Ships 2.0 Time Commitment: Going Backwards for Top Players?!

2Next

Replies

  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    Options
    CaptainRex wrote: »
    Yeah that comment confused me as well. I haven't spent more than 2 minutes on a ship battle in a long time.

    Not a fan of the changes so far (excluding the PVE table, and I'm reserving my final judgement until it's released, obviously). I was hoping for new ships to spice things up (they want to change things, but with the limited number of ships available, there's not a whole lot you can do).

    Here's what's going to happen. They'll re-arrange everything (3 ships to start with, hardware,etc) , people will theory-craft for a week, maybe 2, then we'll be back to the same old stale RNG-fest (stale as in everyone is running the same team, not the gameplay, I enjoy that).
    Here's hoping I'm wrong.

    You forgot the cursory OMG facepalm "wow we never intended to make the game worse" rollback after the rage hits

    Players ask for X
    CG gives you crappy y
    people whine on forum devs do nothing
    ???
    CG Profit

  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    Options
    been listening to a few of the GC interviews... interviewees kept saying this was in no small part due to wanting to shorten the ships battles from 7.5 to 5 minutes...

    almost all battles i've been involved in take 1 minute, 1:30 tops... one of the devs on Warrior's interview just stated most battles will now be around 3 minutes... so in essence, you're ADDING 2 minutes to a battle vs. removing 2.5.... geeeeeeeeee thanks. if timing is your intent, shorten to lag between battles to 5 minutes and save us all 1/2 hour at payout.

    I would love to see the fleet you’ve assembled that is able to in 30 seconds take out the opposing fleet. Or are you one of the top 3 mafia that just rotated turns so you are only facing a single fighter and Capital Ship at payout time?

    lol Burgens
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    Options
    Arnold says he does not play ships that much...seems like he does NOT have a time consumption issue. Most players posting all saying battles are over quick and easy... NO reason for the change...

    Oh wait... ppl who just turned level 65 with garbag ships and fleets or long tme level 85's with garbage ships and fleets can't understand why these battles take so long....Biggs OP blah blah....

    Overriding response on his forum in 10 different threads is that there was not a time issue.....but that will always be used as their "sucker play" to make people think the change was needed.....
  • Jeric
    271 posts Member
    Options
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    Arnold says he does not play ships that much...seems like he does NOT have a time consumption issue. Most players posting all saying battles are over quick and easy... NO reason for the change...

    Oh wait... ppl who just turned level 65 with garbag ships and fleets or long tme level 85's with garbage ships and fleets can't understand why these battles take so long....Biggs OP blah blah....

    Overriding response on his forum in 10 different threads is that there was not a time issue.....but that will always be used as their "sucker play" to make people think the change was needed.....

    Or it's possible that their lifecycle team identied the time expense as a liability for the when it comes to newer players.
  • Options
    Since an overwhelming majority of players can’t be top players, the overwhelming majority will not care about those players.

    And yes, I’m saying that to annoy the top players
  • Jeric
    271 posts Member
    Options
    IronCross wrote: »
    Since an overwhelming majority of players can’t be top players, the overwhelming majority will not care about those players.

    And yes, I’m saying that to annoy the top players

    It's a valid point, motivation aside. Even accounting for whales and dolphins as not all whales and dolphins can consistently reach top spots for a variety of factors. Changing up the gameplay when you have the arena settled at the top ishe most efficient way of appealing to the greatest amount of people, paying and non-paying.
  • Options
    If you are winning your battles in 60 seconds, the battle isn’t interesting. I’d be happy to suck up 2-3 minute battles if the strategy is interesting
  • Options
    Well, it’s not like we never asked for more ships or more ship content. For the peeps complaining that it’s all the same squads- that’s on the devs, not players.
    Ship battles also got so much quicker after Chim.

    My hope with this new format is that they stick with it. Don’t make a huge change - drop the mic- and forget all about it again.
  • Jeric
    271 posts Member
    Options
    In a dynamic game or software, there is no such thing as 'forgotten elements'. That's just poor game design for this genre of game. It needs to be constantly evaluated for growth opportunities, and it absolutely will be for the entire life if this game if professional experience tells me anything.
  • Options
    I can’t see anything changing for older shards unless they release new ships. Everyone in our top 30 can beat everyone. We all have lev 85, 7 star ships with g11/12 pilots. Finishing top 3 is about being online for final hour to climb. New mechanics will scramble things up for a couple weeks, then will be back to same old, same old unless we get new ships.
  • Options
    I would love to see the fleet you’ve assembled that is able to in 30 seconds take out the opposing fleet. Or are you one of the top 3 mafia that just rotated turns so you are only facing a single fighter and Capital Ship at payout time?

    I get first in my fleet shard consistently, I use the same fleet as him; Biggs, ITF, FOTF, Vader, Reaper, Scimitar as first reinforcement.

    I've ended battles in under a minute when the computer opens by shooting at my ITF and it dodges making Chimaera go next to AoE their team and push their meters back and it just snowballs from there.

  • Options
    I struggle to crack the top 20 so im hoping this helps
  • Goodgil
    349 posts Member
    edited April 2018
    Options
    I think at least a part of the change is due to the fact ship combat has gone too fast for top players.

    When you have 3 TIEs focusing damage, Biggs soaking up damage, and Reaper preventing reinforcements, it's hard to find anything that counters it.

    In 3v3, it's going to be harder to find such a combo... Do you would prefer to skip Biggs protection? Reaper's TMR? The TIEs damage?

    This way, they can finally start introducing some new ship mechanics, with having to go to either power creep or nurfs.

    Edit: typos
    Post edited by Goodgil on
  • Rapid
    421 posts Member
    Options
    3v3 to me sounds like RNG will play an even bigger role...
    Rapid wrote: »
    By reducing the battles to 3 v 3...

    Battles will not be 3 v 3.

    They will start at 3 v 3.


    There's a difference.

    Yes. If you read my post I explained that exactly. Namely that every capital would bring a reinforcement in first. Thanks for your contribution...
  • Rapid
    421 posts Member
    Options
    @Depablo very good point on why they might be reducing the timer. I hadn't thought of that!
  • Options
    A year ago the top 10 people in my ship shard had 5 maxed out ships.
    6 months ago the top 50 people in my ship shard had 5 maxed out ships.
    Today, the top 200 people in my ship shard have the exact same 5 maxed out ships.

    There is no skill left in ships. Who wins comes down 100% to who gets the better RNG. All of the reward of having worked hard to get good ships has been stripped away.

    I don't know what the solution is, but I know it isn't to reduce the number of ships needed to 3, so the top 2000 people have the same exact maxed out 3 ships.
  • Nikoms565
    14242 posts Member
    Options
    been listening to a few of the GC interviews... interviewees kept saying this was in no small part due to wanting to shorten the ships battles from 7.5 to 5 minutes...

    almost all battles i've been involved in take 1 minute, 1:30 tops... one of the devs on Warrior's interview just stated most battles will now be around 3 minutes... so in essence, you're ADDING 2 minutes to a battle vs. removing 2.5.... geeeeeeeeee thanks. if timing is your intent, shorten to lag between battles to 5 minutes and save us all 1/2 hour at payout.

    I would love to see the fleet you’ve assembled that is able to in 30 seconds take out the opposing fleet. Or are you one of the top 3 mafia that just rotated turns so you are only facing a single fighter and Capital Ship at payout time?

    :D

    I love when newer players who have been playing less than a year try to make sarcastic posts about veteran players who have played for 2+ years....and they clearly have no idea what they are talking about.
    In game name: Lucas Gregory FORMER PLAYER - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Gorem
    1190 posts Member
    Options
    I just started hitting top 10 this week with a team of power 120k, which can beat teams of power 170k, and I gotta say, I don't take that long at all in my fights even at my level.

    Essentially to me it sucks that ship battles will now take longer to complete, I was already beating them fast enough beforehand, no idea why they decided to "improve" ship battle time by making it take longer.
  • Options
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    been listening to a few of the GC interviews... interviewees kept saying this was in no small part due to wanting to shorten the ships battles from 7.5 to 5 minutes...

    almost all battles i've been involved in take 1 minute, 1:30 tops... one of the devs on Warrior's interview just stated most battles will now be around 3 minutes... so in essence, you're ADDING 2 minutes to a battle vs. removing 2.5.... geeeeeeeeee thanks. if timing is your intent, shorten to lag between battles to 5 minutes and save us all 1/2 hour at payout.

    I would love to see the fleet you’ve assembled that is able to in 30 seconds take out the opposing fleet. Or are you one of the top 3 mafia that just rotated turns so you are only facing a single fighter and Capital Ship at payout time?

    :D

    I love when newer players who have been playing less than a year try to make sarcastic posts about veteran players who have played for 2+ years....and they clearly have no idea what they are talking about.

    This ^

    SnakesOnAPlane
  • Ender22
    1194 posts Member
    Options
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    been listening to a few of the GC interviews... interviewees kept saying this was in no small part due to wanting to shorten the ships battles from 7.5 to 5 minutes...

    almost all battles i've been involved in take 1 minute, 1:30 tops... one of the devs on Warrior's interview just stated most battles will now be around 3 minutes... so in essence, you're ADDING 2 minutes to a battle vs. removing 2.5.... geeeeeeeeee thanks. if timing is your intent, shorten to lag between battles to 5 minutes and save us all 1/2 hour at payout.

    I would love to see the fleet you’ve assembled that is able to in 30 seconds take out the opposing fleet. Or are you one of the top 3 mafia that just rotated turns so you are only facing a single fighter and Capital Ship at payout time?

    :D

    I love when newer players who have been playing less than a year try to make sarcastic posts about veteran players who have played for 2+ years....and they clearly have no idea what they are talking about.

    Haha yeah... “I’ve been playing for a long time now, been level 85 for a few months...”
  • Options
    Chewychuck wrote: »
    If you are winning your battles in 60 seconds, the battle isn’t interesting. I’d be happy to suck up 2-3 minute battles if the strategy is interesting

    What strategy are you talking about? The mechanics of the game are such that at the end of the day, RNG prevails.

    You can have the best strategy, if your opponent has twice the damage output that you have, because of "bad RNG", there is little strategy can do.
  • danrussoa
    964 posts Member
    Options
    I won't pay attention to ships until Han Solo is associated with the ****.
Sign In or Register to comment.