Understanding The Games Problems

 

I want to start this post to help people understand where the games issues are, and to help people understand development of games, So they can correct their terrible perception of game development.

 

First i want to start with a story, that is extremely important to understand how developmental thinking and problem solving works, and how to determine bad and good suggestions

 

A few years ago a corporation build a large skyscraper in New York. after it was completed the  customers in this building complained because of the slow elevator speeds_,_  and long

waits to either get on, or get to the floor they were traveling to. At this, The development team perceived the problem to be  “slow elevator speed”  However, we will learn this was not the case.

After investigating changes to the system, they found it would not be possible to replace the elevator system unless they rebuilt the entire building. This left them at the problem (Red text) while

believing its solution was fixing the system (orange textual problem). An Low level entry level employee made a suggestion, A lter the perception of time so the customers no long focus on the

long waits, removing the problem  (red text) This solution (green text) was the correct solution, And shows how intelligent designers resolve problems by addressing them, not what people

perceive to be the issue (orange text).

 

 

From this story we learn, that often people automatically think the problem is X, but if you analyze it correctly, you will find that it is simply not the case. This is why i am often a head of

most of the people in or pertaining to the game.

The text in green (aka the problem resolved) is synonymous with ‘deceiving’. That can’t fool me nor will i ever accept such treatment.

your focusing on specifics and missing the point, which makes conversation of such rather pointless.

 

the end result is what matters, the customer is happy, and as was the corporation.

Then tell me: if something goes wrong because the real problem wasn’t solved, who do you blame? What should happen next? Keep quiet and endure? No.

If I may: what, in your opinion, are the issues that we (the playerbase) face?

 

 

The first issue with population, (and likely biggest) is the lack of appeal to various types of players, and skill sets of players. This is undoubtedly the single most destructive element to the game.

this come in two fundamental issues,

 

  1. The lack of content variation (trading, mining, etc). If research was applied to this game, we’d see that some 73% of games in this genre are non-pvp oriented. A game focused fully upon this

aspect is a game that is limiting its population to the other 26%.

 

The variant level of skill now applies here, if the newer or even unskilled players cannot compete (more specifically if they feel like they cannot compete) then the game will experience massive bleeding ( the joining and leaving of new players to the game). this further diminishes the population levels.

 

  1. The Lack of ** Play-ability** by the variant skill levels; If modifications where made to the game, to allow the players to enter that realm of “feeling they are doing something” Then the game will retain a large amount, if not all of that 26%. This is the most simplistic, and likely solution to bolster the games population.

 

 

Looking at option two in more detail.

 

Undoubtedly, Skill should play a major effect in the game. Players “feel” its important The problem in this regard rests in that the players thing Skill is dependent upon X Conditions, When it in fact is dependent upon Y conditions. Further this realm of correct understanding is blurred do to the nature of some egotistical players wanting to be “Ubar mode” and “one shot everything”.

 

Correction of these problems will increase the enjoyably and competitive play in the game.

 

 

How would i fix this?

 

I would start with reducing the damage of weapons significantly, Placing the survival of all ships under single fire to around an average of 30 seconds, however this time would be accomplished by improved accuracy rates, at the lower damage variables (in short, reduce the weapon damage, but make them hit more). This will make the unskilled, or new player “feel like” they are having an effect, There for retaining interest in the game, and reducing bleeding.

 

Other mechanical changes are needed in this regards, Like a limitation upon the max turn and strafe rates, preventing interceptors from moving so fast that they cannot be targeted in hit (again, the damage rates would allow them to survive longer, but be hit more often).

 

There is a more simplistic option in this, but it requires an advance set of calculations, It would be to add a mechanic that can be problematic in itself, so fixing the foundation is the solution.

 

After this, I would tailor the operational mode of modules to make the classes (especially the interceptors) much closer to their class play concepts, For example, ECM Ships (since mentioned earlier) i would change to

sit in the back idle, Jamming. They’d have a module they continiously keep on, to reduce their signature. their skill would be to spam jams of enemies, while not using to much energy to unstealth them from their active module.

I would also add a class that works directly against these effects (Covert ops, vs EW interceptor). 

 

changes like this to classes would help improve the dynamics, and i agree paper rock scissors is not the way to set up this game, as much as it is this counters that ( a fine line between the two)

 

In all honesty, I don’t exactly agree with you about some of the points there. Stuff like mining and trading are all nice to have, but if the core of the game isn’t good, then no amount of frills and gimmicks would work. 

 

Players want to feel like they can do something, but the difficulty has to be scaled accordingly; too easy and players get bored, too difficult and players get frustrated. And humans are loss adverse: when we earn something, we want it to retain its value. 

 

As for hard caps on turn rates and damage reduction… all these balance issues warrant a thread of their own; there’s too much to discuss.

 

Lastly… the playerbase isn’t stupid, and we have our own ideas and expectations. After all, we are the game’s target audience. If we feel excluded for any reason (e.g. having our feedback ignored), we’ll leave the game. 

Lastly… the playerbase isn’t stupid, and we have our own ideas and expectations. After all, we are the game’s target audience. If we feel excluded for any reason (e.g. having our feedback ignored), we’ll leave the game

The numbers speak for themselves, it’s a matter of going online and seeing how many people is actually playing.

I guess some people needs to understand that the players are the ones actually playing the game, and that they must work in order to make a more enjoyable experience, not the opposite.

In all honesty, I don’t exactly agree with you about some of the points there. Stuff like mining and trading are all nice to have, but if the core of the game isn’t good, then no amount of frills and gimmicks would work. 

Fore is vital, latter is agreed upon

 

Players want to feel like they can do something, but the difficulty has to be scaled accordingly; too easy and players get bored, too difficult and players get frustrate

 

Hence the nerf to damage and buff to accuracy,  Which takes away frustration, and helps make the game fun. Tactics and build Complexity is how you keep more intelligent players engaged.

the playerbase isn’t stupid, and we have our own ideas and expectations

 

 

That does not make the right. Knowledge is how you fix the problems, not but implementing random irrelevant idea’s.

Mmmm. I think we need to leave the balance out of the game for now, as most can deal with game imbalance and work on the other issues client side. Game modes, wait times, rewards, synergy and so on need to be worked on as a priority at this moment. 

 

Balancing the game is not needed, _ at this time _, its the game mechanics themselves that need tweaking. 

Not true Jp, the only consistancy in the game thus far, Is inbalance. 1 shotting, two shotting and so forth is destroying the amount of people in the game, which directly effect the population levels. If you want to fix the population, the thing causing them to leave is what needs the fix.

the playerbase isn’t stupid, and we have our own ideas and expectations

 

 

That does not make the right. Knowledge is how you fix the problems, not but implementing random irrelevant idea’s.

 

I’m pretty sure most of the points that we players raised on the forums are perfectly valid and our suggestions (generated after a fair amount of discussion) are generally sound. 

 

 

 

Not true Jp, the only consistancy in the game thus far, Is inbalance. 1 shotting, two shotting and so forth is destroying the amount of people in the game, which directly effect the population levels. If you want to fix the population, the thing causing them to leave is what needs the fix.

 

Presently, the things that make me want to leave are MM and the loyalty grind. 

 

Presently, the things that make me want to leave are MM and the loyalty grind. 

 

i think that has to be NUMBER ONE on the list to fix. 

 

I remember that the game was at least 100% better when it was just a grind for credits…and were not forced to fly ships you dont like or cant be good at. 

In terms of major, glaring faults in Star Conflict, I’d put utter lack of backstory quite high up in the list. The ship descriptions were removed and replaced with pointless text nobody reads, and no interest has been shown on restoring them.

 

Backstory is part of what helps people invest in a game emotionally, which makes them invest financially. When there is literally nothing to tie you to the setting, it’s much easier to simply not care and not get invested.

In terms of major, glaring faults in Star Conflict, I’d put utter lack of backstory quite high up in the list. 

 

As long as you’re still around, SC will have a backstory :stuck_out_tongue:

Focusing on fixing and keeping current players in game, does not bring in ones here.

Focusing on what veteran players want, is not what keeps the average player here.

Lastly, The balance issue across all tiers, for example on how interceptors are good in one tier, and trash in another is a good example of how balance is a major issue, which can be playing the major role in population rates (as no one will stay in an unbalance game long)

Focusing on fixing and keeping current players in game, does not bring in ones here.

Focusing on what veteran players want, is not what keeps the average player here.

Lastly, The balance issue across all tiers, for example on how interceptors are good in one tier, and trash in another is a good example of how balance is a major issue, which can be playing the major role in population rates (as no one will stay in an unbalance game long)

 

Interesting. 

 

But what can we do about the lack of people staying in T3 because the MM is horrid for T4/5? 

Focusing on fixing and keeping current players in game, does not bring in ones here.

Focusing on what veteran players want, is not what keeps the average player here.

Lastly, The balance issue across all tiers, for example on how interceptors are good in one tier, and trash in another is a good example of how balance is a major issue, which can be playing the major role in population rates (as no one will stay in an unbalance game long)

Surely if you focus on why people stay, you will find what drew them to the game in the first place?

 

This is starting to remind me of the Syndicate remake. EA knew people used to love Syndicate (an isometric tactical strategy game with micromanagement elements up the jacksie), and they knew people love Call of Duty (an increasingly unimaginative First Person Shooter) so someone with a 2-digit IQ announced “If the Syndicate remake is a First Person Shooter it’ll be super-popular!”

 

But of course, it wasn’t. Syndicate Fans didn’t like it because it wasn’t a Syndicate game, and CoD fans didn’t care because they have CoD already. It was a game without an audience, and it deserved to fail.

 

What drew me to Star Conflict was the arcade space shooter action, the Fixed Tier concept (I came to really appreciate it as I moved up and discovered the difference in play style between them), the hints of a potentially interesting setting and the scope of personal ship customisation.

 

What does the game have now? Fixed tiers are gone, the backstory is gone and the customisation is heavily nerfed. Someone wants World of Tanks in space, but as I have said before, if I wanted to play World of Tanks I would be playing World of Tanks. I didn’t come to Star Conflict to play World of Tanks. None of us came to Star Conflict to play World of Tanks. We have a game for that already - it’s called World of Tanks.

 

Lack of customisation in Tier 1 is likely a major factor as to why it’s not holding people’s attention. There is no hint that you ever have any real choice in your loadout - it’s one gun per hull, sod-all modules and sod-all choice. The Devs need to show people that there is choice in this game, and as long as they know it’s there they will accept a limited amount of choice in the training tiers.

Have to address game play issues first, Role playing etc is not important now, very few people actually follow it.

So lets list what needs to be fixed. 

 

Overall balancing

MM system 

Ranking system

Synergy

Grind

Rewards

Ship tree

Gamemodes

Addtional content. 

 

All these things…how is this game gonna get better…

Overall balancing

MM system 

Ranking system

Synergy

Grind

Rewards

Ship tree

Gamemodes

Addtional content. 

 

Pilot implants tree

Ship Customization

Trading

Turning Star Conflict in to Star Conflictizen would be an extremely bad idea. It’s not very ambitious to make World of Spacetanks, but at least it’s a niche they might be able to fill. Turning Star Conflict in to a full persistent universe game would be suicide, since it would simply be crushed by Star Citizen. I’m doubtful the development effort to do it could be completed before Star Citizen came out, in which case it’d be doomed even before release.

 

What I could get behind however is a single player pve experience to play while waiting for matchmaking instead of looking at my hangar, which could include your mining and trading elements.