Explanation of the great grand rebalance from Paul Preece, founder of KIXEYE

  • ThatOneGuy2000
    ThatOneGuy2000
    Greenhorn
    Joined Jul 2013 Posts: 9
    HELP!!!! im butthurt...Please give me a minute to think up a good excuse as to why..
    Oh nope...never mind i found my car keys....(just figured i should find something to complain about.)
    Carry on and have a nice day. ;)
  • LTBloodshed
    LTBloodshed
    Force to be Reckoned With
    Joined Jun 2015 Posts: 1,525
    CM LXC said:

    You’re only doing this for the money:

    This specific set of changes will most likely lose us money in the short term. We know we’ve lost the confidence of players by moving the goalposts and it will take time to rebuild it. None of the changes are designed to make money, they are designed to improve the accessibility of the game by better defining the meta.

    How can I feel safe investing time/money into the game when you can just change everything in a heartbeat?

    We decided the best approach was to get all the disruptive changes out in one go. To just rip the band-aid off. More disruptive in the short term but it sets us up to be more consistent in the longer term. 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.

    Let's talk about finances.  In the instant short term, i.e., the next 3 weeks, yes this is going to cost you money.  People are really pissed!  However, in the short term, i.e., next few months, this is probably going to make you MORE money short term. Why?

    1. Angry players will still stop coining.  Your players that drop $50 to$100 once or twice a year may never coin again. 

    2. Mega Rich players [ie those folks who flight script to get 7 gold fleets and put them all out on auto] will go on a coin binge to do the same with ISC hulls.  These are the players that spend thousands a year - your whales.  These may drive short-term ISC related revenue, which then tapers off once they have  gold fleets again.


    I think short term, item 2 offsets item 1.  But in the long run, item 1 offsets item 2.


    The real question in my mind is, does that make you more money over the long term?  Our alliance has already physically lost hard-coining players.  As in, they dropped tag and quit after being in our alliance for a year+.  I don't think the community is going to forgot this; the number of changes that drove forced obselescence are so high; not just massive speed nerfs, but also the re-massing and huge armor buffs to ISC.  After running non-stop coin deals for MK upgrades, this was a total bait-n-switch.  I think you will lose a lot of medium draw [$100 to 200/yr] coiner customers.


    Money Making Solution

    If you ever want to earn trust back and continue to harvest most of the veteran player base, I think you need to extend a speed-related olive branch.  Here's an example - introduce VEGA and VSEC only thrusters, only through the BM!

    1. Make thrusters with the same mass of R5, Fus3, but for VEGA and VSEC only with better stats [i.e., more forward, etc]

    2.  By putting in the BM only, supply is limited, and this drives a purpose for BA missions again

    3. People will coin the hell out of these, and drive a continuous source of revenue for a long time

    4. While people will be mad about this, as it would be viewed as nickel/diming, the reality is they would prefer this to, say, nothing

  • Iceman1159
    Iceman1159
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Sep 2013 Posts: 124

    You’re only doing this for the money:

    This specific set of changes will most likely lose us money in the short term. We know we’ve lost the confidence of players by moving the goalposts and it will take time to rebuild it. None of the changes are designed to make money, they are designed to improve the accessibility of the game by better defining the meta.

    So what your saying repeatedly is months.... Id wager a bet that 90% of us speaking against this change are a mix of beta and 3+ year players. We have proven to be a loyal fan base even in your flawed releases. I can apprecoate the desire to grow, adapt. And over come change.... But when you have such a large scale saying your wrong.... Then you probably are. Personally if it is the new gen that your after, why not simply start them in a single sector to learn the game, and when the hit say level 30 intro them to relocation? I dont know i have a ton of ideas or thoughts but in the end i know this is your pony show not mine.

                      Pick battles big enough to matter, small enough to win               

  • Zombie3116
    Zombie3116
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined May 2015 Posts: 194
    Thru all this none of the other concerns me and others have raised has been answered with how the game is broken


    1. Blackmarket... This is now just pointless and a pure money grab with NO real use,great idea. badly implemented,ruined even more
    2. Alliance features. So many good ideas given about how to make this better,all have been ignored,not to mention the amount of frustration it brings
    3. Farming vs pvp. I dont see how any of these changes will make the game more pvp orientated? Were farming like idiots out there,weve been farming like idiots now for so long and to get all that thrown back at us with,hey all those hundreds of fleets killed to make mk 5 ships,well sorry,have a torn of band aid. o wait,new ics hull mk upgrades coming....more farming
    4. Fun events. Well thats not happening,makes it even less fun when difficulty goes up mid event...
    5. Game balance.... Say what,isnt this whole thing about game balance,but wait,now the whole game is gona re balance with ICS hulls being the new meta,how is that game balance?

    So there is 5 simple points,the game feels broken and now it just feels more generic with other hulls being the new in thing and were all left with broken fleets and broken promises.

    I wouldn't be surprised if the next thing was to remove control during battle and let the ai do it as it makes it more compatible and fair for all players

  • Bludcurd
    Bludcurd
    Potential Threat
    Joined May 2015 Posts: 32

    I don't have much to add that hasn't been said already. I will keep it simple.

    ALL individual ships deserve one free instant refit due to the reset (not rebalance). Otherwise the refitting will take months and that Kix is just not fair or good business.

  • DeathDealerD
    DeathDealerD
    Potential Threat
    Joined May 2011 Posts: 27
    Guys i hate to break it to you all but this is exactly and i mean exactly what happened in battle pirates they are following the same template right down to the increase in events and tech and the frequency they arrive,they are screwing Vega exactly as they did in BP the game that came prior to this.. just ask about look it up.. same rubbish and poor ethics just their next venture ..
  • Dirty Mix
    Dirty Mix
    Strike-force Captain
    Joined Oct 2013 Posts: 787
    Guys i hate to break it to you all but this is exactly and i mean exactly what happened in battle pirates they are following the same template right down to the increase in events and tech and the frequency they arrive,they are screwing Vega exactly as they did in BP the game that came prior to this.. just ask about look it up.. same rubbish and poor ethics just their next venture ..
    I dont play that game, did the same changes made the player experience better? new players? is it fun? can we expect the same in VC?
  • Yayz92
    Yayz92
    Potential Threat
    Joined Sep 2015 Posts: 34
    I simply can't wrap my brain around the idea that a Genesis Cruiser can possess the same base forward velocity, strafe and turning rate as a high-end ship such as the Corinthian Cruiser. These stats should at the very least increase by each federation (i.e Rebel, VEGA, VSec and ISC). Despite the community's response to this particular change, if it's still put forward, are the enemy AI fleet's stats also reduced?

    The changes to hull mass is another serious topic that many are uncomfortable with accepting. Many of us have more than one hundred ships that would need to be altered to fit this new change. If Kixeye decides to change the mechanics of the game, they should at least compensate their players to make it easier for them to adapt to these changes. I suggest a free refit for every single ship owned, regardless if it's overweight after the change or not (one time use per ship). This would also make some Black Market items useless as they cannot be removed and fitted on another vessel.

    Please listen to the community and alter some of the statistics listed in the official post. We're starting to lose faith as our words are being lost in the void.
  • LTBloodshed
    LTBloodshed
    Force to be Reckoned With
    Joined Jun 2015 Posts: 1,525

    @Destroyer of Worlds @Soulhunters_Unk @GDIAX @mason.dixen I will let the smartes ppl on forum do the talk in behalf of us the player
    I only got 1 serious question @CM LXC WHAI FORUM BANN SO MANY PLAYERS AT OANCE ?????Just fore saying what thei think ???

    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)

    100% agree with this.  Ive been telling everybody in my alliance this and pissing them off.  The only hulls in the game you need are Rebel and ISC.  Theres no point whatsoever right now for VEGA and VSEC.  Which is why, giving them their speed edge, but a mass/armor disadvantage to ISC is a good idea.   There will be a legitimate choice then.
  • Seardluin
    Seardluin
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Dec 2014 Posts: 269
    CM LXC said:
    You’re dumbing down the game, I like complexity.

    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.


    You do realise with this, that you are removing almost all incentives of trying to do Events/Riots/BP Hunting??? Why would i got and waste a weekend trying to get a Lance for example, when i can do the exact same thing with a Scythe or a Trident??? Extra Mass you might say??? Mass is not everything.


    How can I feel safe investing time/money into the game when you can just change everything in a heartbeat?

    We decided the best approach was to get all the disruptive changes out in one go. To just rip the band-aid off. More disruptive in the short term but it sets us up to be more consistent in the longer term. 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.


    See, once again, you still do not get it. Why build an Apoc over a Rev that takes almost twice as long to build??? Oh more Mass again you say??? Mass is once again, not everything. Once again no incentive to build one.


    Based on currently available information, it appears that several fleet repair times will actually be going up (https://www.kixeye.com/forum/discussion/617254). Is there something we’re missing?

    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. We are planning on providing some assistance to players to help them adjust their equipment to the new meta.


    I seriously doubt what you are proposing will be beneficial, whatever it may be. Unless it is you rescinding the speed nerf.


    In the examples linked to above many of the ships have traded weaponry for armor and shields, which is the current meta. Those 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.


    And what do you mean by 'make sure this happens'??? Sounds rather ominous. Will you 'force' us to have our ships fitted the way you see fit???



    Paul is currently asleep, (and I'll be off shortly), but please leave your comments and questions below, and either he or I will get to them when we can. We read everything, so don't just link your previous forum thread. Remember that this is my bosses bosses boss, so keep it on topic and constructive. 

    Yet another totally useless Q&A post, and i only call it a Q&A post out of politeness. This just goes to show that Kixeye do not care about us the players, our opinions, our objections.

    Sarcasm is implied where you think it is implied.


  • LTBloodshed
    LTBloodshed
    Force to be Reckoned With
    Joined Jun 2015 Posts: 1,525
    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 !!!!

    Fix your post dude -

    You introduced a new carrier with increased speed and reduced its speed the very next day

    I too don't really buy the explanations.  There are other means to make this game more transitional/mid game player friendly.

  • DeathDealerD
    DeathDealerD
    Potential Threat
    Joined May 2011 Posts: 27
    edited 9 Mar 2016, 12:31PM
    Dirty Mix said:
    Guys i hate to break it to you all but this is exactly and i mean exactly what happened in battle pirates they are following the same template right down to the increase in events and tech and the frequency they arrive,they are screwing Vega exactly as they did in BP the game that came prior to this.. just ask about look it up.. same rubbish and poor ethics just their next venture ..
    I dont play that game, did the same changes made the player experience better? new players? is it fun? can we expect the same?


    nope they destroyed the game in favor of a more coin generating business model and kept adding new resources at one point , for instance uranium was added which of course was rare and hard to obtain but could be brought, next came merc crews so actual crews you could attach to a fleet time limited for stat boosts, these also require coins if you want anything decent. the list goes on and i promise you its a long one, in short they milked every bit out of the BP community they could and now it looks like the old cash cow BP has run dry they need a new one :) enter Vega community the battle pirates MK2 in space they have been allowing to grow under a more favorable business model and now your invested boom here it comes :) been here before getting dejavu
  • Mormegil04
    Mormegil04
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Apr 2015 Posts: 196

    Kixeye: the games has to be refreshed to survive and grow.

    Us: great then give us some help so we can refresh to survive and grow in the game we've invested ourselves in.

    It would go a long way to just that refits in April are free. One of many thoughts I'm sure you're hearing LXC and Paul.

    Communication with your end users is key. it's a little late for Paul to throw in comments on the eve of the first update for rebalancing.

  • mason.dixen
    mason.dixen
    Master Tactician
    Joined Oct 2013 Posts: 2,156

    @Destroyer of Worlds @Soulhunters_Unk @GDIAX @mason.dixen I will let the smartes ppl on forum do the talk in behalf of us the player
    I only got 1 serious question @CM LXC WHAI FORUM BANN SO MANY PLAYERS AT OANCE ?????Just fore saying what thei think ???

    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)

    Vega and Vsec also offers higher build and repair times.  Just saying.
    "Forged in the flames of the original 8k wars"
    "Participant in the Jova Crusades; the winning side"
    "I hate cargo fleets.  What else do you want me to say"
    "I attacked you because you stole my piece of cheesecake with cherry toppings."
    "The government has ordered me to harvest this farm.  Please be patient as your base is harvested."
    IGN: MasonD
    ~Condolences to all who share a similar name - there can only be one.
  • RickGarland
    RickGarland
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Aug 2014 Posts: 364

    Hes pretty much blaming the mobile players in his post explaining why the rebalance is happening saying its to make it more mobile friendly i play on mobile and i like it just fine the way it is why not take the time to make the mobile app be able to use a mouse then the mobile players will have the same control over their ships as the pc guys do. He pretty much conterdiced himself when he said the changes short term will cost them kixeye money but in the long term its set up to make them a ton of money.

  • Revann
    Revann
    Master Tactician
    Joined Jan 2014 Posts: 2,399

    This doesn't explain away or fix anything.

    -Git Gud 
  • Jonathan Hagen
    Jonathan Hagen
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Jan 2015 Posts: 323

    Speed changes will kill EVERYTHING.

    What will be the point of getting/using the following ships? Mass differences are not a big enough incentive, and you'll pretty much be throwing all of these types of ships that we built out the window. Weeks, and months of time WASTED because they're being insanely nerfed by the speed normalization,and/or in mass (fury/Dread)
    Destiny Cruiser
    Apocrypha Cruiser
    Corinthian Cruiser
    Fury Battleship
    Dread Battleship
    Zeal Battleship
    Nighthawk Frigate
    Eagle Frigate
    Osprey Frigate
    Trident Destroyer
    Nexus Destroyer
    Scythe Destroyer
    Lance Destroyer
    Taipan Cutter
    Ghirial Cutter
    Komodo Cutter
    Midguard Carrier
    Valhalla Carrier
    Ragnarok Carrier
    Valkyrie Carrier
    Freyja Carrier

    All these ships will pretty much be classified as useless, because their mass isn't the best, and they don't benefit over the ISC versions at all....along with the fact that carriers will no longer have the ability to outrun anything, therefore rendering then completely useless.

  • RickGarland
    RickGarland
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Aug 2014 Posts: 364

    Dont blame us mobile players for this **** show. I like the game just fine the way it is. Did you guys wver think that people who were new just didnt have time to play the game on mobile and thats why they stoppedalso you said short term its going to cost kixeye money but in the long term its going to make you a ton of money so yeah its still about money to you. I have never seen a company so out of touch with its players its unreal. Or maybe people leave after a short time of playing because on mobile the ships are a little harder to control due to missclicks on a touch screen so instead of making it so a mouse works with the apl and makes it easier you make it so we have to put no srmor or shoelds and die faster and spend more money on a repair you make no sense kixeye

  • the mastadon
    the mastadon
    Master Tactician
    Joined Sep 2013 Posts: 2,132
    Quite a few of us understand that the system was broken. And you are right, we have abused several aspects of it to create some truly interesting work-arounds, low intensity fleets, and general bullshit. The REASON why we did not actively go after them is simple. The amount of collateral damage to the system would be overreaching as per the butterfly effect. What we have here is not a rock tossed into the pond, its a goddamn boulder.

    The problem of this, is through the standardization of gameplay, the other key aspects that have been in development have not been touched. Meaning for those of us who would continue, we would find ourselves working out a solution into the new paradigm. In this case, as several people mentioned, it would be high intensity, high armor, cruisers using rear 5. Which by the grace of being that durable, would be too tough to kill even with stasis weaponry. The is also nothing to my knowledge but the possible application of destroyer fleets at mk5, the cruisers would probably still survive. That's simply at the higher levels as well. A number of these solutions stub the backbones of our previous system which directly hurt newer players the most.

    The best solution would be to put this on hold, and see if some factors could be reduced before you run a full conversion on the game which few people truly want. As it's still not implemented, there is still time to do so. I at least understand your concerns, but the game itself was introduced with a lot of these problems. Events being run once a month keeps a stable time of which warfare does not exist, and the amount of riots while helping smaller players is too densely concentrated. This, when you are a player, gives the illusion that this game is straight farming. And that is only working for tech rather than mk upgrades to stay competitive, of which have been sold several times leading to more problems on your side, and ours. Then the aspect of aspects of the game which needed someone to man up and fix the issue without repeated tampering with them. After a product is released it becomes progressively harder to change, which is why you probably waited until now and decided to go the most extreme. As it stands, we actually had more pressing matters, and could simply duke it out ourselves while we waited on a continuation for our spare storyline. It's a demanding job, but both sides of the table **** up on this one.
     
Sign In or Register to comment.