What Universe Do You Want?

Please note, These options are not including Combat mechanics. This is primarily “general concepts” Most importantly the “feel” you want to see

out of the universe.

 

 

Option 1

 

Eve style of universe: players can access any part of the universe at any time.

Territory is fought over by simply entering a system and completing a set goal of mechanics (building stations in short)

Trading, Mining can potentially be added

 

Option 2

 

Blackprophecy style of universe: players can only access speific parts of the universe at a time.

territory is limited to Tiers, But once you out level that tier you can no longer fight in that tier with newer ships/levels.

Trading, Mining can potentially be added

 

Option 3

 

Add your own concept.

I played Black Prophecy quite a bit, and it left me feeling disconnected. Rather than feeling the universe expanding around me, I felt like I was always restricted to a small sliver of the whole, no matter how far I progressed.

 

Eve, on the other hand, is a bit too open to the point that inexperienced recruits routinely get slaughtered if they wander into hostile territory.

 

Here is my Option 3:

 

I would prefer a system similar to Freelancer. As you move up the Tier tree, more areas become accessable. To prevent high-level players from trolling low-level areas, simply scale the rewards accordingly. Low-tier areas recieve very small bonuses, while high-tier areas recieve much larger bonuses.

Here is my Option 3:

 

I would prefer a system similar to Freelancer. As you move up the Tier tree, more areas become accessable. To prevent high-level players from trolling low-level areas, simply scale the rewards accordingly. Low-tier areas recieve very small bonuses, while high-tier areas recieve much larger bonuses.

 

I would support this too.

I played Black Prophecy quite a bit, and it left me feeling disconnected. Rather than feeling the universe expanding around me, I felt like I was always restricted to a small sliver of the whole, no matter how far I progressed.

 

Eve, on the other hand, is a bit too open to the point that inexperienced recruits routinely get slaughtered if they wander into hostile territory.

 

Here is my Option 3:

 

I would prefer a system similar to Freelancer. As you move up the Tier tree, more areas become accessable. To prevent high-level players from trolling low-level areas, simply scale the rewards accordingly. Low-tier areas recieve very small bonuses, while high-tier areas recieve much larger bonuses.

 

+1 , yup sounds good

EVE or Freelancer both sit alright with me. The way it is going now is…

EvE with Star Conflict-controls would be nice. mining, trading, more different ship-classes, a huge universe, crafting, pve/pvp-missions (contracts?) available on stations in the universe… :slight_smile:

I don’t want either.  

 

I like Star Conflict as a game of battles.  

 

A campaign map a la Total War is all I want. 

 

If I wanted to play Eve I’d be playing Eve.  

From what i get, Basically your saying the universe should be like eve, have empire and 0,0 space.

 

I Agree with this, but i think that eve’s system suffers major problems, Things like how conquest is done in the game, and jump gates.

Jump gates were the cause of massive camping, really dont want to see blob wars in this game.

To prevent high-level players from trolling low-level areas, simply scale the rewards accordingly. Low-tier areas recieve very small bonuses, while high-tier areas recieve much larger bonuses.

History has shown that lack of rewards in an area do not stop high level players going there and annihilating low level players. Griefing is its own reward.

 

I’d support option 2. You can’t fly a T2 ship in a T1 area.

 

Since at the moment we never sell ships, and selling modules is not very profitable, it’s pretty easy to keep fitted T1 ships hanging around to switch to should you want to potter around in T1 again (just as we used to now before matchmaking was “improved”).

 

Alternatively, how about a system a little bit like Guild Wars 2, so instead of simply locking you out of an area if you’re too high tier, your ship is automagically downleveled to be suitable for that tier. For example your Dwarf 2 would magically be downgraded to a Dvergr 2’s stats, your T2 modules will act like T1, any T2-only modules will be disabled and modules in extra slots will be disabled. This would allow you to go to earlier areas seamlessly without completely switching ships, but not give you an advantage over players of appropriate level for that area. Should you want to compete “properly” in T1 you can stop and refit your ship appropriately.

It would depend on how the universe was setup and what exactly you mean by universe.

If the game stays Lobby based (And I expect it to) I prefer option 2. logical progression is important, as it adds some much needed structure to things. but in this case, its primarily for balance. However systems similar to what SoldiersFortune has posted work the best for lobby based games. especially if they have a heavy PvE element.

The main issue I have with an ‘Open Universe,’ especially in light of the new sector conquest, is that without a significant population the metagame will evolve to everyone always fighting over a few sectors. because that’s where everyone is, that’s where the best resources are (TBD, crafting system hasn’t really been revealed, just an example) and that’s where you can find matches so you can actually play the game. This also doesn’t address the issue of mixed tier MMing. a firmly robust MMing system would be needed to keep matches balanced. not to mention a truly open universe with no segregation is extremely unfriendly to new players. this would further push the game into a niche market, further limiting the player base. It largely depends on what section of the gaming market the developers want to try to get a piece of.

Under Option 2, however, certain sectors are limited by Tier. so lower ranked players will always be contesting for them. The Highest ranked players have a choice as to which sectors they want to contest, simply by changing the tier of their hanger. This can help alleviate the strain on MMing, because sectors segregated by Tier will all have ships within a certain range of power. so determining skill is the only thing MMing has to do.

 

Furthermore, veteran players playing in lower tiers gives lesser experienced, but equivalent skill, players exposure to higher levels of play. it’s a safer environment for the newer players to learn in, and they aren’t getting rolfstomped by ships that are just too strong. instead they are getting stomped by superior skill, which they can emulate. 

 


An Open universe fails for one primary reason. Gear becomes too important. it’s extremely frustrating to know, that no matter what you do, you will never be able to tackle a certain player because of their gear. This is why so many people resent the mixing of tiers in MMing.

It could be made to work, if something were to be added to help equalize the power difference between tiers. As an example, PvP in SWTOR. For those unfamiliar, essentially what happens is when you enter PvP there are two lobbies. one for 50+, and one for everyone below that.

For the players below level 50, your stats are brought up to the equivalent of a level 49 character. Essentially everyone is level 49 as far as stats. however you don’t have access to all the same tools. IE: if you are level 10, you have all the abilities of a level 10 character, but your base stats are level 49. so the power difference between a true level 49 and a level 10 in PvP is equalized in terms of stats, but it’s not negated due to the tools each player has access to. so the main difference, once translated to Star Conflict, would be the number of modules you have access to and the power difference between them is not as great. However I firmly believe this is not a replacement for a proper and elegant MMing system. but It is an option to relieve the tension in mixing of tiers for a small player base. This would help relieve the strain on the MMing algorithm because everyone below a certain threshold is brought within a certain range. Especially for game modes like Realistic mode where queue times are often in excess of 3 minutes. I would prefer not to see this kind of system personally because it removes some of the depth. 

 

I’m all for open-world. So far the only arguments I’ve seen against it is newbie(New/inexperienced, not to be confused with noo b) hand holding. This can be avoided by having two “universes”. You can have the tutorial T1 area and when you decide to leave it you’re not allowed back, but you unlock the other tiers for use in the field. I normally wouldn’t even consider that, but for some reason the developers made tier 1 ships very limited with their loadouts(no ship mods, weapon mods, weapon types and MANY active modules missing). Tier 2 can be competitive if loaded out right against Tier 3 and so on.

 

Yes gear will also become important. That’s usually the end-game for ANY game with looting systems. Sadly though I will say the developers will need to change how you obtain decent gear normally since it takes over two years of gameplay to unlock all Mk III equipment for just Tier 4. This also being on top of the loot nerf that makes finding gear for anything but the highest tier beyond useless.

Option 1, absolutely. This game have a BIG potential to go skyrocket.

Adding the EVE style of universe and introducing a different sector control mode is what i vote for.

Dont add the JumpGates too =) (I hate gate camping)

 

From a standpoint in which you don’t consider the current state of the game, just the “feel” of the universe, the Eve-like universe would be far superior. Being able to freely travel through and conquer territory in the universe would be the best choice, being stuck into your tier’s corner of the universe would definitely suck. But of course, there are things to consider. But even considering these, we can still find the Eve-like universe to be the best choice.

 

IMPORTANT: Note that most of the following includes mechanics and such that would come of universe choice, which is some ways is NOT directly relevant to this poll. This poll is about the general feel of the universe, not all the attached possible mechanical requirements that would come with that choice.

Eve-like Universe (option A)

Pros

  • Ability to conquer freely. You will not be restricted to conquering a small portion of the map based on your tier.
  • Leaves a zone for freelance pilots to fight in faction space, as well as the ability for there to be a small sector for brand new rank 1 players to start off.
  • Immersion is increased by far. Space is not disjointed.
  • Increased ship variety (see Note #1)
  • Removal of tier system. (see Note #1)
    Cons
  • Redesign of ship tree.
  • Currently lacking in modules to create much choice in each ship class.
    Notably, neither con are insurmountable. New modules are likely already planned to be added to the game and redesigning the ship tree is not a difficult task (except for the people who have to redesign the ship menu).

 

Note #1: Before you instantly balk at the idea of tier removal and ask why this is a pro, consider for a moment that it is not what you think. Removal of the tier system does not mean you will see “T4” ships flying alongside (and dominating) “T1” ships, this means the whole ship system will be redesigned to actually allow them to fly together fairly. Doing this would lead to increased ship variety, since we can’t have every ship serve the same purpose. To use Eve again as an example of this system, ships would be changed to fit the idea of each having their role, while the you start with a ship that serves a basic, generic function (don’t misread as useless), while the later ships begin to serve more focused and specialized functions. The new addition of Ship Roles coming out is already a huge step in this direction. Imagine for a moment the fighter roles. Lets add a Combat role for argument sake (middle of the road tank and damage). This could be the basic fighter. As you unlock further into the fighter tree, you could unlock a Command fighter, which specializes in buffing allies (in return for less damage than the others), a Gunship, which specializes in doing damage (in return for less tank than the others), or a Tackler, which specializes as an anti-interceptor role (in return for less tank and damage, but gaining ability to tackle). The basic role of fighter is not useless, and neither are the more specialized roles, they just server different purposes. All could fight together. Of course though, this is only 4 out of 12 fighters per faction. This means more unique and varied roles can be added to these other ships, possibly some being middle grounds between each main role, or different varieties of each role.

 

BlackProphecy-like Universe (option B)

Pros

  • Supports current game state.
    Cons
  • Fractures the player community (in a corp of 150 players, only 30 players can be in each tier at one time, assuming you recruit to average players per tier in an attempt to have your corp own territory in all of the game’s tiers and sectors, and the chances of more than 15 being on-line per tier at one time are low.
  • Ruins the idea of conquering space.
    And either:
  • New players will still get rolled over by experienced ones because if they want to control T1 space they will still fight in T1 ships.
    or
  • Once you reach max tier, you will be limited to fighting over only 20-25% of the entire universe (less if you exclude faction territory).
     

Aside from the benefit that the current game state would support this system, in the end it will simply fracture that community. Partitioning the community by tier will completely break corporations. If you are stuck in your tier, you cannot play with corp members of other tiers. As with the math in the bullet above, this also means that getting a full corp group at a certain tier to go out conquering territory will be extremely difficult. Also, this makes conquest only worth anything at max tier. Eventually any player will outgrow the lower tiers, and losing access to them, why conquer them in the first place? What is the point? There isn’t one. So no one cares about conquering 75% of space, while where it counts, only a fourth of the universe is conquerable. This is far from ideal.

 

Freelancer-like Universe (A proposed option C)

 

No pros/cons because this is essentially BlackProphecy-like Universe, but without locking you out of lower tiers. While this solves some of the problems, a few remain in this system. Namely, this system assumes Tiers are still in place. While this system is beautiful for PvE style of gameplay (which Freelancer mostly was), it does not benefit a PvP game, especially when it comes to conquest of territory. If, as a corporation, we want to own low tier territory, we will. Whether or not this forces us into lower tier ships is up for debate, but either way you will have experienced players rolling the new players in this system because it does not stop you from entering these lower tiered areas. Many people will still do this because ownership of territory is worth it, even at the expense of less rewards for doing so (or they will do it simply to grief new players, that is another concern).

From what i get, Basically your saying the universe should be like eve, have empire and 0,0 space.

 

I Agree with this, but i think that eve’s system suffers major problems, Things like how conquest is done in the game, and jump gates.

Jump gates were the cause of massive camping, really dont want to see blob wars in this game.

but not only 0,0, also highsec and lowsec

I’m all for open-world. So far the only arguments I’ve seen against it is newbie(New/inexperienced, not to be confused with noo b) hand holding. This can be avoided by having two “universes”. You can have the tutorial T1 area and when you decide to leave it you’re not allowed back, but you unlock the other tiers for use in the field. I normally wouldn’t even consider that, but for some reason the developers made tier 1 ships very limited with their loadouts(no ship mods, weapon mods, weapon types and MANY active modules missing). Tier 2 can be competitive if loaded out right against Tier 3 and so on.

The tier’s have the capability to be competitive within themselves. This is one of the things that Star Conflict has that is somewhat unique.

Consider this:

In a ranked ladder system we have an opportunity to rank pilots by skill.

When we increase in Tiers of ships, a couple of things happen. we gain more base stats. and we gain access to more active and passive ‘skills’ via modules. This is important to consider for a couple of reasons.

In a traditional MMO, or really any console RPG as well, the best gear acts as a reward from some large challenge. it’s your reward for tackling some of the most difficult/time consuming content the game has to offer.

Now, once you have that gear one thing happens: the margin of error to complete additional content decreases. This is one reason some guilds look for certain gear requirements. you can, to a degree, make up for lack of skill with certain gear. as you gain more power the level of skill needed to complete content is decreased. However this is a PvE scenario only.

in PvP, the same is true, but it’s relative. IE: if you and I both have T2 ships. but I have all Mk. I gear and you have all purples…well my skill level must be considerably higher than yours if i beat you in a pure 1v1 situation.

That being said, T1 matches have the opportunity to be the most competitive and balanced. simply because with such limited gear and ability choices, skill plays the most important factor in determining who wins. but this is mechanical ability, and not really knowledge of the game and all of its mechanics. it’s more accessible to players of all experience levels as well. a very mechanically able pilot could beat a 4 or 5 year veteran. but this isn’t to say experience doesn’t’ play a role. you can improve your mechanical ability through practice and experience.

Compare this to a T4 match. there are a lot of other factors. because there are so many more permutations for possible load outs, a new variable is added. That is, you have to understand your own loadout compared to other possible load outs. this primarily comes from experience (or studying/theory crafting). so matches at this level, while also skill based, will largely be determined by how experienced a player is rather than mechanical ability. IE: If i can use my abilities better than you, and counter your abilities it’s very likely I will beat you 1v1 despite being less mechanically able as a pilot.

T2 and T3 would be a mix of the two extremes. Doing away with the tier system removes this level of complexity, which is one of the reasons I oppose the removal and moving to a more open world.

 

From a standpoint in which you don’t consider the current state of the game, the Eve-like universe would be far superior. But of course, there are things to consider. But even considering these, we can still find the Eve-like universe to be the best choice.

Eve-like Universe (option A)

Pros

  • Ability to conquer freely. You will not be restricted to conquering a small portion of the map based on your tier.
  • Leaves a zone for freelance pilots to fight in faction space, as well as the ability for there to be a small sector for brand new rank 1 players to start off.
  • Immersion is increased by far. Space is not disjointed.
  • Increased ship variety (see Note #1)
  • Removal of tier system. (see Note #1)
    Cons
  • Redesign of ship tree.
  • Currently lacking in modules to create much choice in each ship class.
    Notably, neither con are insurmountable. New modules are likely already planned to be added to the game and redesigning the ship tree is not a difficult task (except for the people who have to redesign the ship menu).

 

Note #1: Before you instantly balk at the idea of tier removal and ask why this is a pro, consider for a moment that it is not what you think. Removal of the tier system does not mean you will see “T4” ships flying alongside (and dominating) “T1” ships, this means the whole ship system will be redesigned to actually allow them to fly together fairly. Doing this would lead to increased ship variety, since we can’t have every ship serve the same purpose. To use Eve again as an example of this system, ships would be changed to fit the idea of each having their role, while the you start with a ship that serves a basic, generic function (don’t misread as useless), while the later ships begin to serve more focused and specialized functions. The new addition of Ship Roles coming out is already a huge step in this direction. Imagine for a moment the fighter roles. Lets add a Combat role for argument sake (middle of the road tank and damage). This could be the basic fighter. As you unlock further into the fighter tree, you could unlock a Command fighter, which specializes in buffing allies (in return for less damage than the others), a Gunship, which specializes in doing damage (in return for less tank than the others), or a Tackler, which specializes as an anti-interceptor role (in return for less tank and damage, but gaining ability to tackle). The basic role of fighter is not useless, and neither are the more specialized roles, they just server different purposes. All could fight together. Of course though, this is only 4 out of 12 fighters per faction. This means more unique and varied roles can be added to these other ships, possibly some being middle grounds between each main role, or different varieties of each role.

 

 

 

Redesigns are expensive and take a lot of time. it would be easier to balance within the current tier system for two reasons.

  1. we already have data to support any changes

  2. each individual tier has a range of possible power. IE: you have a maximum and minimum DPS for each ship in a given Tier.


That being said, There are several advantages to removing the tier system. As you’ve pointed out, it can help alleviate the long MMing queue times. and to me, this is the only thing it can accomplish that tweaks to the Tier system can’t.

However, this is only a problem due to a low population of pilots. So to me the choice is

  1. do we mitigate the issues of bad game design (bad meaning you can’t retain players or attract new ones) by complete and total redesign/overhauls. starting over from square 1?

or

2)do we fix the core problems with/refine the existing system and therefore improve attraction and retention to gain new players?

#2 is almost always the fastest and will require the least amount of resources (man power, capitol, etc). from a business standpoint, this is what you want to do. So this is why I always try to propose changes with this in mind.

However, that being said, one of the games i’m currently testing (FFXIV) has done option 1. sweeping overhauls have happened, a completely new engine was developed. But this took 2 years of work, and they had two advantages: they had a workable game to hold the playerbase over and deep pockets so they could take a major hit in revenue while this happened. of course, anyone following the industry knows the position square enix is in, and why they would do something so drastic.

Also keep in mind, this game will compete in the same segment as Star Citizen. if it has any hope, it has to attract players now and build a population that will grow, or it will never be able to compete. a lot of people are playing this as a stepping stone to Star Citizen anyway. but if the game is good enough, they may play both, rather than dropping Star Conflict completely. so speed is of the essence.

 

BlackProphecy-like Universe (option B)

Pros

  • Supports current game state.
    Cons
  • Fractures the player community (in a corp of 150 players, only 30 players can be in each tier at one time, and the chances of more than 15 being on-line per tier at one time are low.
  • Ruins the idea of conquering space.
    And either:
  • New players will still get rolled over by experienced ones because if they want to control T1 space they will still fight in T1 ships.
    or
  • Once you reach max tier, you will be limited to fighting over only 20-25% of the entire universe (less if you exclude faction territory).
     

Aside from the benefit that the current game state would support this system, in the end it will simply fracture that community. Partitioning the community by tier will completely break corporations. If you are stuck in your tier, you cannot play with corp members of other tiers. As with the math in the bullet above, this also means that getting a full corp group at a certain tier to go out conquering territory will be extremely difficult. Also, this makes conquest only worth anything at max tier. Eventually any player will outgrow the lower tiers, and losing access to them, why conquer them in the first place? What is the point? There isn’t one. So no one cares about conquering 75% of space, while where it counts, only a fourth of the universe is conquerable. This is far from ideal.

 

 

I’m not sure I understand your arguments. they seem nonsensical to me. however I am not a part of a corporation and not 100% sure how anything there works.

  1. why would corporations be restricted by number of people in a given tier? why would players be assigned and restricted to a given tier and be unable to switch between them on the fly like unaligned pilots? IE: why can a corp only have 30 pilots in a given tier, and why can’t the pilots within that tier switch to another tier below them to fill any gaps? Keep in mind, corps will also have access to capital ships/dreadnoughts.

  2. Proper matchmaking along with a larger player base will alleviate the problem of highly experienced players rolling inexperienced players. you can’t tie this to the option. However you can say that a small player base will aggravate the system further by increasing queue times. (which is likely true, your statement isn’t) so what you really need to say is: if the game stays at a small population this system isn’t sustainable.

  3. i don’t understand how this ruins the idea of conquering space either. conquering space is one of the reasons restricting by tier is a good thing. it enforces people playing in all sectors, and not just the ones that offer the best rewards/are the only ones you have access to.

  4. Restricting sectors by tier also does something else: it populates the lowest tier of the queue with more players. In most games, there is a gradual shift to ‘end game’ or the highest tier. over time, you get little to no people playing lower tiers. 1) fewer people are trying the game, because they already have, or the market is saturated and you’re just not attracting any more people. This happens, it’s not strange or new or bad. and 2) there’s no incentive for higher tier players to ‘play down.’

 

Freelancer-like Universe (A proposed option C)

 

No pros/cons because this is essentially BlackProphecy-like Universe, but without locking you out of lower tiers. While this solves some of the problems, a few remain in this system. Namely, this system assumes Tiers are still in place. While this system is beautiful for PvE style of gameplay (which Freelancer mostly was), it does not benefit a PvP game, especially when it comes to conquest of territory. If, as a corporation, we want to own low tier territory, we will. Whether or not this forces us into lower tier ships is up for debate, but either way you will have experienced players rolling the new players in this system because it does not stop you from entering these lower tiered areas. Many people will still do this because ownership of territory is worth it, even at the expense of less rewards for doing so (or they will do it simply to grief new players, that is another concern).

I never played black prophecy. but if it locks you out of lower tiers after you pass them, than I would agree. you don’t want to lock people out of lower tiers. but it wouldn’t make any sense to do that, because it changes the current system for the worse. this is really more an implementation scheme for option 2.

alright let me take a stab at this and explain a few problems.j

 

First let me start by saying, There is no game right now that i am extremely happy with its system of how a universe is handled, but if there was one which is the closest, It would be 

x3 Universe.

 

It its a system which is extremely close to this game, and also supports free travel concepts like Eve online, which retaining uniqueness to races, and the ability to corporately own space.

Its layout also provides possibilities for corporations to progress the system they conquer into mining, trading, or even military nodes. For the reason, Hands down i believe this system is the game.

However, It has draw backs itself. For example, It has no real system of conquest for a stay system, its a concept that was poorly put together, and is really foreign to the game. 

 

that being said, it has a tier of ships (not a tier quing system) and i feel it is extremely important to differentiate against each of them, Because i am against Tier Matches,  not Tier ships.

I also believe that Tier ships should have limitation to them to some degree, and should not be more then 5-12.5% Differences between the lowest and highest tiers.

 

 

 

 

 

As for The closed System  (Black prophecy)

It i a system that I am very much against, not because of the layout of the game, But because of the sectioning off. 

As it was stated by another the feeling is limited, And There is no way to fix this.

Its Destructive to the community, to the motivation of progression through the game, And it devalues in came content.

And all of that just because people wanted what? To make newbs fight newbs?

 

Its a bit silly, The diversity in skill in the universe is what makes on empire / alliance powerful over another. IF everyone is equal all the time

the games content and pvp is going to be boring, progression

 

The list go’s on like this, over and over we see degradation of the game because of  people being attached to a dead game.

The system dident work there, and nor has it worked successfully in any game.

 

There are many ways to Motivate progression, So there for this being the cause,

 

This Current Tier systems Offers nothing unique or beneficial to the game,

What it does offer is the potential to destroy the game, and to cause and prolong many many problems.

@Uhmari: Agreed.

@Oni: Response below. Hidden because it is not entirely relevant to the overall purpose of the poll (i.e. more mechanical in nature than about what you want the world to be like, regardless of the mechanical changes it might require).

Redesigns are expensive and take a lot of time. it would be easier to balance within the current tier system for two reasons.

  1. we already have data to support any changes

  2. each individual tier has a range of possible power. IE: you have a maximum and minimum DPS for each ship in a given Tier.


That being said, There are several advantages to removing the tier system. As you’ve pointed out, it can help alleviate the long MMing queue times. and to me, this is the only thing it can accomplish that tweaks to the Tier system can’t.

However, this is only a problem due to a low population of pilots. So to me the choice is

  1. do we mitigate the issues of bad game design (bad meaning you can’t retain players or attract new ones) by complete and total redesign/overhauls. starting over from square 1?

or

2)do we fix the core problems with/refine the existing system and therefore improve attraction and retention to gain new players?

#2 is almost always the fastest and will require the least amount of resources (man power, capitol, etc). from a business standpoint, this is what you want to do. So this is why I always try to propose changes with this in mind.

However, that being said, one of the games i’m currently testing (FFXIV) has done option 1. sweeping overhauls have happened, a completely new engine was developed. But this took 2 years of work, and they had two advantages: they had a workable game to hold the playerbase over and deep pockets so they could take a major hit in revenue while this happened. of course, anyone following the industry knows the position square enix is in, and why they would do something so drastic.

Also keep in mind, this game will compete in the same segment as Star Citizen. if it has any hope, it has to attract players now and build a population that will grow, or it will never be able to compete. a lot of people are playing this as a stepping stone to Star Citizen anyway. but if the game is good enough, they may play both, rather than dropping Star Conflict completely. so speed is of the essence.

I totally agree that overhauls are expensive, time-consuming and generally bad. The thing is, this is not an overhaul. As a matter of fact they took a big step towards implementing this with the upcoming patch and the Ship Roles changes. The only thing they would also need to do is make more ship roles such that each ship is unique in its role and your done (factions would have the same ships, but some factional differences should be added somehow as well). This is aside from the fact they need to add more modules, and might want to remake the ui for the tech tree since it would no longer be tiered, but again that is not an overhaul of any sort. The total final implementation might take a month, but that is it.

I’m not sure I understand your arguments. they seem nonsensical to me. however I am not a part of a corporation and not 100% sure how anything there works.

  1. why would corporations be restricted by number of people in a given tier? why would players be assigned and restricted to a given tier and be unable to switch between them on the fly like unaligned pilots? IE: why can a corp only have 30 pilots in a given tier, and why can’t the pilots within that tier switch to another tier below them to fill any gaps? Keep in mind, corps will also have access to capital ships/dreadnoughts.

  2. Proper matchmaking along with a larger player base will alleviate the problem of highly experienced players rolling inexperienced players. you can’t tie this to the option. However you can say that a small player base will aggravate the system further by increasing queue times. (which is likely true, your statement isn’t) so what you really need to say is: if the game stays at a small population this system isn’t sustainable.

  3. i don’t understand how this ruins the idea of conquering space either. conquering space is one of the reasons restricting by tier is a good thing. it enforces people playing in all sectors, and not just the ones that offer the best rewards/are the only ones you have access to.

  4. Restricting sectors by tier also does something else: it populates the lowest tier of the queue with more players. In most games, there is a gradual shift to ‘end game’ or the highest tier. over time, you get little to no people playing lower tiers. 1) fewer people are trying the game, because they already have, or the market is saturated and you’re just not attracting any more people. This happens, it’s not strange or new or bad. and 2) there’s no incentive for higher tier players to ‘play down.’

Sorry, I failed to explain the reason behind that :stuck_out_tongue: It is an average. Assume that you have 5 tiers, and either A: have an average number of players or B: Have recruited such that you have players available in equal amounts in each tier. In other words, out of 150 players / 5 tiers, you can recruit 30 players per tier to accomodate the locked space such that you corp can have a presence in them all. Basically the point of it is that forcing people to only fight in a small portion of the game’s world based on their tier is silly, when as a corp and player you would like to be able to take territory in any part of the game’s world, and thus in any tier. Instead you are forced into your 20% of the world because of your current tier. As for the rewards, if we removed tiers there would be no reward difference, so it would not matter, make equal incentive to fight over the entire game’s territory, maybe give a few, equally spread, “better” sectors as a goal to fight towards (like PlanetSide2).

 

I never played black prophecy. but if it locks you out of lower tiers after you pass them, than I would agree. you don’t want to lock people out of lower tiers. but it wouldn’t make any sense to do that, because it changes the current system for the worse. this is really more an implementation scheme for option 2.

Black Prophecy is option 2 :stuck_out_tongue:

  1. required: PVE has no influence over parts of world accessible. 

  2. Allegiance: Faction and subfaction determine baseline of accessible worlds.

  3. Border: Battles are fought at contested worlds. Access determined by distance from accessible worlds (fuel).

3.5 hidden fuel depots can be unlocked, earned, deployed and destroyed. 

  1. uncontested world: inaccessible unless contested by corporations or factions. 

  2. Tiers irrelevant. Enter combat in world defended by a tier 4 group. Face consequences. 

EvE with Star Conflict-controls would be nice. mining, trading, more different ship-classes, a huge universe, crafting, pve/pvp-missions (contracts?) available on stations in the universe… :slight_smile:

Agreed, but can we keep the politics a little lower key and a few less spreadsheets. I think the Star-Conflict controls will prevent this of course :slight_smile:

I vision the universe operating much like in X3 universe.

 

There They used a reputation system also. As you progressed, you gain access to more of a races ships.

Specials modules required special licenses. (like military grade weapons).

 

Other then that the universe was like in eve, Can go anywhere, at anytime, But it had a black-prophecy Style Map.

Looked like this (partial view)

selectsector.jpg

 

 

As you can see it has systems like eve, Nice flat map, Easy to do.

 

 

Here is a system from x3, of a ship. In orbit of a planet much like in this game

 

mzl.zvedsrja.800x500-75.jpg