any other map…if queue time takes too long, i cancel queue and select another random map…untill i get a game. That for sure prevents me from joining certain games i would agree playing (anything but FS and defense contract). It would speed up queue times certainly.
I play random with a multipurpose setup that works fine for all maps. You can also add more ships for specific maps: LRF with coils for FS, thilith gunship for blackwood/captured dreadnought (or any other map with lots of enemy ships), cov ops for fort muerto, etc. I used to play with my patriarch only at all missions (cause back then it was the only premium ship i had…and i wanted to farm free synergy), being an awesome ship to complete any mission (heavy blaster with crit ammo, vernier, accelerating coils and iridium, EM+therm+shield splitter, elec guidance, TTC and infrared, pulsar, shield booster, emergency shield and spectre/signature masking). Problem isnt ship setup, its player skill and build.
We don’t see any troubles with mission select interface, where anyone can chose everything he likes. It’s much more productive to make changes in missions instead. We just add a little more difficulty in FS, will be tweaking other missions also. Don’t forget also that sometimes they’re becoming a part of important task or event.
1 hour ago, CinnamonFake said:
We don’t see any troubles with mission select interface, where anyone can chose everything he likes. It’s much more productive to make changes in missions instead. We just add a little more difficulty in FS, will be tweaking other missions also. Don’t forget also that sometimes they’re becoming a part of important task or event.
Ok,I bet Ice Belt or Processing Rig might follow,got any plans for those?
2 hours ago, CinnamonFake said:
…where anyone can chose everything he likes. It’s much more productive to make changes in missions instead.
You can choose everything you like, but with low productivity because you often miss a lot of games; after youve chosen a map and wait for more than 5 minutes, you realise you cant fulfill your choice, and change for another map you choose (2nd option now) hoping to have a diferent fate…all of that because you want to avoid 1 or 2 maps (FS and defense contract).
Yes, make changes in missions, but do it in rewards/time terms.
19 hours ago, niripas said:
Why won’t you just select other missions then? In higher tiers they require proper ship setup, so I cannot imagine going i.e to Crimson Haze with setup from Fire Support and vice-versa.
Tried this, in alt i like to play ice belt, 5-7 min wait in high population time. Rare it gets done now, i could do a fire support in that time for more reward.
Tickboxing would at least allow the pve player to separate themselves from the farmers if they wanted to be or at least add more versatility to the bland pve diet. The fire support mission difficulty is also not the problem. A decent player can still complete it every time solo. This is why i have to laugh when people say that pve is about team work, the difficulty change only effects one group of people and i’d wager its not anyone commenting here.
14 hours ago, JCNB said:
Tried this, in alt i like to play ice belt, 5-7 min wait in high population time. Rare it gets done now, i could do a fire support in that time for more reward.
Tickboxing would at least allow the pve player to separate themselves from the farmers if they wanted to be or at least add more versatility to the bland pve diet. The fire support mission difficulty is also not the problem. A decent player can still complete it every time solo. This is why i have to laugh when people say that pve is about team work, the difficulty change only effects one group of people and i’d wager its not anyone commenting here.
Golddigger what are you talking about?
17 hours ago, xXThunderFlameXx said:
Ok,I bet Ice Belt or Processing Rig might follow,got any plans for those?
We have plans for every mission, it will be a long work, but I can not say anything about terms for now)
19 minutes ago, CinnamonFake said:
We have plans for every mission, it will be a long work, but I can not say anything about terms for now)
Anything but speedruns.Processing Rig has escort on the last round so getting the first place for eff might be more matching as the cargo ships and the turrets on the first 2 stage are rewarding pretty well,Ice Belt on the other hand is fully speedrunable,get a recon and a destroyer and you are good to go…
Speaking of speedruns,you have to do something about the loading screen,make it so the the mission time freezes while that so we wont waste 1,5 minutes waiting on a speedrun mission,or even more if someone DCs…