IMO, this might still need a little bit more tweaking, but it's definitely a LOT better.
SWAG: I think that you should check at what level most people become capable of earning the main raid prizes like the Goliath and the Strike Cruiser (NOT the ones for being one of the best in the sector like the Sea Scorpion A or Hammerhead . At THAT point is when they should become unable to attack lower levels.
Maybe you should decide on what level a player has the ability to protect themselves from any attack from any level player. Currently about a level 33-34. Then use a a +-7 rule instead up to level 50-55. Then open it to all higher players... This new system will not allow any players that reach the 40 mark to ever get bigger.
That is not what it states strike Capt... It basically says that a lvl 29 can attack down to a lvl 27 but get attacked by any level higher. So since most level 29's are still trying to build their first full FF fleet. Good luck trying to get any revenge...
OK so IM going to travel one hour to hit an opponent two sectors over or is there going to be an adjustment to travel times??
the other thing is why travel so far when you cant be sure about even connecting to a battle and possibly dieing before you get into the battle I say this because Im reading forums due to a lost fleet and ten hour repair time Im not hitting anymore bases tonight..lol
Maybe you should decide on what level a player has the ability to protect themselves from any attack from any level player. Currently about a level 33-34. Then use a a +-7 rule instead up to level 50-55. Then open it to all higher players... This new system will not allow any players that reach the 40 mark to ever get bigger.
You will continue to get "bigger" it is going to suck just like it did for me going thru 25 to 29 but unless you quit you will continue to grow and hopefully learn.
Greetings Captains! We received lots of good feedback for the proposed new level system and attack ranges post.
I think this is a better proposal. I like the idea of replacing the distance cap with +/- 2 sectors. If people are willing to travel that far to attack then they should be allowed to do so. It would suck though if I'm forced to travel that far to find targets. On the other hand, that's why we have the relocate button. Also, I think it's great that the +/- 5 level limit is removed for higher level players. Current level 30 players and over should all be able to attack each other.
Personally, I don't mind if the changes cause the higher level players to have less targets. It'll be painful in the beginning but eventually players with similar levels will flock together. Imagine a sector with with only level 30 and over players. That would be awesome!
The only thing I would like added to this proposal is the ability to see in which sector my friends are currently located before I relocate to them. Yes, I realize this isn't directly related to the new level structure but I believe it affects the game play indirectly.
Im srry..but i still thinks its a bad idea...Ure taking away the fun for the higher levels....
I give an example..at my lvl and I am a 34 atm..I can only hit 33/34/35...in the new system...
This sucks for me..u have 2 compensate for the bigger levels..When we fight eachother we are looking at repair times off 20 hrs(dread fleet)and for other fleets it ill be at least 10 hrs..
Now if i attack a 35 base i wont get enough res 2 cover the repairs..and the time will kill me in this case..then ill have to take out salvages 2 get res and fight again in 3 days when my fleets are repaired..Then yes im bad i will hit a 29 base for the easy res..srry 29 thats the game..WE ALL BIN THERE..
I really think kixeye is going for the gold now...U want GOLD..then give something back that we can use the gold..
LEAVE THE OLD SYSTEM AS IT IS..
I am a level 28 player and get attacked continually by lvl 30+ players with DU4 bases and all the fancy new raid ships that I don't stand a chance against but I agree with you. The +2/-2 sector range is not going to be used much due to the long travel times and the new level changes will end up making the game less playable. I don't need protection from higher level players, I just need reasonable research, ship building and repair times so that I can fight back.
I like what I am reading on this new revision but I have to ask. W
With the revision of the levels.. that will space things out a lot more.. why not just keep the +/- 5 level hitting in place. It will mean more targets for everyone and still keep things fair as bases will still be of the appropriate difficulty.
Rumseeker
Lvl 34
Sector 361
ID 1122925
Browser: Firefox
OS: WIndows 7
"Kicking the crap out of RRs wherever they Frubble"
I can see the level 28 and 34-35's+ licking their chops. I think it will bring more imbalance at the 30+ level that can now get attacked by 37's lol Doesn't really affect me as long as the levels lower can't rim and rocket my base without retaliation. It would be ridicuous if someone can hit your base and you can't hit back no matter the level. I don't really understand why this is needed and anyway you do this there will be screwing some level. I think the +/- 3 idea is much simpler and keeps the level familiar for all. Don't really think this adresses any of the big problems for someone like me. Examples for stale game for me are ridiculous repair time, ship build times and nothing to do besides now that blueprints done. I simply don't launch fleets even close to 25% compared to 6 months ago. I just hold hope as I think some of these problems will be addressed to so call bring the excitement back soon.
ok kixeye this still leavs the 33 hitting 28 and 29 problem that started this mater... comon im getting lvled by a 33 not complaining im taking it but still my base aint got the defence to outhold the 40
+ in this system **** this means a lvl 87 gona hit a lvl 40 what are you thinking its good for the 87(that is a 39 right now) can hit a 40 ( 29 right now) this makes no sense man i say you got to re think this again but i like the idea of longer range of attack more targets for evryone and with 2 sectors to choose from why make it so a 39 can hit a 29 man ???? its not logical
Current level 29 players are in a much better position to defend themselves. By this point, players should have Outpost 5 (max land tiles & defensive platforms), Stalkers and Sea Wolves; all of which can provide some very effective defense, at least enough to give a higher level pause to think if the reward is actually worth the risk.
And what use are any of those against a level 34 with Raid Hulls, Siege Weapons and the abilty to hit your base patrol/defence multiple times with mutiple fleets of sub killers and wolf killers before his base fleet(s) even arrive? And even if he does screw up and enter your base with his hitter and there's danger there he simply retreats.
You twist the facts to suit your arguement once again Swag, as Community Manager you should be representing our interests to Kixeye not touting the company line.
In general however I agree with what Kixeye are attempting to do here in reducing the disparity between hitable targets, but then to go and make a 29 open to everyone is just plain crazy. There is far more of a disparity between 29 and 34+ than there is between 24 and 29 simply because by 34 you have the experience, time and probably coins to have developed ships and fleets to take on the different base setups out there.
And why bother with levels at all over the 40 watershed (if thats where it is) if it's free for all? Why not make it simply that level 40 is as high as you can go, might make the bullies out there think twice about hitting if he thought it might cause retalition from someone bigger than him.
Paul Preece condemmed people for hitting below their weight, you think brave words will stop the innumerable bullies out there? Put your money where your mouth is Mr Preece, or at least play in the real world and see how many 33/34 hit exclusively at 28/29.
TANSTAAFL There ain't no such thing as a free lunch Bandito260 Sector 92; Level 156 Please feel free to correct my grammar, spelling, punctuation, syntax or idiom, but if you do, remember that I am British and hence a member of the only nation who has the right to term themselves native speakers of the English language.
I disagree. There is a huge diffrence in a lvl 31-34 and a 36. ask yourselves why is he a 36?? it is because he has built a ton of raid hulls. period end of discussion. with this new lvl system any one over 30 is open to be hit by people with multiple raid fleets while they may be working on one raid fleet. I am lvl 33 I have one goliath 3 strike cruisers 4 cudas. how does that compete with people with full dread and dic fleets?? it doesn't period. kixeye this sounds like you giving in to the coiners crying because they will have to fight people with their own lvl of tech and fleets. you propse this yet still haven't addressed the ship roadblock. this new system saves all the new players until they hit lvl 30 then they are fed to the wolves. getting hit is how you learn to play. keep the plus minus 5 across the board and keep the lvls the same, sounds fair to me.
for instance you keep adding new tech that is fine and dandy. but we have people with fullly maxed mod pods and arbiters allready. how does a lvl 30 compete with that?? stupid idea that caves to the coiners, let them fight each other.
This is a workable evolution of the originally suggested new level structure. You have addressed the valid concerns raised, without pandering to the constant complainers (who will never be satisfied whatever you do). My only concern is that current level 29s would struggle to fight off the higher levels - I would suggest starting the open attacking at current level 30 or 31 instead.
Great work - I can see this new structure addressing the problems effectively.
All below is "my" opinion and any criticism noted "I" consider constructive, i do hope this meets your critera.
Firstly thank you for taking note of the outroar over your last suggestion and modifying it.
a +2/-2 sector travel rule i believe is totally irrelivent. Compare current player hits between 0-600 to 600-850, extending the range will most likely only effect 5% of base hits. Travel times limit much more than range limits. Based on it irrelivence i consider this change neither good nor bad. More of who cares, why waste the time on this when there are more pressing matters. I do not believe i have EVER seen anyone complain about the 850 range limit.
Whilst i appreciate the effort to open attacking range i believe it is inadequate again. Yes you have partially insulated level 23-28 players, your retention there should increase. But hit 29(current) and BAM you thrown under the bus. Not only can the 34s of old still hit you but the full scale massive coiners 36+ can now treat you as a drive by too. At level 29 expect your player retention to drop considerably.
To insulate players to a point then make life worse for them than it already is will defeat your aim here. Not only will they be unprepared for serious combat due to the insulation but they will be hit by bigger players than before. That is simply wrong.
You did so well to a point, but then clearly decided LAZY math was better than finishing the hard work. Its only the levels 29/30(current) you have shafted, they MUST be protected from the heavy coiners 35+ or be lost.
Please finish the hard work and stop the near enough attitude. You so close to getting it right.
I do hope you consider this a mature response and have no need for denegration or banning as a response this time.
All below is "my" opinion and any criticism noted "I" consider constructive, i do hope this meets your critera.
Firstly thank you for taking note of the outroar over your last suggestion and modifying it.
a +2/-2 sector travel rule i believe is totally irrelivent. Compare current player hits between 0-600 to 600-850, extending the range will most likely only effect 5% of base hits. Travel times limit much more than range limits. Based on it irrelivence i consider this change neither good nor bad. More of who cares, why waste the time on this when there are more pressing matters. I do not believe i have EVER seen anyone complain about the 850 range limit.
Whilst i appreciate the effort to open attacking range i believe it is inadequate again. Yes you have partially insulated level 23-28 players, your retention there should increase. But hit 29(current) and BAM you thrown under the bus. Not only can the 34s of old still hit you but the full scale massive coiners 36+ can now treat you as a drive by too. At level 29 expect your player retention to drop considerably.
To insulate players to a point then make life worse for them than it already is will defeat your aim here. Not only will they be unprepared for serious combat due to the insulation but they will be hit by bigger players than before. That is simply wrong.
You did so well to a point, but then clearly decided LAZY math was better than finishing the hard work. Its only the levels 29/30(current) you have shafted, they MUST be protected from the heavy coiners 35+ or be lost.
Please finish the hard work and stop the near enough attitude. You so close to getting it right.
I do hope you consider this a mature response and have no need for denegration or banning as a response this time.
x2 couldnt agree more. If it wasnt for buddy bubbles I knew quite a few 28/29s that woulda quit by now
I think +2 / -2 Sector range is kept keeping Alliance Feature in Mind... and i appreciate their effort for listening to us and making necessary changes and still keeping the game alive.
I don't understand why you must do this. We (the people who have been playing for awhile) have all taken our **** kickings and made it through just fine. We learned from them and made our bases/fleets better. I am a lvl 31 and very rarely hit anyone that is under a 29 because they don't have enough res, so it ain't worth my time unless they piss me off or mess with one of my alliance members. I don't see why you need to do this rather then most of the level 20 somethings crying. This will effectively limit everybody's number of targets for base hits. I did see where you are purposing to expand to +/- 2 sectors which is cool but who is gonna travel that far to hit a base. I also saw where ya'll had some great ideas to fix this travel time (which honestly scares me due to the other things you have thought up recently). I really hope you just add map speed to every bodies ships instead of making us put streamlining on our base hitters or using these new magical ships to increase map speed; because who in their right mind is gonna take a base hitter ship off of their fleet to add a magical map speed boost ship? I really hope you think this through a lot and don't just add something that is gonna limit every bodies playing time down. Again, I don't why you think you need to do this but if you do then this is better then the first proposal. In my opinion it needs a third thinking through and tell us what you are gonna do about travel times before implementing this into the game.
I suggest if you are going to make current lvl 29 and above hittable by anyother lvl above them then max your lvl system up. Everyone who is lvl 29 and up should now be lvl 29.
This way atleast the higher lvls will have to think twice about hitting you not knowing what lvl you exactly are and what technology you have
I missed out on commenting on version 1 by a few minutes. To start with, version 2 is better. I agree that the mid- to upper 20's are taking a beating. I'm all for a good bash - but ya need to have a reasonable shot to bash back (up or down) no matter what level player you are.
I feel there is a two-fold problem behind the pressure on that level range - the compression of long time players into (generally) the first half of the 30's; and the accumulation of game tech by 30's level players. A +/- 5 level rule is virtually meaningless if a player can only suicide their fleets on higher level players' bases. This is also true in the transition zone around 40 under the proposed level structure.
This suggested level structure attempts to create a level separation buffer between these exposed 20's and the growing pool of 30's. That's fine. It doesn't address the technology gap which still impacts players that would land in the low end of the new 40's. My concern with the current proposal is that it will shift the beating zone from the old 20's area into the new low 40's. If a current level 29 (new 40) player focused on base defense at the expense of ships, they may have a defensible base but no fleets to hit back with. If Raids escalated their growth, they may well be level 30 with no heavy base fleets completed. Perhaps they didn't mind getting crushed regularly in their 20's and so chose to build heavy fleets first. They can smack some of their +5 higher levels but now need a breather to gain and hold the needed res to catch up on base defense. There are many other growth choice scenarios. Good or bad in one's view, there are player examples for all. It's not a linear choice game. Saying that they should have this or that by a certain level - in essence, providing a 'care bear' path to success - takes away from the learning opportunities afforded on less optimal paths. I think it would be better for game balance to move the open hitting threshold from 40 to 45 or 50. This would provide a better stabilizing level range for players nearest the open hit zone.
One thing that I didn't see in this new version is an explanation of points per new level. I believe the former proposal mentioned the current structure was something like 'new level is 140% of previous level'. I may not have that right but the gist to me was that it is slowing leveling progress for the current 30's. While a percentage multiplier may work up to a certain level, once they're at the point where they have little to build or research, I feel their growth will again slow. At that point, perhaps a fixed value per level would be better. Also, I'm assuming that if implemented, you won't be just mapping levels to discrete buckets (as in the outline). Rather, you'd evaluate players' point totals and map them to the nearest appropriate levels. Not doing so will create level voids (no players) until points accumulate under the new system to fill in the voids. The voids would artificially limit the number of available targets for a period of time. Smoothly mapping players avoids the voids and would provide a better player transition to the new system. Please fill us in on the points/level structure and whether players will be uniformly mapped across all new levels.
Lastly, I'm fine with the travel range changes. Time to target has been beaten to death like a level 30 hitting a 25. Even so, I'll offer this. Player level is a rank signifying accumulating some tiered number of points, but it has no in-game value. One thing that could bring value in-game would be to have player rank equate to some percentage improvement in map speed. A bracketed structure beginning at level 20 and stepping every 10 levels with a 3% to 5% boost per bracket. With an 80+ level structure, that would equate to 7 brackets and up to a 21% to 35% map speed boost. I know you've said you're working on ideas. Here's one that benefits most active players, ties in with the proposed level structure, and helps to address travel time concerns.
i thinkit is all ridiculous the gap between the lvls and all the strength imbalance is really more due to the research and upgrade times.as time has gone by has been so many more things to rersearch and the times aint been adjusted.is no way to get on top of the research lag.esp when a mere rimjob if happens frequently enuf(which is more then daily)can see a simple research of 6 days turn into near on a mth.the repair time on labs is ridiculous .could be made so that the research continues while buildiung is damaged.mean seriously with all the specials that have been added on top of what was when i started the game a 10 day research is bad enuf and not to mention the ship building ya need what 15 days plus to build a sc cannon ship near 86 days to build a fleet.and by time ya finish buildin a full fleet is something already out to make that build pointless.even the repair times of a fleet makes no real way for trial and error if ya addressed those issues ya would have more battles between same lvls .as would keep people on par with the lvl they are at.i am a current lvl 32 and am far behind on research and fleets so i do often hit 27s and 28 tho if these issues was addressed and the lvl stucture not modified but made to with i 3 lvls ya would see that balance that the lower lvls are screaming for.it seriously at the point for me that i consider not playin no more as usually nothin to do im either waitin on research which is strectch from a 6 day and often ends up at least 14 or a 10 day build for a single ship.and any combat to keep the fun going while i wai for the upgrades /research or ship build is only going to end in a few days of waitin for repairs.the game is gettin boring and i am in a different sector weekly i have heard many people in the same boat as me and most the people i talk to are seriously considering to stop playing the game.
godofwar-AA-
current lvl 32
winner of ;barracuda, goliath,strikecruiser, interdictor,hha-tho have never been able to complete a fleet of any of them
ya need to sort all the real issues or ya will lose alot of the players who are larger frustrated as it all takes the fun out of the game.and i refer to even players in the top 100
SWAG: I think that you should check at what level most people become capable of earning the main raid prizes like the Goliath and the Strike Cruiser (NOT the ones for being one of the best in the sector like the Sea Scorpion A or Hammerhead
the other thing is why travel so far when you cant be sure about even connecting to a battle and possibly dieing before you get into the battle I say this because Im reading forums due to a lost fleet and ten hour repair time Im not hitting anymore bases tonight..lol
You will continue to get "bigger" it is going to suck just like it did for me going thru 25 to 29 but unless you quit you will continue to grow and hopefully learn.
I think this is a better proposal. I like the idea of replacing the distance cap with +/- 2 sectors. If people are willing to travel that far to attack then they should be allowed to do so. It would suck though if I'm forced to travel that far to find targets. On the other hand, that's why we have the relocate button. Also, I think it's great that the +/- 5 level limit is removed for higher level players. Current level 30 players and over should all be able to attack each other.
Personally, I don't mind if the changes cause the higher level players to have less targets. It'll be painful in the beginning but eventually players with similar levels will flock together. Imagine a sector with with only level 30 and over players. That would be awesome!
The only thing I would like added to this proposal is the ability to see in which sector my friends are currently located before I relocate to them. Yes, I realize this isn't directly related to the new level structure but I believe it affects the game play indirectly.
I am a level 28 player and get attacked continually by lvl 30+ players with DU4 bases and all the fancy new raid ships that I don't stand a chance against but I agree with you. The +2/-2 sector range is not going to be used much due to the long travel times and the new level changes will end up making the game less playable. I don't need protection from higher level players, I just need reasonable research, ship building and repair times so that I can fight back.
With the revision of the levels.. that will space things out a lot more.. why not just keep the +/- 5 level hitting in place. It will mean more targets for everyone and still keep things fair as bases will still be of the appropriate difficulty.
Lvl 34
Sector 361
ID 1122925
Browser: Firefox
OS: WIndows 7
"Kicking the crap out of RRs wherever they Frubble"
+ in this system **** this means a lvl 87 gona hit a lvl 40 what are you thinking its good for the 87(that is a 39 right now) can hit a 40 ( 29 right now) this makes no sense man i say you got to re think this again but i like the idea of longer range of attack more targets for evryone and with 2 sectors to choose from why make it so a 39 can hit a 29 man ???? its not logical
And what use are any of those against a level 34 with Raid Hulls, Siege Weapons and the abilty to hit your base patrol/defence multiple times with mutiple fleets of sub killers and wolf killers before his base fleet(s) even arrive? And even if he does screw up and enter your base with his hitter and there's danger there he simply retreats.
You twist the facts to suit your arguement once again Swag, as Community Manager you should be representing our interests to Kixeye not touting the company line.
In general however I agree with what Kixeye are attempting to do here in reducing the disparity between hitable targets, but then to go and make a 29 open to everyone is just plain crazy. There is far more of a disparity between 29 and 34+ than there is between 24 and 29 simply because by 34 you have the experience, time and probably coins to have developed ships and fleets to take on the different base setups out there.
And why bother with levels at all over the 40 watershed (if thats where it is) if it's free for all? Why not make it simply that level 40 is as high as you can go, might make the bullies out there think twice about hitting if he thought it might cause retalition from someone bigger than him.
Paul Preece condemmed people for hitting below their weight, you think brave words will stop the innumerable bullies out there? Put your money where your mouth is Mr Preece, or at least play in the real world and see how many 33/34 hit exclusively at 28/29.
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch Bandito260 Sector 92; Level 156 Please feel free to correct my grammar, spelling, punctuation, syntax or idiom, but if you do, remember that I am British and hence a member of the only nation who has the right to term themselves native speakers of the English language.
for instance you keep adding new tech that is fine and dandy. but we have people with fullly maxed mod pods and arbiters allready. how does a lvl 30 compete with that?? stupid idea that caves to the coiners, let them fight each other.
Give credit where it is due. They got raked over their last plan and implemented changes
Smart-NBK LVL103
MY Channel's
¶http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTp5_k-xOHECzL8Dnt17jIw
¶http://www.youtube.com/user/DO212Channel
of course it is you are a coiner lol this gives you more targets
Great work - I can see this new structure addressing the problems effectively.
I want some of what your smoking.
I work to pay for school. I cant afford to spend $100 a week on any game.
Firstly thank you for taking note of the outroar over your last suggestion and modifying it.
a +2/-2 sector travel rule i believe is totally irrelivent. Compare current player hits between 0-600 to 600-850, extending the range will most likely only effect 5% of base hits. Travel times limit much more than range limits. Based on it irrelivence i consider this change neither good nor bad. More of who cares, why waste the time on this when there are more pressing matters. I do not believe i have EVER seen anyone complain about the 850 range limit.
Whilst i appreciate the effort to open attacking range i believe it is inadequate again. Yes you have partially insulated level 23-28 players, your retention there should increase. But hit 29(current) and BAM you thrown under the bus. Not only can the 34s of old still hit you but the full scale massive coiners 36+ can now treat you as a drive by too. At level 29 expect your player retention to drop considerably.
To insulate players to a point then make life worse for them than it already is will defeat your aim here. Not only will they be unprepared for serious combat due to the insulation but they will be hit by bigger players than before. That is simply wrong.
You did so well to a point, but then clearly decided LAZY math was better than finishing the hard work. Its only the levels 29/30(current) you have shafted, they MUST be protected from the heavy coiners 35+ or be lost.
Please finish the hard work and stop the near enough attitude. You so close to getting it right.
I do hope you consider this a mature response and have no need for denegration or banning as a response this time.
x2 couldnt agree more. If it wasnt for buddy bubbles I knew quite a few 28/29s that woulda quit by now
Thank you Kixeye and Good Work.
Lvl-54
Alliance- Red Vikings
Won-Cudas, Strike Cruisers, Interdictors, Battle Ships, Triton, Mercury, Javelin
This way atleast the higher lvls will have to think twice about hitting you not knowing what lvl you exactly are and what technology you have
I feel there is a two-fold problem behind the pressure on that level range - the compression of long time players into (generally) the first half of the 30's; and the accumulation of game tech by 30's level players. A +/- 5 level rule is virtually meaningless if a player can only suicide their fleets on higher level players' bases. This is also true in the transition zone around 40 under the proposed level structure.
This suggested level structure attempts to create a level separation buffer between these exposed 20's and the growing pool of 30's. That's fine. It doesn't address the technology gap which still impacts players that would land in the low end of the new 40's. My concern with the current proposal is that it will shift the beating zone from the old 20's area into the new low 40's. If a current level 29 (new 40) player focused on base defense at the expense of ships, they may have a defensible base but no fleets to hit back with. If Raids escalated their growth, they may well be level 30 with no heavy base fleets completed. Perhaps they didn't mind getting crushed regularly in their 20's and so chose to build heavy fleets first. They can smack some of their +5 higher levels but now need a breather to gain and hold the needed res to catch up on base defense. There are many other growth choice scenarios. Good or bad in one's view, there are player examples for all. It's not a linear choice game. Saying that they should have this or that by a certain level - in essence, providing a 'care bear' path to success - takes away from the learning opportunities afforded on less optimal paths. I think it would be better for game balance to move the open hitting threshold from 40 to 45 or 50. This would provide a better stabilizing level range for players nearest the open hit zone.
One thing that I didn't see in this new version is an explanation of points per new level. I believe the former proposal mentioned the current structure was something like 'new level is 140% of previous level'. I may not have that right but the gist to me was that it is slowing leveling progress for the current 30's. While a percentage multiplier may work up to a certain level, once they're at the point where they have little to build or research, I feel their growth will again slow. At that point, perhaps a fixed value per level would be better. Also, I'm assuming that if implemented, you won't be just mapping levels to discrete buckets (as in the outline). Rather, you'd evaluate players' point totals and map them to the nearest appropriate levels. Not doing so will create level voids (no players) until points accumulate under the new system to fill in the voids. The voids would artificially limit the number of available targets for a period of time. Smoothly mapping players avoids the voids and would provide a better player transition to the new system. Please fill us in on the points/level structure and whether players will be uniformly mapped across all new levels.
Lastly, I'm fine with the travel range changes. Time to target has been beaten to death like a level 30 hitting a 25. Even so, I'll offer this. Player level is a rank signifying accumulating some tiered number of points, but it has no in-game value. One thing that could bring value in-game would be to have player rank equate to some percentage improvement in map speed. A bracketed structure beginning at level 20 and stepping every 10 levels with a 3% to 5% boost per bracket. With an 80+ level structure, that would equate to 7 brackets and up to a 21% to 35% map speed boost. I know you've said you're working on ideas. Here's one that benefits most active players, ties in with the proposed level structure, and helps to address travel time concerns.
-KB
Hang on! This is gonna be a thrill ride of geriatric proportion!
New system lvl 51
godofwar-AA-
current lvl 32
winner of ;barracuda, goliath,strikecruiser, interdictor,hha-tho have never been able to complete a fleet of any of them
ya need to sort all the real issues or ya will lose alot of the players who are larger frustrated as it all takes the fun out of the game.and i refer to even players in the top 100