the arguments about a rebalance i can definately understand. BUT commonising all event ship prizes ALL BP ship basically devalues the game and the functionality of it. Changing the scale and rebalancing all without leveling everything the same may have been more palatable to the player base BUT assumptions have been made by the design team with isolation of the player experience. Even if its good its still going to be a **** flavoured lolypop shovved in every players mouth. accept, dont accept. kix have decided to make this change.
No announcement has been made however on what the actualy rebalance compensation will be... another way for uncertainty to **** off a player or two...
@CM LXC Everything changes in last few months game turn into coining game instant of skills game, No matter what you do you can't defeat the coiner and coiner can kill hole alliance alone, Why you don't increase the cost of coins in more? everything you do is 70% good for coiners, The game sucks cause it only depends on coining. The coiner only have to launch and attack fleet and then repair and attack back, They even don't join battle and take down 7 fleets at once. When the game was goes into open beta and in Closed beta it was not like this, It was skill full game and there was excitement but now I don't know where that excitement goes. Its all about coin
What's the point of sleepless nights farming those Vega / Vsec hulls only to find out that they will nerf it real hard to the point that their only leverage against the generic research-able rebel hulls are the extra mass..
Mr. Preece, what makes you so sure that you are heading in a right direction for VC? The feedback of the upcoming changes from the absolute majority of our community doesn't mean anything to you? Perhabs you could listen at least to something that the community speaks about and perform some changes to the upcoming updates. I won't list it here, you can just read previous and upcoming posts, not mentioning countless other threads regarding this update.
That phone based players are changing the game is a simple fact, and it needs to be dealt with. Most new players will be mobile, and without the ability of new players to compete, VC, or any game, will die.
Range and speed are controling? Of course they are. Always have and always will be, both in RL and any gaming platform.
If speeds are all equal, range will dominate.
If speed and range are equal, raw firepower will dominate.
If speed, range and raw firepower are all equal, armor will control.
If speed, range, raw firepower and armor are all equal, sheer numbers will control.
If numbers too are equalized, then the game is little more than high card.
The biggest reason for the backlash is twofold.
First, is the time invested so far is being undone. I don't think the muckety mucks truly understand that from the player side.
But even if the time and money invested by the players has to be undone, then KIX needs to make things right. You can't take our money and time and money. Did I mention money, and say whoops, just buy more stuff.
There's absolutely no reason why players can't be given free refits, or a month of reduced refit time, or simply coins. That's the second reason for the backlash; it can be mitigated by KIX.
We're not looking to come out ahead. We're looking to be in the position we would have been in had KIX not screwed up so bad that this radical change was needed.
So I appreciate the platitudes, but until you figure out why this rebalance still won't address the issues you claim, and why players rightfully feel they are being crapped on, don't expect the sentiment to go away anytime soon.
The game is getting more simple with regards to ship speeds, that is true. However there are different kinds of complexity. Speed is a very important stat. So important that it can override nearly all other stats except for Range. When that happens the game actually loses a ton of complexity, as the number of meaningful combat stats drops from many to few. Bringing more consistency to hull speeds should return more complexity than it takes as the number of meaningful stats increases. Over time, we expect more hull classes to become useful to more players.
I am not sure how someone can think this and believe themselves to be reasonable or logical. You state in this comment that speed is everything, more important than range. How does normalizing speed increase the number of meaningful stats? All you have left is range. I am having a hard time wrapping my head around that statement. Maybe further developing this answer or providing examples would be best.
Mobile has since gone on to become
the largest platform for VC. However, designing and supporting an
identical game across platforms that are so different in size, power and
accessibility is not without its tradeoffs. Some aspects of the
original PC game work well on mobile, some not so much.
And
this is where we catch up to today, or rather five months ago, when
KIXEYE started to put some serious thought into addressing the areas of
VC that were not working well.
If you want to play catch-up, you should be improving the interface of the mobile platform to make its usability comparable to that of a PC User, not changing the fundamentals of a game that everyone has been playing. Just because that may be challenging doesn't mean you don't do it. Also, one player does not just rely on a single platform to access the game. Have you checked how many people who use mobile also play on PC? Whether intended or not, the mobile version does serve a purpose. Just because it is not the purpose that you want doesn't make changing the fundamentals of the game an acceptable decision.
The majority of people didn’t find
what they were looking for in VC and simply stopped playing. For those
people, VC failed. It failed to be fun. It failed to be engaging day
after day.
Have you ever considered the possibility that the reason why VC failed for them is because it is just not their type of game? A person who is interested in the game would put in the effort to learn the mechanics of the game, just like the old players and even current new players.
Also, not every player's needs/wants are the same. Some prefer PVP while others prefer PVE. If you want a larger proportion of players to feel engaged, you should be introducing newer aspects to the game that tie to the existing game. Players who prefer PvE should be allowed to play through the storyline and be rewarded so.
Players who prefer PvP should have an aspect of the game where PvP is rewarding.
At this moment, you only want to shift to PvP. Is it any surprising that you are not able to capture a larger audience when you are only offering a 1-dimensional aspect of the game?
And there
lies the catch-22. Some of the aspects of the game that appeal to the
current player base are the exact same aspects that frustrate or
overload new players. To improve the experience for new players, and to
grow VC, we have to alter the game to make it more attractive to new
players. Sometimes, after considering all other options, this includes
altering the game in a way that frustrates the current player base.
A game is frustrating and overloading when one doesn't understand what they need/should do. Instead of this kind of re-balancing, have you ever thought of improving the tutorial-aspects of the game to get them more familiarized on what makes the game fun rather than effectively creating a new game? A game is worth playing if it is challenging and rewarding. Right now, poor guidance and tutorial to give them key learning experiences is missing. It is the active players who provide "training" that actually help players get up to speed (pun intended). It is not surprising that if players can't find other players who are more passionate about the game to "guide" them, they would lose interest. Hence, better tutorials are needed!!
Bringing more consistency to hull speeds
should return more complexity than it takes as the number of meaningful
stats increases. Over time, we expect more hull classes to become
useful to more players.
No it won't. All this means is that if a tactic against one class of ships is figured out, then all ships in that class are doomed. At the present moment, the difference in speed gives the variety. A strategy against a slower Venom or Fury will not work against a faster Dread or Zeal. This argument is flawed.
The MK upgrade bonuses have already introduced new ships into fleet combat (Echo/Aurora Lance destroyers for example). One might even go as far as saying that this has already achieved the effect of making more hulls useful already.
Speed is a very important stat. So important that it can override nearly all other stats except for Range. The importance of speed (running away indefinitely) has already been restricted by the introduction of a limited combat area. Also, not being able to catch a ships can also mean that your choice of fleet and decisions made in the combat area are inappropriate. This point is moot.
None of the changes are designed to make
money, they are designed to improve the accessibility of the game by
better defining the meta. Please address the root cause of this issue by improving the interface for the various platforms rather than creating a new game (Re-defining the meta). This will then tie in to your strategic decision to have 1 game across all platforms. And that 1 game is Vega Conflict in its current form.
One of our key goals for the future is
to increase the longevity of ship builds across all classes. It is vital
to the health of the game that ships have long, useful lives. The only ships to have long useful lives will be the ISC ships because they are the end goal. Every other ship will be abandoned since it is just a lousier version of the same ship. Your actions are in fact, achieving the opposite effect. And when all that is left are ISC ships, are you going to start another vicious cycle of rebalancing again?
Note, the ISC / Cruiser Armor bonus is
‘repair free’. An ISC ship with a 30% Armor bonus is not charged repair
for the additional armor points. At the end of the day when every player eventually reaches this level, there won't be any relative bonus. This point is moot.
I play vega on august 2015. Just new player. My age over 30. I play this vega because it remain me about vintage game like master of orion. Yes i like strategy game. Research something , inventedproduced and put it on our creation ship. I don't interest in arcade game.
If you developer want this game growing up. Please stop your plan on make speed ship equal base on type. You re balance armor and shield its Ok for me. But speed , please don't ! . As PC player and manual piloting I strongly against it. I enjoy challenge defeat higher ship with high speed fleet make adrenalin rush. So i hunt and join on event collecting rare ship special with agility / speed. Because it fun. If you rebalance all speed equal according its type, fun is gone for me.
my advice 1. Don't like rebalance speed. For fast speed Vsec Hull you can add penalty longer time build and repair. For high armor but slower ship like ICS you can add bonus faster build and repair time. 2. Make faction. Not every tech and weapon can put on all ship. maybe you can launch on event vega tech , ICS tech , or alien tech with unique bonus and ability for certain ship/faction. So player can feel more in this game and take side which faction they will support. So Vsec hull can't attach with weapon or armor from ICS, or else. Faster ship have lower damage fire power slower ship have stronger armor and more fire power. So player can decide who love manual and speed choose vsec ull/faction. Who love auto maybe choose ics. 3. Coin...yes its important for your business. Add features renting ship/tech for 3 days for hundreds coin. Or renting mercenary pilot / mechanic for 3 days for coins so it can boost up stat on our fleet. Maybe it can add more speed, turning, agility, fire power or repair time on battle. It will more fun for us and more coin for you.
"The majority of people didn’t find what they were looking for in VC and simply stopped playing. For those people, VC failed. It failed to be fun. It failed to be engaging day after day."
So the solution is to completely negate autofleets, making it much more difficult and time consuming for new players to compete in events, getting resources, farming blueprints and surviving in general? Good Job!
Please answer - why do u killed some really interesting ships? The worst thing is Destiny. It WAS very interesting, speed-based, fun ship for good pilots. Bit i had some weakness. But many ppl and I liked it.
Now, Exodus is much better, because of second special.
Why?
Good morning dear friends. Only express my opinion, I love vega conflict, have several accounts, they seem very well canvios but only find one thing wrong. My main account has many large ships and what I will not do is spend time or money either in repair or retrofitting, I can not find it fair. And it is simple, or reequipacion of all ships is free and instant or I wont play and I'll find another game, and I sure as many players make. Thank you for listening to my opinion
@Destoryer Of Worlds said:
So, why couldn't you just make V-Sec hulls the most powerful instead of iron star hulls? V-Sec hulls take longer, so they should be better!
Also, 21k Health MkV heretics is ridiculous. You can fit that, plus good weapons, on 6 ships in a fleet. They would smash EVERYTHING that isnt a destroyer, and they can just run from those.
There's no point in building anything other than Rebel and Iron star hulls now, because the only thing VEGA and V-sec hulls offer is higher mass and SLIGHTLY higher base HP (and a few other useless stats)
Rather build Vega and ISC. Rebel hulls don't offer enough mass for 42k fits and can only go up to MK IV.
Give us a real reason to think this update need to get into the game. No word about any free refit or at least a refit bay. 200+ ships that are in need for a refit. Calculate how much time i cant play the game then. Please just give us some real reasons to think its worth it
The main reason new players drop out of this game has nothing to do with the ship speeds, its the insanely long build and repair times the game has.
"One of our key goals for the future is to increase the longevity of ship builds across all classes. It is vital to the health of the game that ships have long, useful lives."
You keep talking about ship longevity and that was a reason you brought in mk upgrades. The only thing that determines a ships "longevity" is its specifications. Thats it, just its specs. You give us a ship with good specs we will use it, if you don't then we won't. Its simple. There was nothing wrong with ship longevity in the game, I don't know where you got this from. People still use Rancors, Revs, and the Dread has been around a long time and its one of the most popular in the game - because of its specs. Well up until these changes which kill battleships, so you are actually hurting what you say you want to improve.
"None of the changes are designed to make money, they are designed to improve the accessibility of the game by better defining the meta."
Ok, we are not stupid, and being so dishonest with us doesn't win you any points. How can you say that none of the changes were designed to make you money. The new ISC crafting alone is a new cash cow to milk. You have killed one class of ships and buffed another. And at the same time you have done all you can to kill instant repair fleets. The last six months have been a progressive effort to weaken ship shields. More and more phased weapons and this update utterly destroys shock and deflector shields
If this wasn't about money you would be offering compensation. Something most games would do when pushing these kind of changes on their players. Free instant refits for everyone's ships, and refunds for people who spent money on your mk upgrade packages the last few months.
You could have given a warning, even two weeks ago before people bought the zeal crafting packages, that the ship was to undergo major changes. That would have been the honest thing to do.
Paul it is good to FINALLY get a response from someone at Kixeye after the plethora of complaints regarding the latest rebalancing announcement.
I will keep my points brief. I can appreciate you trying to strike a balance between current and new players and I agree with this. There is one change however that has been overwhelmingly criticised and which is being asked to be dropped. That is having all speeds standardised for a ship class. This is nothing short of false advertising. For example, our last event for has the python which has always had sector speed advantage. Why did we bother working so hard for this for you to take it away a week later? Is that nothing short of being deceptive?
Revs need to have a speed increase to be relevant again. Beyond that drop all other speed changes and I think we could live with the rest of the changes with far less grumbling.
What i like is that they put all changes in at once. What i dont like is low lvl fleets get so much more rep times. Because of this all these low lvl players will leave. New ones dont stay and because sectors are empty, players are bored and leave. Even if they dont there is noone to battle with so no rep times anyway so no coins. Overall vega conflic will be dead by the summer. And i hate long posts. Keep it short guys.
Bye bye KIXEYE, Vega Conflict was the first and finally the last game i played from you.
I have never seen such an arrogant and rude community treatment like this. The whole community tries to explain you, that this rebalance will destroy the game and you ignore this completely. You introduced a new carrier with increased speed in comparison to most of all ... and now all should have the same speed ... i cant understand these decisions !!!!
Furthermore it seems to me that the last weeks and mounths (december 2015 to february 2016) with anunbelievable amount of events, where several VSec and Vega Corporation hulls could be obtained, wasjust to earn money as much as possible since a huge part of the community will stop playing this game. These hulls are useless after the rebalance!!!
Thisfinancial strain, due to leaving players and rebalance effort, has to be compensated. And as far as I can see this has been done by cheating current players ... a barefaced lie !!!!
The game is getting more simple with regards to ship speeds, that is true. However there are different kinds of complexity. Speed is a very important stat. So important that it can override nearly all other stats except for Range. When that happens the game actually loses a ton of complexity, as the number of meaningful combat stats drops from many to few. Bringing more consistency to hull speeds should return more complexity than it takes as the number of meaningful stats increases. Over time, we expect more hull classes to become useful to more players.
I am not sure how someone can think this and believe themselves to be reasonable or logical. You state in this comment that speed is everything, more important than range. How does normalizing speed increase the number of meaningful stats? All you have left is range. I am having a hard time wrapping my head around that statement. Maybe further developing this answer or providing examples would be best.
You dont even have range. The so called "short range" impluse beam is nearly max range, has great dps and no blindspot.. It never misses too..
All it will ever come down to is armor. Armor armor armor... Prepare for coin mash conflict.
Please explain what is the difference between a MK upgrade and getting T2, T3 vega, vsec or ISC fleets? In both cases we can get bigger mass, more slots. In some cases with MK upgrade we get some extra efficiency in dealing with other ships types. And no, more health is not any different than getting an extra armor slot. In conclusion you are just replicating the MK upgrades on a whole ship class. A Herectic is just a Genesys upgraded several times, or a Apocs upgrade a bit, hence those inferior ships in the same class will die, like we do not keep MK2 ships but we want MK5 ones because they are superior to MK2. What troubles me is that you cannot understand that you are duplicating the MK upgrades on whole ships class
I have never seen such an arrogant and rude community treatment like this.
The whole community tries to explain you, that this rebalance will
destroy the game and you ignore this completely. You introduced a new
carrier with increased speed in comparison to most of all ... and now
all should have the same speed ... i cant understand these decisions
!!!!
Furthermore it seems to me that the last weeks and mounths (december 2015 to february 2016) with anunbelievable amount of events, where several VSec and Vega Corporation hulls could be obtained, wasjust to earn money as much as possible since a huge part of the community will stop playing this game. These hulls are useless after the rebalance!!!
Thisfinancial strain, due to leaving players and rebalance effort, has to be compensated. And as far as I can see this has been done by cheating current players ... a barefaced lie !!!!
The main thing that bothers us is that speed differences was what made each ship from each factions differ from each other, mass and equipment loadouts are a second thing. just implement some stuff from your other games, like say the repair modifier from Battle Pirates making low level ships quick to repair, or co op battles get those beta servers up and get some players in to test them, after all players are the king, we should be able to at least alter the dev process if something is terribly wrong.
If you are NOT doing this for the money, GIVE US THOSE FREE REFITS FOR ALL SHIPS, or at least a refit bay. Because with the new fleet mass limit, ENTIRE FLEETS needs to be refitted, not just the dreads or Furies.
I read this expecting some real information, but after I finish reading it, it fail short, just a bunch of nice politic talk, no real substance. I will be blunt.
I returned to the game as Creative
Director back in August, and while the current situation is definitely a
low point
where is CM Skeedor !!!!??????
Over time, we expect more hull classes to become useful to more players.
I remember LXC talking about no more hulls, now this is false?
better defining the meta.
Better is not a measure, its just a nice word.
One of our
key goals for the future is to increase the longevity of ship builds
across all classes. It is vital to the health of the game that ships
have long, useful lives.
sorry i really don't believe this any more
We are planning on providing some assistance to players to
help them adjust their equipment to the new meta.
will just benefit some extreme cases?
ships should now
downgrade their shields and armor and take more weapons. As they do
their repair times will drop. We will be monitoring builds to make sure
this happens.
But you know people will have to just add ridiculous amounts of zynthium and the lvl 11 bay will allow for that looking at some days to repair a single heretic fleet, monitoring this?
PS: cant trust Kixeye if the employees lie when confronted with what it seams to be some denial of service attacks on the server. spank CS CHRIS for blaming the players that get affected with laughable copy pasted excuses. plus we confront LXC with proof about players using scripts and we don't see a fix on that.
"One of our key goals for the future is to increase the longevity of ship builds across all classes. It is vital to the health of the game that ships have long, useful lives."
So with these new ISC mk upgrades the Iron Star ships will be the strongest in the game and its what everyone will gravitate towards using. (Those of us who are still playing the game that is) Four months from now its basically going to be IronStar Conflict. So how does that improve the health of the game or insuring the long useful lives of the non ISC hulls?
The hull repair change will significantly shift the meta of ship design towards lower armor, high damage ships. As it does ship repair times will fall.
The point is:
A.: Repair times should not be re-structured. It should be generally lowered accross the board. Allowing people to fight 4 high-end-battles a day rather than 1-2 is not only improving the gaming-experience of the current players. That information gets around which means that it also reaches out to new players or more imporantly: They will in turn reach out for Vega Conflict.
Let's just imagine for complete insane moment that our fleet bay would be repairing twice as fast (which would still be anything but fast, right?) How much more intense and fun would giant wars be? How much longer would the fighting last (The fighting of regular players) Coining Players would still coin just as much but "regular players" could stand up to them better allowing a feeling of "more fairness" therefore creating a greater insentive to play more - assist more - definitely spend more time which should the the primary focus: "How can we make players WANT to spend more time in our game"?
B.: Your re-structuring of repair time achieves the complete opposite of what I wrote above. Players investing lots of money will not only have more fleets at hands now. Their fleets will now also have twice as much survivability. Those who don't care how long the repair time of their fleets is get in turn rewarded with much stronger fleets. Having a bit more damage output for the saved mass of armor does not compensate for having twice as much Armor & Shields. So it will frustrate players even more that are creating "reasonable" fleet layouts. Before they could outplay a "Coiner" and have the feeling of success even though his never-ending fleets would eventually out-ressource maybe your entire alliance even. But that "regular player" had a chance ot dominating at least the battles he had before his fleet-manager went all red.
That's my point of view when it comes to the repair-time changes.
-Important Viewer-Question: What happens to "Enhanced" Hulls? Their main reason was always the speed upgrade...
What a lame explanation that has no value and appears to have taken little thought.
Where is Hitler video #3?
No announcement has been made however on what the actualy rebalance compensation will be... another way for uncertainty to **** off a player or two...
Will we get a free refitte fore the ships that after the update will be over mass ?
What's the point of sleepless nights farming those Vega / Vsec hulls only to find out that they will nerf it real hard to the point that their only leverage against the generic research-able rebel hulls are the extra mass..
Range and speed are controling? Of course they are. Always have and always will be, both in RL and any gaming platform.
If speeds are all equal, range will dominate.
If speed and range are equal, raw firepower will dominate.
If speed, range and raw firepower are all equal, armor will control.
If speed, range, raw firepower and armor are all equal, sheer numbers will control.
If numbers too are equalized, then the game is little more than high card.
The biggest reason for the backlash is twofold.
First, is the time invested so far is being undone. I don't think the muckety mucks truly understand that from the player side.
But even if the time and money invested by the players has to be undone, then KIX needs to make things right. You can't take our money and time and money. Did I mention money, and say whoops, just buy more stuff.
There's absolutely no reason why players can't be given free refits, or a month of reduced refit time, or simply coins. That's the second reason for the backlash; it can be mitigated by KIX.
We're not looking to come out ahead. We're looking to be in the position we would have been in had KIX not screwed up so bad that this radical change was needed.
So I appreciate the platitudes, but until you figure out why this rebalance still won't address the issues you claim, and why players rightfully feel they are being crapped on, don't expect the sentiment to go away anytime soon.
I am not sure how someone can think this and believe themselves to be reasonable or logical. You state in this comment that speed is everything, more important than range. How does normalizing speed increase the number of meaningful stats? All you have left is range. I am having a hard time wrapping my head around that statement. Maybe further developing this answer or providing examples would be best.
Mobile has since gone on to become the largest platform for VC. However, designing and supporting an identical game across platforms that are so different in size, power and accessibility is not without its tradeoffs. Some aspects of the original PC game work well on mobile, some not so much.
And this is where we catch up to today, or rather five months ago, when KIXEYE started to put some serious thought into addressing the areas of VC that were not working well.
If you want to play catch-up, you should be improving the interface of the mobile platform to make its usability comparable to that of a PC User, not changing the fundamentals of a game that everyone has been playing. Just because that may be challenging doesn't mean you don't do it. Also, one player does not just rely on a single platform to access the game. Have you checked how many people who use mobile also play on PC? Whether intended or not, the mobile version does serve a purpose. Just because it is not the purpose that you want doesn't make changing the fundamentals of the game an acceptable decision.
The majority of people didn’t find what they were looking for in VC and simply stopped playing. For those people, VC failed. It failed to be fun. It failed to be engaging day after day.
Have you ever considered the possibility that the reason why VC failed for them is because it is just not their type of game? A person who is interested in the game would put in the effort to learn the mechanics of the game, just like the old players and even current new players.
Also, not every player's needs/wants are the same. Some prefer PVP while others prefer PVE. If you want a larger proportion of players to feel engaged, you should be introducing newer aspects to the game that tie to the existing game. Players who prefer PvE should be allowed to play through the storyline and be rewarded so.
Players who prefer PvP should have an aspect of the game where PvP is rewarding.
At this moment, you only want to shift to PvP. Is it any surprising that you are not able to capture a larger audience when you are only offering a 1-dimensional aspect of the game?
And there lies the catch-22. Some of the aspects of the game that appeal to the current player base are the exact same aspects that frustrate or overload new players. To improve the experience for new players, and to grow VC, we have to alter the game to make it more attractive to new players. Sometimes, after considering all other options, this includes altering the game in a way that frustrates the current player base.
A game is frustrating and overloading when one doesn't understand what they need/should do. Instead of this kind of re-balancing, have you ever thought of improving the tutorial-aspects of the game to get them more familiarized on what makes the game fun rather than effectively creating a new game? A game is worth playing if it is challenging and rewarding. Right now, poor guidance and tutorial to give them key learning experiences is missing. It is the active players who provide "training" that actually help players get up to speed (pun intended). It is not surprising that if players can't find other players who are more passionate about the game to "guide" them, they would lose interest. Hence, better tutorials are needed!!Bringing more consistency to hull speeds should return more complexity than it takes as the number of meaningful stats increases. Over time, we expect more hull classes to become useful to more players.
No it won't. All this means is that if a tactic against one class of ships is figured out, then all ships in that class are doomed. At the present moment, the difference in speed gives the variety. A strategy against a slower Venom or Fury will not work against a faster Dread or Zeal. This argument is flawed.
The MK upgrade bonuses have already introduced new ships into fleet combat (Echo/Aurora Lance destroyers for example). One might even go as far as saying that this has already achieved the effect of making more hulls useful already.
Speed is a very important stat. So important that it can override nearly all other stats except for Range.
The importance of speed (running away indefinitely) has already been restricted by the introduction of a limited combat area. Also, not being able to catch a ships can also mean that your choice of fleet and decisions made in the combat area are inappropriate. This point is moot.
None of the changes are designed to make money, they are designed to improve the accessibility of the game by better defining the meta.
Please address the root cause of this issue by improving the interface for the various platforms rather than creating a new game (Re-defining the meta). This will then tie in to your strategic decision to have 1 game across all platforms. And that 1 game is Vega Conflict in its current form.
One of our key goals for the future is to increase the longevity of ship builds across all classes. It is vital to the health of the game that ships have long, useful lives.
The only ships to have long useful lives will be the ISC ships because they are the end goal. Every other ship will be abandoned since it is just a lousier version of the same ship. Your actions are in fact, achieving the opposite effect. And when all that is left are ISC ships, are you going to start another vicious cycle of rebalancing again?
Note, the ISC / Cruiser Armor bonus is ‘repair free’. An ISC ship with a 30% Armor bonus is not charged repair for the additional armor points.
At the end of the day when every player eventually reaches this level, there won't be any relative bonus. This point is moot.
If you developer want this game growing up. Please stop your plan on make speed ship equal base on type. You re balance armor and shield its Ok for me. But speed , please don't ! . As PC player and manual piloting I strongly against it. I enjoy challenge defeat higher ship with high speed fleet make adrenalin rush. So i hunt and join on event collecting rare ship special with agility / speed. Because it fun. If you rebalance all speed equal according its type, fun is gone for me.
my advice
1. Don't like rebalance speed. For fast speed Vsec Hull you can add penalty longer time build and repair. For high armor but slower ship like ICS you can add bonus faster build and repair time.
2. Make faction. Not every tech and weapon can put on all ship. maybe you can launch on event vega tech , ICS tech , or alien tech with unique bonus and ability for certain ship/faction. So player can feel more in this game and take side which faction they will support. So Vsec hull can't attach with weapon or armor from ICS, or else. Faster ship have lower damage fire power slower ship have stronger armor and more fire power. So player can decide who love manual and speed choose vsec ull/faction. Who love auto maybe choose ics.
3. Coin...yes its important for your business. Add features renting ship/tech for 3 days for hundreds coin. Or renting mercenary pilot / mechanic for 3 days for coins so it can boost up stat on our fleet. Maybe it can add more speed, turning, agility, fire power or repair time on battle. It will more fun for us and more coin for you.
it just few suggestion
please considered.
So the solution is to completely negate autofleets, making it much more difficult and time consuming for new players to compete in events, getting resources, farming blueprints and surviving in general? Good Job!
Please answer - why do u killed some really interesting ships? The worst thing is Destiny. It WAS very interesting, speed-based, fun ship for good pilots. Bit i had some weakness. But many ppl and I liked it.
Now, Exodus is much better, because of second special.
Why?
The same for Eagle and it's strafing.
Yeah let's make vega like battle pirates. Wait, what the **** is battle pirates?
Good morning dear friends. Only express my opinion, I love vega conflict, have several accounts, they seem very well canvios but only find one thing wrong. My main account has many large ships and what I will not do is spend time or money either in repair or retrofitting, I can not find it fair. And it is simple, or reequipacion of all ships is free and instant or I wont play and I'll find another game, and I sure as many players make. Thank you for listening to my opinion
Rather build Vega and ISC. Rebel hulls don't offer enough mass for 42k fits and can only go up to MK IV.
Keep on polishing
Give us a real reason to think this update need to get into the game. No word about any free refit or at least a refit bay. 200+ ships that are in need for a refit. Calculate how much time i cant play the game then. Please just give us some real reasons to think its worth it
The main reason new players drop out of this game has nothing to do with the ship speeds, its the insanely long build and repair times the game has.
"One of our key goals for the future is to increase the longevity of ship builds across all classes. It is vital to the health of the game that ships have long, useful lives."
You keep talking about ship longevity and that was a reason you brought in mk upgrades. The only thing that determines a ships "longevity" is its specifications. Thats it, just its specs. You give us a ship with good specs we will use it, if you don't then we won't. Its simple. There was nothing wrong with ship longevity in the game, I don't know where you got this from. People still use Rancors, Revs, and the Dread has been around a long time and its one of the most popular in the game - because of its specs. Well up until these changes which kill battleships, so you are actually hurting what you say you want to improve.
"None of the changes are designed to make money, they are designed to improve the accessibility of the game by better defining the meta."
Ok, we are not stupid, and being so dishonest with us doesn't win you any points. How can you say that none of the changes were designed to make you money. The new ISC crafting alone is a new cash cow to milk. You have killed one class of ships and buffed another. And at the same time you have done all you can to kill instant repair fleets. The last six months have been a progressive effort to weaken ship shields. More and more phased weapons and this update utterly destroys shock and deflector shields
If this wasn't about money you would be offering compensation. Something most games would do when pushing these kind of changes on their players. Free instant refits for everyone's ships, and refunds for people who spent money on your mk upgrade packages the last few months.
You could have given a warning, even two weeks ago before people bought the zeal crafting packages, that the ship was to undergo major changes. That would have been the honest thing to do.
I will keep my points brief. I can appreciate you trying to strike a balance between current and new players and I agree with this. There is one change however that has been overwhelmingly criticised and which is being asked to be dropped. That is having all speeds standardised for a ship class. This is nothing short of false advertising. For example, our last event for has the python which has always had sector speed advantage. Why did we bother working so hard for this for you to take it away a week later? Is that nothing short of being deceptive?
Revs need to have a speed increase to be relevant again. Beyond that drop all other speed changes and I think we could live with the rest of the changes with far less grumbling.
I have never seen such an arrogant and rude community treatment like this. The whole community tries to explain you, that this rebalance will destroy the game and you ignore this completely. You introduced a new carrier with increased speed in comparison to most of all ... and now all should have the same speed ... i cant understand these decisions !!!!
Furthermore it seems to me that the last weeks and mounths (december 2015 to february 2016) with an unbelievable amount of events, where several VSec and Vega Corporation hulls could be obtained, was just to earn money as much as possible since a huge part of the community will stop playing this game. These hulls are useless after the rebalance!!!
This financial strain, due to leaving players and rebalance effort, has to be compensated. And as far as I can see this has been done by cheating current players ... a barefaced lie !!!!
You dont even have range. The so called "short range" impluse beam is nearly max range, has great dps and no blindspot.. It never misses too..
All it will ever come down to is armor. Armor armor armor... Prepare for coin mash conflict.
What troubles me is that you cannot understand that you are duplicating the MK upgrades on whole ships class
Omg. I knew it. This must be one man decision. The Kix team would never make bad and fatal decision like this.
Mr Founder. Do you honestly play Vega? You are completely out of touch.
I will not elaborate my objection. Others have made their points crystal clear.
Let time decides if this one man decision is the reason of the end of Vega.
I'm just very sad when that happens.
Sincerely.
Vega fan.
Furthermore it seems to me that the last weeks and mounths (december 2015 to february 2016) with an unbelievable amount of events, where several VSec and Vega Corporation hulls could be obtained, was just to earn money as much as possible since a huge part of the community will stop playing this game. These hulls are useless after the rebalance!!!
This financial strain, due to leaving players and rebalance effort, has to be compensated. And as far as I can see this has been done by cheating current players ... a barefaced lie !!!!
just implement some stuff from your other games, like say the repair modifier from Battle Pirates making low level ships quick to repair, or co op battles
get those beta servers up and get some players in to test them, after all players are the king, we should be able to at least alter the dev process if something is terribly wrong.
If you are NOT doing this for the money, GIVE US THOSE FREE REFITS FOR ALL SHIPS, or at least a refit bay. Because with the new fleet mass limit, ENTIRE FLEETS needs to be refitted, not just the dreads or Furies.
where is CM Skeedor !!!!??????
I remember LXC talking about no more hulls, now this is false?
Better is not a measure, its just a nice word.
sorry i really don't believe this any more
will just benefit some extreme cases?
But you know people will have to just add ridiculous amounts of zynthium and the lvl 11 bay will allow for that looking at some days to repair a single heretic fleet, monitoring this?
PS: cant trust Kixeye if the employees lie when confronted with what it seams to be some denial of service attacks on the server. spank CS CHRIS for blaming the players that get affected with laughable copy pasted excuses. plus we confront LXC with proof about players using scripts and we don't see a fix on that.https://www.facebook.com/groups/VEGAConflictAllSectors/
So with these new ISC mk upgrades the Iron Star ships will be the strongest in the game and its what everyone will gravitate towards using. (Those of us who are still playing the game that is) Four months from now its basically going to be IronStar Conflict. So how does that improve the health of the game or insuring the long useful lives of the non ISC hulls?
If I player wrote this, he would get banned.....
A.:
Repair times should not be re-structured. It should be generally lowered accross the board. Allowing people to fight 4 high-end-battles a day rather than 1-2 is not only improving the gaming-experience of the current players. That information gets around which means that it also reaches out to new players or more imporantly: They will in turn reach out for Vega Conflict.
Let's just imagine for complete insane moment that our fleet bay would be repairing twice as fast (which would still be anything but fast, right?)
How much more intense and fun would giant wars be? How much longer would the fighting last (The fighting of regular players) Coining Players would still coin just as much but "regular players" could stand up to them better allowing a feeling of "more fairness" therefore creating a greater insentive to play more - assist more - definitely spend more time which should the the primary focus: "How can we make players WANT to spend more time in our game"?
B.:
Your re-structuring of repair time achieves the complete opposite of what I wrote above. Players investing lots of money will not only have more fleets at hands now. Their fleets will now also have twice as much survivability. Those who don't care how long the repair time of their fleets is get in turn rewarded with much stronger fleets. Having a bit more damage output for the saved mass of armor does not compensate for having twice as much Armor & Shields. So it will frustrate players even more that are creating "reasonable" fleet layouts. Before they could outplay a "Coiner" and have the feeling of success even though his never-ending fleets would eventually out-ressource maybe your entire alliance even. But that "regular player" had a chance ot dominating at least the battles he had before his fleet-manager went all red.
That's my point of view when it comes to the repair-time changes.
-Important Viewer-Question: What happens to "Enhanced" Hulls? Their main reason was always the speed upgrade...
Manni