Board Index | Search | Profile |
Page 4 of 6 |
[ 79 posts ] | Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next |
Print view | Previous topic | Next topic |
Author | Message |
---|---|
Member
Team:
Rank: Officer Main: topbuzzz Level: 8015 Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:31 pm Posts: 4347 |
If we had legions of people converting to p2p because they can cap bases I would agree, but where are they?
|
Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:31 am |
|
Contributor
Team:
Rank: Soldier Main: Hober Mallow Level: 4888 Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:08 pm Posts: 3191 |
andezrhode2a wrote: This game shouldn't worry about losing one customer. They should worry about the rates of which free users convert to premium customers. If this mechanic leads to less converted free users, then of course it should be reconsidered. But in this case, you have a player who has been here for a long time. You seriously can't expect a gaming company to cater this one player and remove said game mechanic just because he played his game poorly. If anything the development of this game needs to stop catering all the existing subscribing players and focus on what I mentioned earlier. If you can't get new players to subscribe, you'll eventually run out of existing subscribing players, because somewhere down the line they will no longer subscribe, be it because of a game mechanic, their real life situation or some other factor. Catering existing subscribers on a player-to-player basis with a customer service that borders insanity just prolongs an inevitable death of this game. Put the focus on those who have never subscribed, and find out why they aren't subscribing. That should be first priority for Jeff_L, in my opinion. Truer words have not been spoken in a long time. sabre198 wrote: If we had legions of people converting to p2p because they can cap bases I would agree, but where are they? They aren't here because this game is mind numbingly frustrating at the early levels. As a new player you don't know how the AI work, you don't have an intrinsic understanding of weapon ranges, and there is no explanation of the User Interface... You can't do shit by yourself as a new player once you hit a certain level without using Drones/Slaves. You're forced to play with Slaves (which aren't explained to you at all) and Drones (Which are barely explained to you). Missions aren't working. Some missions don't tell you exactly what you should do. The galaxy map bugs out sometimes and does this weird thing where it will infinitely zoom out instead of going to the galaxy you're in now. Building Academy is in Warp 1 instead of in the Nexus where it belongs. There is no explanation of what is possible in the game at early levels, you're thrown in with no idea of what you can and cannot do. Even Minecraft/GTA/System Shock/Sim City/NameAnySandboxGameYouWant makes sure you understand everything that can/may/will happen... _________________ http://www.starsonata.com/suggestions |
Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:55 pm |
|
Team:
Rank: Officer Main: number666.5 Level: 8923 Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 4:12 pm Posts: 3457 Location: nowhere |
Antilzah wrote: Dom wrote: Perhaps PvP ranges should be based on coreskill levels then? /me creates high level base builder alts with core skills at 9. and find out you can only use adonis gear on your bases? dont think its that useful _________________ Valkyrie300 wrote: You need to thoroughly think before sprouting exaggerated statements |
Tue Nov 11, 2014 6:04 pm |
|
Team:
Rank: Councilor Main: Llessur Level: 3931 Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 4:26 pm Posts: 902 Location: Feilding, New Zealand |
andezrhode2a wrote: This game shouldn't worry about losing one customer. They should worry about the rates of which free users convert to premium customers. If this mechanic leads to less converted free users, then of course it should be reconsidered. But in this case, you have a player who has been here for a long time. You seriously can't expect a gaming company to cater this one player and remove said game mechanic just because he played his game poorly. If anything the development of this game needs to stop catering all the existing subscribing players and focus on what I mentioned earlier. If you can't get new players to subscribe, you'll eventually run out of existing subscribing players, because somewhere down the line they will no longer subscribe, be it because of a game mechanic, their real life situation or some other factor. Catering existing subscribers on a player-to-player basis with a customer service that borders insanity just prolongs an inevitable death of this game. Put the focus on those who have never subscribed, and find out why they aren't subscribing. That should be first priority for Jeff_L, in my opinion. I agree but it is NOT about losing only only one customer is it. It is about losing large number of customers every time there is a decent war. The reason is not because "they lost the war and their egos are hurt" but because of the losses incurred to due to base capping. or having to spend day and night playing SS defending bases. Some people have a life you know. I wonder how PvB fans would react if their ships could be capped like bases can. It would certainly be a quick way to get a nice T22 ship Further the present system makes small/ medium level teams very vulnerable. If a team attacks a small team bases alone are insufficient to defend against high tech well organised attackers. Defenders have to be available 24/7, attackers can attack whenever it suits them. But even if you lose a war, what hurts is not losing your galaxy, you can rebuild or get another gal. It is losing your gear/builds from capping. The new, disposable base gear system goes some way to allieviate this problem BUT the gear is so SLOW to build so you are vulnerable for a very long time. BTW it seems to be geared to high resource systems (high DF) I actually gave up on trying to build T16 Y/Z gear in DF 70 as I was using all the resources of a galaxy to upgrade one base. As far as attracting new players is concerned I totally agree that a way of attacting new players is needed but I dont think it is an "either /or" situation you can do both here. As for the quality of new content I have to give the Admins the thumbs up here. After levellling multiple accounts as a ptp and being inactive for about a year. Four of us regoined as ftps to see how SS was going. We all enjoyed the low level stuff and quickly levelled to 1k in one uni with at least a couple of characters. Where we ran into problems was the second uni, most of us had done all the Earthforce content (the old bosses included) so the issue was where from here. The next logical step was to go ptp and activate our old accounts , but a series of problems arose: 1/ The SP/Traders war showed us that teams were still being rolled. Yes I know that SP built poor quality bases and they had literally been doing that for years, relying on their rep to protect them. 2/ The base upgrade was not what we had hoped, bases could still be capped and gear lost. Two of us decided that not enough had changed to resub. One simply went inactive. I was not prepared to join another team yet or resub as a single player team. |
Sat Nov 15, 2014 11:16 pm |
|
over 9000!
Main: enkelin
Level: 5600 Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:28 pm Posts: 11109 |
I read your whole reply, Russell, and it's well thought-out, but I am struggling to understand something: you say the base rebalance wasn't what you were hoping for, but how exactly could it be accomplished to keep noob bases as safe as you are wanting without making territorial war completely impossible to wage?
_________________ Hi, I'm Anil, a long-time player turned developer. I am Star Sonata's lead content developer, which means that I run weekly dev meetings and make sure that any proposed changes to the game receive proper review before going live. http://www.starsonata.com/features |
Sat Nov 15, 2014 11:57 pm |
|
Team:
Rank: Soldier Main: LemonPrime Level: 8087 Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:14 pm Posts: 5747 |
I find it laughable that you're so upset about bases being capped. It takes a week to finish X gear. Once that happens, take off all your "expensive" base gear and stop caring if they try to kill your gal. If you aug it correctly and lay enough grem, its' nearly impossible to pvb a good galaxy.
If someone wants to invest kits to BvB, by all means let them. Show them you can defend and they won't waste more kits on your gal. DF70 isn't exactly a high value target to waste time on anyways. _________________ Lemon/Meo |
Sun Nov 16, 2014 1:40 am |
|
Contributor
Team:
Rank: Soldier Main: Hober Mallow Level: 4888 Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:08 pm Posts: 3191 |
anilv wrote: I read your whole reply, Russell, and it's well thought-out, but I am struggling to understand something: you say the base rebalance wasn't what you were hoping for, but how exactly could it be accomplished to keep noob bases as safe as you are wanting without making territorial war completely impossible to wage? He doesn't care about PvP or BvB, I was around back when Russell was playing years ago. And thats fine. If you aren't able to build X gear then maybe you should think about building in higher DFs? Like Wildspace? There are a lot of planets with Loads of resources that no one touches. Wildspace is like the Wild Wild West atm... _________________ http://www.starsonata.com/suggestions |
Sun Nov 16, 2014 9:23 am |
|
Team:
Rank: Soldier Main: LemonPrime Level: 8087 Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:14 pm Posts: 5747 |
MasterTrader wrote: anilv wrote: I read your whole reply, Russell, and it's well thought-out, but I am struggling to understand something: you say the base rebalance wasn't what you were hoping for, but how exactly could it be accomplished to keep noob bases as safe as you are wanting without making territorial war completely impossible to wage? He doesn't care about PvP or BvB, I was around back when Russell was playing years ago. And thats fine. If you aren't able to build X gear then maybe you should think about building in higher DFs? Like Wildspace? There are a lot of planets with Loads of resources that no one touches. Wildspace is like the Wild Wild West atm... The entire north center of Wild Space is totally open lol. Make your team space! _________________ Lemon/Meo |
Sun Nov 16, 2014 5:15 pm |
|
Team:
Rank: Councilor Main: Llessur Level: 3931 Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 4:26 pm Posts: 902 Location: Feilding, New Zealand |
anilv wrote: I read your whole reply, Russell, and it's well thought-out, but I am struggling to understand something: you say the base rebalance wasn't what you were hoping for, but how exactly could it be accomplished to keep noob bases as safe as you are wanting without making territorial war completely impossible to wage? Simple, dead bases cannot own galaxies, and do not stop other people owning. Just remove the base capping and allow the defeated team to remove their gear unmolested. This would work well for bvb as the siege kits could own the gal, there would have to be an automatic end of the war status and a few days to remove gear before war could be reinstated if desired. That would require a small bit of coding I suppose. You would need a compulsory peace as I have seen a victorious team target a defeated team trying to evacuate gear off bases, preventing them and then taking the full bases over when they became "abandoned". Pirates (PvB) would have no incentive to kill noob bases as there would be no loot. In the past I have seen pirates totally destroy a mid-ranked team. All the bases were simply capped and looted. The defeated team was "The League of Gentlemen" I believe, I didnt see them again. |
Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:34 am |
|
over 9000!
Main: enkelin
Level: 5600 Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:28 pm Posts: 11109 |
Russell wrote: anilv wrote: I read your whole reply, Russell, and it's well thought-out, but I am struggling to understand something: you say the base rebalance wasn't what you were hoping for, but how exactly could it be accomplished to keep noob bases as safe as you are wanting without making territorial war completely impossible to wage? Simple, dead bases cannot own galaxies, and do not stop other people owning. Just remove the base capping and allow the defeated team to remove their gear unmolested. This would work well for bvb as the siege kits could own the gal, there would have to be an automatic end of the war status and a few days to remove gear before war could be reinstated if desired. That would require a small bit of coding I suppose. You would need a compulsory peace as I have seen a victorious team target a defeated team trying to evacuate gear off bases, preventing them and then taking the full bases over when they became "abandoned". Pirates (PvB) would have no incentive to kill noob bases as there would be no loot. In the past I have seen pirates totally destroy a mid-ranked team. All the bases were simply capped and looted. The defeated team was "The League of Gentlemen" I believe, I didnt see them again. I don't understand your obsession with losing base gear. These noob teams you are talking about are free to use Anda/Achilles gear which is almost completely worthless and trivial to replace. Have you looked at the stats lately? The vanilla Anda/Achilles stuff has been beefed drastically. It just really feels like you are carrying on arguing a point that has been made moot by the base rebalance. _________________ Hi, I'm Anil, a long-time player turned developer. I am Star Sonata's lead content developer, which means that I run weekly dev meetings and make sure that any proposed changes to the game receive proper review before going live. http://www.starsonata.com/features |
Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:39 am |
|
Contributor
Team:
Rank: Soldier Main: Hober Mallow Level: 4888 Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:08 pm Posts: 3191 |
anilv wrote: Russell wrote: anilv wrote: I read your whole reply, Russell, and it's well thought-out, but I am struggling to understand something: you say the base rebalance wasn't what you were hoping for, but how exactly could it be accomplished to keep noob bases as safe as you are wanting without making territorial war completely impossible to wage? Simple, dead bases cannot own galaxies, and do not stop other people owning. Just remove the base capping and allow the defeated team to remove their gear unmolested. This would work well for bvb as the siege kits could own the gal, there would have to be an automatic end of the war status and a few days to remove gear before war could be reinstated if desired. That would require a small bit of coding I suppose. You would need a compulsory peace as I have seen a victorious team target a defeated team trying to evacuate gear off bases, preventing them and then taking the full bases over when they became "abandoned". Pirates (PvB) would have no incentive to kill noob bases as there would be no loot. In the past I have seen pirates totally destroy a mid-ranked team. All the bases were simply capped and looted. The defeated team was "The League of Gentlemen" I believe, I didnt see them again. I don't understand your obsession with losing base gear. These noob teams you are talking about are free to use Anda/Achilles gear which is almost completely worthless and trivial to replace. Have you looked at the stats lately? The vanilla Anda/Achilles stuff has been beefed drastically. It just really feels like you are carrying on arguing a point that has been made moot by the base rebalance. Its not just the Anda/Achilles gear he's referring to. He's talking about extractors and other things as well. He doesn't want to lose anything if his bases are destroyed. _________________ http://www.starsonata.com/suggestions |
Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:35 am |
|
Team:
Rank: Soldier Main: LemonPrime Level: 8087 Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:14 pm Posts: 5747 |
I recommend building strong galaxies, and then you don't lose anything at all.
_________________ Lemon/Meo |
Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:38 am |
|
Member
Team:
Rank: Officer Main: topbuzzz Level: 8015 Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:31 pm Posts: 4347 |
ELITE wrote: I recommend building strong galaxies, and then you don't lose anything at all. "how exactly could it be accomplished to keep noob bases as safe as you are wanting without making territorial war completely impossible to wage?" |
Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:44 am |
|
Team:
Rank: Soldier Main: LemonPrime Level: 8087 Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:14 pm Posts: 5747 |
sabre198 wrote: ELITE wrote: I recommend building strong galaxies, and then you don't lose anything at all. "how exactly could it be accomplished to keep noob bases as safe as you are wanting without making territorial war completely impossible to wage?" Correction then. Make galaxies strong enough that the attackers have to commit the same amount of resources that you put into it. That generally stops BvB attempts as the galaxy is only worth the cost if you maintain it for a good chunk of the uni. _________________ Lemon/Meo |
Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:51 am |
|
Member
Team:
Rank: Officer Main: topbuzzz Level: 8015 Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:31 pm Posts: 4347 |
I have read your sentence 5 times and it still doesnt make sense, well done.
So noob team has a gal that has a strength value X, what if pirate team can destroy strength X easily? How does that stop BVB attempts as you say. |
Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:59 am |
|
Page 4 of 6 |
[ 79 posts ] | Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next |
All times are UTC - 5 hours |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests |
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum |