Visual Hints for MM rules

Suggestions Visuals
#1

Okay, as mentioned in other threads, the current situation of new Queues, Bonuses, ± Rules, exceptions in CtB, etc. can kinda get confusing

 

And I still feel, this has more to do with information, than malicious intent of players and abuse. Yes of course, I do know from experience, that in a game you should never leave your garage door open.

 

What I miss visual clues for:

  • missing modules on a ship as a separate mini icon.

  • upon equipping ships, show which queue they will land in (“Deck-weight”), maybe also color indicated. (Easy, Medium, Hard)

  • upon equipping ships, show which ships might become “too weak” or even “unusable”, by adjusting their icon overlay, much like the “unavailable” one.

  • add tooltips and information about queue bonuses, maybe even integrate it into the fitting.

 

This would harmonize with the Deck itself also showing which Queue you will go to, adjusting everything more dynamically, and keeping players informed, less confused, and also less “enticed” to find out how to use “hidden features”, because they are there in plain sight.

 

Bonus:

 

 

 

  • add even Deck hints, which are optional. This could be small checks to see if any obvious hints could help the player decide ships. Much like team composition hints in another currently famous game, they are of course completely optional. But, this could include:

* a hint to fill up all slots.

* a hint to bring some sort of support (engi, ecm, command)

* a hint to consider combat recon (if you only equip LRF and tacklers)

* a hint to consider damage types or ranges (if all weapons are close range or have the same damage type)

and so on. well this is just a brainfart, ignore this part. But if you add this, maybe even add this in games, reminding all players that “There is no Healer” and stuff. Simply as hints.

Okay okay I played too much Overwatch lately.

 

If this is added, I think, with the new changes, even the ± rules could be overthought to be lifted, if the future stays on the track of the current Easy/Medium/Hard principle. Which I personally do like

However I would only lift it for underranked, fully equipped, fully synergized ships, as the goal of these rules was to stop people from bringing low ranked ships to be synergized in high rank games. Unsynergized ships have to play in their own Difficulty level, which is the new rule I would enforce instead.

 

Another rule would be to limit underranking by having to fullfill a rank sum. As more complex rules can be visually shown already in the hangar with said changes, it would improve a lot.

 

This of course brings up the question, how this will affect PvE, but to be honest, I would still prefer if PvE gets its own deck / hangar, so that people can theoretically prepare multiple decks of ships, and switch between them, and since this would completely change the way the current GUI works, I kept the idea somewhat in limits.

 

–

And because there is space left, I also add AdamWests thought, which I find logical, changing the system to

R1-5 Easy, R5-10 Medium, R10-15 Hard.

And personally, I would not give more underrank bonus to ships belonging to medium difficulty than the lowest, so all R9, R8, R7, … ships in hard should have the same bonuses as a R10 gets.

 

–

Comments, thoughts, questions, insults, go for it, put your words into the box and press post.

I know, this isn’t just visual, but it’s majorly a visual suggestion.

Sorry if I have no drawings, but if someone really wants to, I can start up paint.

#2

1 hour ago, g4borg said:

 

And personally, I would not give more underrank bonus to ships belonging to medium difficulty than the lowest, so all R9, R8, R7, … ships in hard should have the same bonuses as a R10 gets

 

Isn´t it working like this?

#3

Information available through GUI has always being an issue for this game, be it module descriptions, Hangar - MM management or game modes.

I wish devs invested more effort into interface and at this point prioritize it higher than some other features.

#4

+1 for any improvement to UI.

I particularly like the suggestions about showing which tier/rank you will launch to, and the one about helper icons that encourage you to fill all slots or diversify your ship roles. I feel this could also be given in the form of written tips in the hangar (that can of course be deactivated) along the lines of those that are on the loading screens, but actually give you time to read them!

 

You didn’t mention what we have suggested often in the past: an indicator in the hangar of how many squads and what size are in queue in each tier/rank, to encourage others to queue up in a squad. I have pretty much given up on this ever being introduced, but it can’t harm to add to the list!

#5

There should be more of a “team weight” kind of thing. Have the same rules as now for queue but your entire “team” of 3-4 ships has their rank averaged, and that average is what is used to place you in to battles.

 

For example, if you have a team of ranks 7, 9, 9, and 10, your average will be 8.75 so instead of automatically going in to “hard” mode because of the rank 10 ship you are still placed in “medium”.

 

This would be especially nice as most players that are actively levelling up in the ship tree will only have one to two rank 10 ships and all lower ranks. This will prevent them from getting too swamped and freaking out because of the jump in difficulty.

#6

18 minutes ago, TheDarkRedFox said:

There should be more of a “team weight” kind of thing. Have the same rules as now for queue but your entire “team” of 3-4 ships has their rank averaged, and that average is what is used to place you in to battles.

 

For example, if you have a team of ranks 7, 9, 9, and 10, your average will be 8.75 so instead of automatically going in to “hard” mode because of the rank 10 ship you are still placed in “medium”.

 

This would be especially nice as most players that are actively levelling up in the ship tree will only have one to two rank 10 ships and all lower ranks. This will prevent them from getting too swamped and freaking out because of the jump in difficulty.

Right and then i would bring 7 7 7 10 and only use 10 as averaged 7.75 Great plan!

Not

#7

1 hour ago, otaku98753 said:

Isn´t it working like this?

to be honest, it could have been a case of not enough coffee in the morning, but i remembered higher numbers for a r8 ship, i could have read it wrong, will double check. As said, confusing. That’s the part that is true, and I just mean, I would keep that “rule” for balancing it out, no matter what they do with it. It just kinda makes sense.

 

35 minutes ago, millanbel said:

You didn’t mention what we have suggested often in the past: an indicator in the hangar of how many squads and what size are in queue in each tier/rank, to encourage others to queue up in a squad. I have pretty much given up on this ever being introduced, but it can’t harm to add to the list!

oh yeah, that. but i feel that requires more iron will in the devs, as I do see the requirement in there to add more network calls / network traffic to the lobby, which they seemed to have been avoiding in the past a lot. Maybe I add it. Especially if I strike out otakus’ contemplation.

 

31 minutes ago, TheDarkRedFox said:

This would be especially nice as most players that are actively levelling up in the ship tree will only have one to two rank 10 ships

that’s why i would make R10 the highest in medium, as said, but balance wise, see it as the lowest in hard, just like r5. how to do that? I dunno. Maybe equipping 4 R10 takes you to hard, 3 or less to medium. Which is kinda what I meant with Rank Sum. Lets assume Hard has an entry level of R10 or higher, and a rank sum of 30. you could even sum up by synergy, so 3 unsynergized R10 would take you to medium, 3 synergized ones to hard. 4 ships would definitely take you to hard, if you have R10 or higher equipped. however equipping a R15 and 3 R1 will not let you into pvp, 2 R15 and a R1 would. I know this would mean, you gotta equip at least 2 ships to be able to pvp, but that is kinda almost like something which they should add anyway, nobody likes one ship wonders. But the way you describe it, I am not sure if I can agree to that, see Kostyans rant. The basic rule of “maximum ranked ship decides difficulty” must stay, we do not need to carebear so far, really. And total amount of ships is also not important for all game modes, which is why i left “rank sum” unexplained.

Also even there i see territory of abuse, like keeping one ship unsynergized, which however kinda feels like really not worth the effort, instead of equipping 2 R10 and a R9-.

#8

11 minutes ago, xKostyan said:

Right and then i would bring 7 7 7 10 and only use 10 as averaged 7.75 Great plan!

Not

This would not apply. Matchmaking has only three slots now, 1-5, 6-9 and 10-15. You would still queue in the adequate difficulty.

#9

15 minutes ago, TheDarkRedFox said:

This would not apply. Matchmaking has only three slots now, 1-5, 6-9 and 10-15. You would still queue in the adequate difficulty.

Which is not an adequate difficulty since r10s should be Hard in my case and not medium 

#10

Well written initial post. I hope that they will implement this. It’s really needed!

#11

The current difficulties will be reworked not even once I believe. We want to get out from Tier system, and this is kind of its variation. You can consider it as a temporary decision, then we will go back to something more connected to the rank system, it’s the priority. And only after that we will start to think about interface and how to update it to current needs.

#12

icons for missing modules, and having visual clues which ships are going to be “usable” and “unusable” are not directly tied to the new difficulties.

But exactly because you are planning to adjust things, I wrote this up here. Because if you start to accumulate lots of “rules” and “changes”, at least some basic ingame indication keeps players updated more easily. and it would help, if such things arent found out by remembering, or seeing the effects ingame.

I do understand if fitting help etc. comes later, and of course, good to hear you have not forgotten about adjusting the ui.

 

#13

8 hours ago, CinnamonFake said:

We want to get out from Tier system

Finally, should’ve done this back in 0.7s ![:)](<fileStore.core_Emoticons>/emoticons/001j.png “:)”)