On the whole ship fighting times have reduced by upwards of 10 seconds across all segments,
The RNG is so much more of a factor now that I often cancel a fight about 20 seconds in. My guess is this is the behavior responsible for the 10 second average battle time decrease.
Not that I would consider 10 seconds significant by any metric anyway.
On the whole ship fighting times have reduced by upwards of 10 seconds across all segments, there are significantly more people engaging in battles, and a number of other metrics we consider healthy.
nuff said statistics > complaints - leef, 2016
Do you think they account for all the people who used to take all their battles down to the last five seconds to avoid sniping, smart guy?
She said there are more people engaging in battles? My shard is losing players who have guaranteed payout positions. I would have to say the spike in usage could be contributed to people trying to overcome the this mess. But who knows maybe people stopped buying scratchoffs and are using their luck on ship battles instead.
On the whole ship fighting times have reduced by upwards of 10 seconds across all segments, there are significantly more people engaging in battles, and a number of other metrics we consider healthy.
nuff said statistics > complaints - leef, 2016
Do you think they account for all the people who used to take all their battles down to the last five seconds to avoid sniping, smart guy?
Exactly. Or those that auto now because they dont care about ships anymore.
On the whole ship fighting times have reduced by upwards of 10 seconds across all segments, there are significantly more people engaging in battles, and a number of other metrics we consider healthy.
nuff said statistics > complaints - leef, 2016
Do you think they account for all the people who used to take all their battles down to the last five seconds to avoid sniping, smart guy?
So allow me to offer myself as a dissenting opinion. I am in a fairly old shard and typically ranked anywhere from 8th to the low 40’s in fleet battles.
I ran a somewhat unconventional team (which I preferred) that involved Sun Fac, Vader, Biggs, Cassian, and Reaper.
Since the fleet update, I continue to place in this range with my ranking actually improving slightly on average.
To be blunt, I adapted to the changes after experimenting. I paid attention to the reinforcement abilities and adjusted to maximize them. Vader is no longer in the initial wave because he wreaks far more havoc when brought in (same with Reaper to a lesser degree). Boba is now in the starting lineup because it forces opponents to address him early. I do not retain my final placing through 24 hours, but I win FAR more than I lose.
And my battles take less time. Not sure what everyone else is doing different. I’m happy to provide my ally code if the Devs want to do any special tracking on my account.
One thing I’ll echo is some disappointment on reaper being neutered. I worked hard to get that ship and continue to work hard on developing it (Shoretrooper shard drop rate is just abusive). It should retain its value.
So allow me to offer myself as a dissenting opinion. I am in a fairly old shard and typically ranked anywhere from 8th to the low 40’s in fleet battles.
I ran a somewhat unconventional team (which I preferred) that involved Sun Fac, Vader, Biggs, Cassian, and Reaper.
Since the fleet update, I continue to place in this range with my ranking actually improving slightly on average.
To be blunt, I adapted to the changes after experimenting. I paid attention to the reinforcement abilities and adjusted to maximize them. Vader is no longer in the initial wave because he wreaks far more havoc when brought in (same with Reaper to a lesser degree). Boba is now in the starting lineup because it forces opponents to address him early. I do not retain my final placing through 24 hours, but I win FAR more than I lose.
And my battles take less time. Not sure what everyone else is doing different. I’m happy to provide my ally code if the Devs want to do any special tracking on my account.
One thing I’ll echo is some disappointment on reaper being neutered. I worked hard to get that ship and continue to work hard on developing it (Shoretrooper shard drop rate is just abusive). It should retain its value.
Say what you are running boba in the starting lineup? This cannot be credible. I am in a 5 man rotation in my payout time and we went from having 100% people making their spots most days to 40% so 3 out of 5 won't climb for the free crystals. It doesn't matter what combo you use. If it isn't fun people aren't going to show. Being force fed the genosians also isn't fun.
Oh, while we're having fun being all communicative, could someone check on the actual dodge rate of Biggs. I've had him dodge at least 1 battle each day for the last 3. K-thx.
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*
Oh, while we're having fun being all communicative, could someone check on the actual dodge rate of Biggs. I've had him dodge at least 1 battle each day for the last 3. K-thx.
Oh, while we're having fun being all communicative, could someone check on the actual dodge rate of Biggs. I've had him dodge at least 1 battle each day for the last 3. K-thx.
Come on, you know better than this.
Awwe c'mon. Well thought out points and legitimate concerns and questions don't get a response. I thought I would try a different tactic.
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*
And for the record, I never cancel out of a fight. Do you guys upend the board when you get a bad roll in Monopoly as well?
Why in the world would you play Monopoly?
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*
We also want to see how behavior changes after the release of the table, and once people can upgrade more ships - the likelihood that the meta will start to shift.
-Carrie
You see, you keep hinting that this will be the case, but you aren't allowing players to mitigate or plan for the change. Then you wonder how you get a 1K + response threads when you make the change...
With a new release, there's always the instant uproar of the community. They have to let it sink in and see what we do with it once we stop grumping about it. There's no point in a knee-**** reaction to appease the community's reaction, as that would do more harm than good in the long run.
I like how @CG_Carrie gets straight to the point thanks for the update! It's good to know what's going on.
Huge numbers of players have said that ships 2.0 is an unbalanced mess that only makes worse what it was meant to correct (e.g., being overdependent on RNG).
After all of that feedback, I have to say that "we will remain vigilant in monitoring balance concerns and re-evaluate as needed" sounds an awful lot like this:
I don't want to undervalue player experience and feedback - that is 100% something we factor into all the decisions we make. But it isn't the complete picture. On the whole ship fighting times have reduced by upwards of 10 seconds across all segments, there are significantly more people engaging in battles, and a number of other metrics we consider healthy.
However, I want to caveat this heavily, that doesn't mean everything is hunky dory OR that the things that we're seeing is indicative of your experience, it just means we need more time and to validate some more things. We also want to see how behavior changes after the release of the table, and once people can upgrade more ships - the likelihood that the meta will start to shift. Ultimately, we want to see a lively and interesting daily ship meta. If we don't see interesting play developing, we will re-evaluate.
-Carrie
Actually, Carrie, with all respect you misinterpret the meaning of battle length. Battle were 7 minutes and a half, now 5. When people waited until last seconds until last strike, so opponents have fewer time to fight them. So, let’s say, the number of holding players is the same, and max battle time reduces by 2,5 minutes and you detect only 10 seconds reducing in battle length, guess what it means...
I have to concur with my esteemed colleagues of the time reduction issue.
Ships 1.0, generally I was getting to the point of being ready to win within 2 minutes at the most. Then, put a timer and WAIT for 5 minutes until about 30 seconds left and click that final hit. Did same tactic for the hour leading up to payout for at least six months.
Ships 2.0, half the time I know I'm going to lose in about the first 30 seconds. I don't forfeit, I try to play through, but the AI has already decided that it's going to win and I get crap RNG for the rest of the match. Generally, that means I'm getting destroyed in about 2 minutes whether I like it or not. But, if I'm in a position to win, I'm waiting until about 30 seconds left to do the final kill shot. Why? Same reasons I did it in ships 1.0, just like so many other players do. If you finish too quickly, you get sniped.
If you left it at 5v5, I'm thinking players would be a lot less disgruntled about this whole thing. The META went from 5 specific ships to 3 ships (pretty much the top 50 in my shard are all the same three in the starting line up, Boba comes in as first reinforcement - a couple have scimitar).
And, most importantly, putting out ships 2.0 BEFORE the PVE table was a substantial cart before the horse. So substantial, many of us are carrying that cart up hill, hoping the horse will be at the top. Some of the things released with ships 2.0 are very cool and interesting, but we're stuck because of "RNG" and your AI doing pretty much whatever it wants. (including ignoring taunts, reapplying buffs that get cleansed off its ships, jumping turns, reducing its own cooldowns, giving itself massive crits, etc.)
I have to concur with my esteemed colleagues of the time reduction issue.
Ships 1.0, generally I was getting to the point of being ready to win within 2 minutes at the most. Then, put a timer and WAIT for 5 minutes until about 30 seconds left and click that final hit. Did same tactic for the hour leading up to payout for at least six months.
Ships 2.0, half the time I know I'm going to lose in about the first 30 seconds. I don't forfeit, I try to play through, but the AI has already decided that it's going to win and I get **** RNG for the rest of the match. Generally, that means I'm getting destroyed in about 2 minutes whether I like it or not. But, if I'm in a position to win, I'm waiting until about 30 seconds left to do the final kill shot. Why? Same reasons I did it in ships 1.0, just like so many other players do. If you finish too quickly, you get sniped.
If you left it at 5v5, I'm thinking players would be a lot less disgruntled about this whole thing. The META went from 5 specific ships to 3 ships (pretty much the top 50 in my shard are all the same three in the starting line up, Boba comes in as first reinforcement - a couple have scimitar).
And, most importantly, putting out ships 2.0 BEFORE the PVE table was a substantial cart before the horse. So substantial, many of us are carrying that cart up hill, hoping the horse will be at the top. Some of the things released with ships 2.0 are very cool and interesting, but we're stuck because of "RNG" and your AI doing pretty much whatever it wants. (including ignoring taunts, reapplying buffs that get cleansed off its ships, jumping turns, reducing its own cooldowns, giving itself massive crits, etc.)
So, are we stuck with this the way it is now?
This describes it perfectly. And just for the record I think this also shows how little you folks at CG actually play your own game on anything but a test account. Also explains how game creators stay so far out of touch with the community. *looking at you Sith Raid and Ships 2.0*
Only a 10second reduction in all total fights?
It lost 2min 30 seconds. That's a lot longer then 10 seconds.
And I know the main reason it looks like its less is because now people can't time out over 7mins on purpose.
combine that with the fact that the AI can chose to beat a player in the first 1-3 shots with this 3v3 update and only 10seconds is hardly anything.
Actual fun ship battles was still faster before the revamp. And there was less rng involved. And less Focus Fire AI, and more diversity. ect.
Though I'm still getting over the fact that the new ship has 4 50% chances to completely turn the tide of a battle each turn. I'm gonna hate fighting the AI using that and watching it proc all 4 chances 100% of the time rng fest getting more rng festie
"We have heard your concerns but we have a cognitive filter active that only allows us to interpret the things we like, everything we don't like has been dismissed as irrelevant"
On the whole ship fighting times have reduced by upwards of 10 seconds across all segments, there are significantly more people engaging in battles, and a number of other metrics we consider healthy.
nuff said statistics > complaints - leef, 2016
data <> statistics. Caiaphas, 2018.
Saying that fight times have reduced by 10 seconds does not mean that there has been a statistically significant reduction in fight times. Take a large sample of fight times before and after the update. Take the differences. Calculate the mean and variance of the difference. Do the actual statistics. Given the variance in fight times that I experience, I can't possibly imagine that a mere 10 second reduction is actually a significant reduction. If the null hypothesis significance test can't reject the null hypothesis (that the fight times are the same), then the fight times are the same. You can't say that you have made a difference to fight times without testing the data to see if you have in fact made a difference to fight times.
Given the variance in fight times, 10 seconds can't be statistically significant. Therefore, the massive development effort FAILED to meet this development objective. But nice try.
Same goes for "significantly more people engaging in battles". Compare the proportion of fleet battles as a % of the active playerbase in the period after the release of Ships 2.0 to a similar period of the same length ... the last major Ships update: the proportion of fleet battles as a % of the active playerbase after the release of Ships 1.0. I'm willing to bet that the statistics would show that MORE people were engaged after the release of Ships 1.0, than after 2.0.
Anyone can compare participation at a peak to participation at a trough and say that there is an improvement, so you have to compare similar periods in time. I suspect that the proportion of fleet battles as a percentage of the active playerbase is not higher (and is actually lower) now than in the period after the release of Ships 1.0. Therefore, the massive development effort FAILED to meet this development objective. But again, nice try.
actual statistics > verbal fluff.
Prove me wrong, and show us the real statistics or the real data.
Replies
The RNG is so much more of a factor now that I often cancel a fight about 20 seconds in. My guess is this is the behavior responsible for the 10 second average battle time decrease.
Not that I would consider 10 seconds significant by any metric anyway.
Do you think they account for all the people who used to take all their battles down to the last five seconds to avoid sniping, smart guy?
Exactly. Or those that auto now because they dont care about ships anymore.
You fight 2min ; loose frustratingly
Spend 50 crystals,
You fight 2min against the same guy and win
Done all 5 fight going 26 to 9 th , i was #1 everyday before update, going 26 to 1 easily
Ship 2,0 is a trap for crystals , rebuying 5 more try ,
Crystals I spent in 1.0 = zero
Finish = 1st or 2nd
Crystals I spend in 2.0 = zero
Finish = 1st or 2nd
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
hahah
I ran a somewhat unconventional team (which I preferred) that involved Sun Fac, Vader, Biggs, Cassian, and Reaper.
Since the fleet update, I continue to place in this range with my ranking actually improving slightly on average.
To be blunt, I adapted to the changes after experimenting. I paid attention to the reinforcement abilities and adjusted to maximize them. Vader is no longer in the initial wave because he wreaks far more havoc when brought in (same with Reaper to a lesser degree). Boba is now in the starting lineup because it forces opponents to address him early. I do not retain my final placing through 24 hours, but I win FAR more than I lose.
And my battles take less time. Not sure what everyone else is doing different. I’m happy to provide my ally code if the Devs want to do any special tracking on my account.
One thing I’ll echo is some disappointment on reaper being neutered. I worked hard to get that ship and continue to work hard on developing it (Shoretrooper shard drop rate is just abusive). It should retain its value.
Say what you are running boba in the starting lineup? This cannot be credible. I am in a 5 man rotation in my payout time and we went from having 100% people making their spots most days to 40% so 3 out of 5 won't climb for the free crystals. It doesn't matter what combo you use. If it isn't fun people aren't going to show. Being force fed the genosians also isn't fun.
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*
Come on, you know better than this.
Awwe c'mon. Well thought out points and legitimate concerns and questions don't get a response. I thought I would try a different tactic.
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*
Why in the world would you play Monopoly?
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*
You see, you keep hinting that this will be the case, but you aren't allowing players to mitigate or plan for the change. Then you wonder how you get a 1K + response threads when you make the change...
I like how @CG_Carrie gets straight to the point
no, i believe you are incorrect. I have noticed that my experience has been repeated over and over by other players in this thread.
Actually, Carrie, with all respect you misinterpret the meaning of battle length. Battle were 7 minutes and a half, now 5. When people waited until last seconds until last strike, so opponents have fewer time to fight them. So, let’s say, the number of holding players is the same, and max battle time reduces by 2,5 minutes and you detect only 10 seconds reducing in battle length, guess what it means...
Ships 1.0, generally I was getting to the point of being ready to win within 2 minutes at the most. Then, put a timer and WAIT for 5 minutes until about 30 seconds left and click that final hit. Did same tactic for the hour leading up to payout for at least six months.
Ships 2.0, half the time I know I'm going to lose in about the first 30 seconds. I don't forfeit, I try to play through, but the AI has already decided that it's going to win and I get crap RNG for the rest of the match. Generally, that means I'm getting destroyed in about 2 minutes whether I like it or not. But, if I'm in a position to win, I'm waiting until about 30 seconds left to do the final kill shot. Why? Same reasons I did it in ships 1.0, just like so many other players do. If you finish too quickly, you get sniped.
If you left it at 5v5, I'm thinking players would be a lot less disgruntled about this whole thing. The META went from 5 specific ships to 3 ships (pretty much the top 50 in my shard are all the same three in the starting line up, Boba comes in as first reinforcement - a couple have scimitar).
And, most importantly, putting out ships 2.0 BEFORE the PVE table was a substantial cart before the horse. So substantial, many of us are carrying that cart up hill, hoping the horse will be at the top. Some of the things released with ships 2.0 are very cool and interesting, but we're stuck because of "RNG" and your AI doing pretty much whatever it wants. (including ignoring taunts, reapplying buffs that get cleansed off its ships, jumping turns, reducing its own cooldowns, giving itself massive crits, etc.)
So, are we stuck with this the way it is now?
This describes it perfectly. And just for the record I think this also shows how little you folks at CG actually play your own game on anything but a test account. Also explains how game creators stay so far out of touch with the community. *looking at you Sith Raid and Ships 2.0*
It lost 2min 30 seconds. That's a lot longer then 10 seconds.
And I know the main reason it looks like its less is because now people can't time out over 7mins on purpose.
combine that with the fact that the AI can chose to beat a player in the first 1-3 shots with this 3v3 update and only 10seconds is hardly anything.
Actual fun ship battles was still faster before the revamp. And there was less rng involved. And less Focus Fire AI, and more diversity. ect.
Though I'm still getting over the fact that the new ship has 4 50% chances to completely turn the tide of a battle each turn. I'm gonna hate fighting the AI using that and watching it proc all 4 chances 100% of the time
data <> statistics. Caiaphas, 2018.
Saying that fight times have reduced by 10 seconds does not mean that there has been a statistically significant reduction in fight times. Take a large sample of fight times before and after the update. Take the differences. Calculate the mean and variance of the difference. Do the actual statistics. Given the variance in fight times that I experience, I can't possibly imagine that a mere 10 second reduction is actually a significant reduction. If the null hypothesis significance test can't reject the null hypothesis (that the fight times are the same), then the fight times are the same. You can't say that you have made a difference to fight times without testing the data to see if you have in fact made a difference to fight times.
Given the variance in fight times, 10 seconds can't be statistically significant. Therefore, the massive development effort FAILED to meet this development objective. But nice try.
Same goes for "significantly more people engaging in battles". Compare the proportion of fleet battles as a % of the active playerbase in the period after the release of Ships 2.0 to a similar period of the same length ... the last major Ships update: the proportion of fleet battles as a % of the active playerbase after the release of Ships 1.0. I'm willing to bet that the statistics would show that MORE people were engaged after the release of Ships 1.0, than after 2.0.
Anyone can compare participation at a peak to participation at a trough and say that there is an improvement, so you have to compare similar periods in time. I suspect that the proportion of fleet battles as a percentage of the active playerbase is not higher (and is actually lower) now than in the period after the release of Ships 1.0. Therefore, the massive development effort FAILED to meet this development objective. But again, nice try.
actual statistics > verbal fluff.
Prove me wrong, and show us the real statistics or the real data.
So, in other words, you think that your experience is the only one because it coincides with the loudest one?