Theres hope, CG just responded to the STR feedback... I cant renember which was first, STR or shipsminus2, because both were ages ago, but finally, somethings happening there.
The Sith Raid happened before ships failed rework, so maybe ships is next? It is good to see them finally showing they are seeing the feedback though, and not ignoring it, or the naïve person above who wrote "Disagree". They can't disagree with feedback, that'd not how feedback works, lol.
CG Employee: CG Manager! this post says we cant disagree with feedback.
CG Manager: NicWester gives feedback that ships 2.0 is better. Cant disagree with that? Ok then! BYE FORUMS
CG Employee: Wait! Nikoms565 says that ships 2.0 is terrible as feedback
CG Manager: Actually i was trying to point out how terrible that idea is.
CG Employee: Oh.
Except that when they've posted here it's been to say that on the whole, battles are shorter, more people are engaging, and there's a greater fluidity in ranks. I get that you don't like it, that's not in dispute, but when they say their goals were to make things faster and get more players doing more than one battle a day and that's what's happening, why would you think they'd change it?
Empirically I see more variation in starting lineups than before the change as well--that's just one leaderboard out of a whole bunch, so I'm not going to say it's true everywhere, though.
The only thing that needs to change is that Endurance needs to be brought up to par with the other capital ships and we need more ships and capital ships added with an expedited release cadence so they can be brought into the mix faster. A couple more Galactic Republic ships with implicit synergy with Endurance would solve both problems.
Theres hope, CG just responded to the STR feedback... I cant renember which was first, STR or shipsminus2, because both were ages ago, but finally, somethings happening there.
The Sith Raid happened before ships failed rework, so maybe ships is next? It is good to see them finally showing they are seeing the feedback though, and not ignoring it, or the naïve person above who wrote "Disagree". They can't disagree with feedback, that'd not how feedback works, lol.
CG Employee: CG Manager! this post says we cant disagree with feedback.
CG Manager: NicWester gives feedback that ships 2.0 is better. Cant disagree with that? Ok then! BYE FORUMS
CG Employee: Wait! Nikoms565 says that ships 2.0 is terrible as feedback
CG Manager: Actually i was trying to point out how terrible that idea is.
CG Employee: Oh.
Except that when they've posted here it's been to say that on the whole, battles are shorter, more people are engaging, and there's a greater fluidity in ranks. I get that you don't like it, that's not in dispute, but when they say their goals were to make things faster and get more players doing more than one battle a day and that's what's happening, why would you think they'd change it?
Empirically I see more variation in starting lineups than before the change as well--that's just one leaderboard out of a whole bunch, so I'm not going to say it's true everywhere, though.
The only thing that needs to change is that Endurance needs to be brought up to par with the other capital ships and we need more ships and capital ships added with an expedited release cadence so they can be brought into the mix faster. A couple more Galactic Republic ships with implicit synergy with Endurance would solve both problems.
i do like it. I was mocking the idea that every single feedback should be counted just because its feedback. Sorry about the confusion
Theres hope, CG just responded to the STR feedback... I cant renember which was first, STR or shipsminus2, because both were ages ago, but finally, somethings happening there.
The Sith Raid happened before ships failed rework, so maybe ships is next? It is good to see them finally showing they are seeing the feedback though, and not ignoring it, or the naïve person above who wrote "Disagree". They can't disagree with feedback, that'd not how feedback works, lol.
CG Employee: CG Manager! this post says we cant disagree with feedback.
CG Manager: NicWester gives feedback that ships 2.0 is better. Cant disagree with that? Ok then! BYE FORUMS
CG Employee: Wait! Nikoms565 says that ships 2.0 is terrible as feedback
CG Manager: Actually i was trying to point out how terrible that idea is.
CG Employee: Oh.
Except that when they've posted here it's been to say that on the whole, battles are shorter, more people are engaging, and there's a greater fluidity in ranks. I get that you don't like it, that's not in dispute, but when they say their goals were to make things faster and get more players doing more than one battle a day and that's what's happening, why would you think they'd change it?
Empirically I see more variation in starting lineups than before the change as well--that's just one leaderboard out of a whole bunch, so I'm not going to say it's true everywhere, though.
The only thing that needs to change is that Endurance needs to be brought up to par with the other capital ships and we need more ships and capital ships added with an expedited release cadence so they can be brought into the mix faster. A couple more Galactic Republic ships with implicit synergy with Endurance would solve both problems.
i do like it. I was mocking the idea that every single feedback should be counted just because its feedback. Sorry about the confusion
Ah, fair enough. And sorry about getting on my hind legs about it
I know it won't change though..."CG/EA - ignoring your feedback since August 2017, because we know better."
There's a difference between ignoring your feedback and disagreeing with your feedback.
No doubt. And since CG/EA's communication on this topic and many others in the past 6 months has been virtually non-existent, it's clearly the former, not the latter.
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*
I know it won't change though..."CG/EA - ignoring your feedback since August 2017, because we know better."
There's a difference between ignoring your feedback and disagreeing with your feedback.
No doubt. And since CG/EA's communication on this topic and many others in the past 6 months has been virtually non-existent, it's clearly the former, not the latter.
Not really. Every game company does this. They make one reply every now and again, then go quiet--complainy players never change their minds, so any "discussion" becomes one-way very fast.
Ok, let me explain what I meant since apparently its hard for people to understand, and by that I mean I must be too old/smart for this:
They can't disagree with feedback because its feedback. When you say "I don't like this" it means you don't like it, its how "you" feel. ie "you". When you say you like something, "you" like that something. Its basically like saying no one else is somehow allowed to have an opinion.
You can't pick and choose who to disagree and who to agree with, you take them both and weigh your options, find compromises. Just because you like Ships, and others don't, doesn't change anything. What matters is the majority, and if you are not blind, you can see the majority hate ships 2.0, and many have posted ideas on ways it can be fixed, many many idea's. Which has been given as feedback, which of course is actual ideas on how to fix the thing, and guess what, this feedback and involves improvement?
Comes from people who don't like the thing. The feedback given from people who like it? No improvements.
I'm quite glad this generation is not like the world was in the past, Fire for light? We don't need electricity and light, we already have fire torches, that's enough.
Ok, let me explain what I meant since apparently its hard for people to understand, and by that I mean I must be too old/smart for this:
They can't disagree with feedback because its feedback. When you say "I don't like this" it means you don't like it, its how "you" feel. ie "you". When you say you like something, "you" like that something. Its basically like saying no one else is somehow allowed to have an opinion.
You can't pick and choose who to disagree and who to agree with, you take them both and weigh your options, find compromises. Just because you like Ships, and others don't, doesn't change anything. What matters is the majority, and if you are not blind, you can see the majority hate ships 2.0, and many have posted ideas on ways it can be fixed, many many idea's. Which has been given as feedback, which of course is actual ideas on how to fix the thing, and guess what, this feedback and involves improvement?
Comes from people who don't like the thing. The feedback given from people who like it? No improvements.
I'm quite glad this generation is not like the world was in the past, Fire for light? We don't need electricity and light, we already have fire torches, that's enough.
Except I could say the majority left the forums a long time ago disliking it, and what remains could be a loud minority that is now the majority. Claiming majority status is debatable, since last I checked on Android there were more than 10 million downloads. No where near that are the forums, 1% would be lucky. Fun topic, but doesn't really signify anything. My bet is CG has better data points to measure involvement than only relying on feedback from the forums. The changes in HSR could coincide with internal metrics AND the forums together. That's my feedback and my opinion which the forums tell me is not debatable.
what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
Like the update or dont like update is not what bothers me. What bothers me is why do the update and then just ignore ships?
I know they gave us ship PVE, but where are the darn ships? We want ships!
It's likely CG has prioritized future development. Mods is a hot topic along with maintenance, and new toons so my guess is those are on the forefront of scheduling resources. I'm positive they've not forgotten ships, but can't get to it all now. It wasn't that long ago mods was a very hot topic. Development doesn't just happen overnight. Their silence doesn't mean it's not prioritized, but maybe it does mean they're not ready to discuss it further.
what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
I understand all of that, but then dont do anything. Big or go home as the saying goes. Just dont get the "look at all the changes to ships" stuff but then only 1 new ship. It's not really a big deal, just giving feedback
What worries me is bar Lando's Falcon and the Sith Fighter, nothing has really been added to mix things up further.
Imagine in arena you had only 4 viable leaders and one was severely lacking? The chance for diversity there is stunted off the bat.
High time we started getting Fleet Legendary events. Luke's X-Wing, Palpatine's shuttle, double event with Anakin and GK's Jedi star fighters. Give us Bounty Hunter ships, more Capital ships and maybe hint bigtime a Fleet Raid IS coming. It'll be a nightmare with the lack of options we currently have.
Oh, and feel free to skip marquee events and actually add ships. Make them farmable off the bat. By all means save the better ones for marquee if you wish but PLEASE promise players that Fleet WILL matter and their efforts will be rewarded very soon.
No, you can disagree with feedback. Much of the feedback, as I've been saying from the beginning, boils down to:
"I don't like this because I can't just keep using what I've used for the last two years and I didn't bother working on my other ships during that time, change it back."
That's bad feedback. You can ignore it.
If, for example, someone says that we need reinforcement materials or ship omegas made more available, that's good feedback. You can still disagree with it, for example if CG has a target number for how many of each players should get in a given time and they're hitting that target. Not changing it doesn't mean you're ignoring the feedback, it just means that they like their targets and metrics and aren't convinced.
Replies
Empirically I see more variation in starting lineups than before the change as well--that's just one leaderboard out of a whole bunch, so I'm not going to say it's true everywhere, though.
The only thing that needs to change is that Endurance needs to be brought up to par with the other capital ships and we need more ships and capital ships added with an expedited release cadence so they can be brought into the mix faster. A couple more Galactic Republic ships with implicit synergy with Endurance would solve both problems.
i do like it. I was mocking the idea that every single feedback should be counted just because its feedback. Sorry about the confusion
Ah, fair enough. And sorry about getting on my hind legs about it
No doubt. And since CG/EA's communication on this topic and many others in the past 6 months has been virtually non-existent, it's clearly the former, not the latter.
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*
Not really. Every game company does this. They make one reply every now and again, then go quiet--complainy players never change their minds, so any "discussion" becomes one-way very fast.
They can't disagree with feedback because its feedback. When you say "I don't like this" it means you don't like it, its how "you" feel. ie "you". When you say you like something, "you" like that something. Its basically like saying no one else is somehow allowed to have an opinion.
You can't pick and choose who to disagree and who to agree with, you take them both and weigh your options, find compromises. Just because you like Ships, and others don't, doesn't change anything. What matters is the majority, and if you are not blind, you can see the majority hate ships 2.0, and many have posted ideas on ways it can be fixed, many many idea's. Which has been given as feedback, which of course is actual ideas on how to fix the thing, and guess what, this feedback and involves improvement?
Comes from people who don't like the thing. The feedback given from people who like it? No improvements.
I'm quite glad this generation is not like the world was in the past, Fire for light? We don't need electricity and light, we already have fire torches, that's enough.
Except I could say the majority left the forums a long time ago disliking it, and what remains could be a loud minority that is now the majority. Claiming majority status is debatable, since last I checked on Android there were more than 10 million downloads. No where near that are the forums, 1% would be lucky. Fun topic, but doesn't really signify anything. My bet is CG has better data points to measure involvement than only relying on feedback from the forums. The changes in HSR could coincide with internal metrics AND the forums together. That's my feedback and my opinion which the forums tell me is not debatable.
I know they gave us ship PVE, but where are the darn ships? We want ships!
It's likely CG has prioritized future development. Mods is a hot topic along with maintenance, and new toons so my guess is those are on the forefront of scheduling resources. I'm positive they've not forgotten ships, but can't get to it all now. It wasn't that long ago mods was a very hot topic. Development doesn't just happen overnight. Their silence doesn't mean it's not prioritized, but maybe it does mean they're not ready to discuss it further.
Imagine in arena you had only 4 viable leaders and one was severely lacking? The chance for diversity there is stunted off the bat.
High time we started getting Fleet Legendary events. Luke's X-Wing, Palpatine's shuttle, double event with Anakin and GK's Jedi star fighters. Give us Bounty Hunter ships, more Capital ships and maybe hint bigtime a Fleet Raid IS coming. It'll be a nightmare with the lack of options we currently have.
Oh, and feel free to skip marquee events and actually add ships. Make them farmable off the bat. By all means save the better ones for marquee if you wish but PLEASE promise players that Fleet WILL matter and their efforts will be rewarded very soon.
#fleetmatters
"I don't like this because I can't just keep using what I've used for the last two years and I didn't bother working on my other ships during that time, change it back."
That's bad feedback. You can ignore it.
If, for example, someone says that we need reinforcement materials or ship omegas made more available, that's good feedback. You can still disagree with it, for example if CG has a target number for how many of each players should get in a given time and they're hitting that target. Not changing it doesn't mean you're ignoring the feedback, it just means that they like their targets and metrics and aren't convinced.