Explanation of the great grand rebalance from Paul Preece, founder of KIXEYE
Over the last few days, I've been collecting and collating some of your responses to the great rebalance. I promised an explanation from the person in charge of these changes, and here it is. I've rephrased the questions somewhat, but I feel it keeps the original spirit.
For those of you who don't know who he is, Paul Preece is one of the original founders of KIXEYE, and original creator of Battle Pirates.
Blue is me, Orange is Paul.
What is the point of this change?
To find the reason for the changes we have to go back in time, to when VC was first created. When KIXEYE first imagined VC it was as a space themed version of a PC game we had previously created called Battle Pirates. It’s not in our DNA to simply clone games, even one of our own, so we purpose built VC from the ground up as a true PC space game. In the process creating a bunch of new features such as combat strafing, hull classes, weapon arcs, planets, moving PvE fleets, interception, wormholes, shields, mines, asteroids and factions. As is often the case when creating new things, some of them work well, some… not so well. We’ll come back to the not-so-well bit in a minute.
At the same time as we were launching VC on PC, games were exploding onto a different device entirely: the phone. As VC was our latest and greatest game we decided to create a mobile version of it as our first proper excursion onto the mobile platform. We also decided that the mobile version of VC was not going to be a different game, dumbed down for mobile players, it was (and is) the exact same game as the PC version. Mobile players coexisting and competing with PC players in the same universe. Which is pretty cool and, as far as I’m aware, unique among realtime MMO games.
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.
To you, the long time players, the game feels good as it is. It doesn’t feel broken or badly out of shape. You like playing the game - if you didn’t you wouldn’t have continued playing it month after month. And yet here am I saying it needs fixing. Well... we’re both right. As it turns out, you guys (and gals) are pretty unique. Out of the millions of people who have played VC, it really connected with a small, select subgroup of those people (you) who really enjoyed playing VC day after day, month after month. 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.
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.
We do not want you thinking that you are not important to us. Long time players are the lifeblood of the game. In many ways you are the game. However for VC to grow and entertain a new generation of players it must change and adapt. Ultimately we feel the result is worth the effort.
Paul Preece
Founder, KIXEYE
Who in the dev team came up with this? They should be fired/stabbed/[Insert terrible thing here]:
That would be me. As a huge fan of VC I want to see the game reach the highs I know it can. I returned to the game as Creative Director back in August, and while the current situation is definitely a low point, the features the team are currently working on are some of the most exciting I’ve seen in any of our games.
You’re removing the ships individuality/variety:
We’re putting together another post to address this in more detail and with more data.
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’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.
LXC: Ok, this was Scarlett. Credit where it's due.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
It DISADVANTAGES new players because they were the ones benefiting most from shields, and are therefore hurt the most by the huge increase in repair times for them (in some cases by thousands of percent).
Those who take advantage of the much higher ship and fleet mass make fleets that win reliably by maxing out armour and shields (which they can do very easily, so many ships have mass you can't even max out with current tech) get massive increases to repair times.
I agree, speed is one of the 2 biggest factors in balancing these ships along with range. Removing it as a factor in balancing makes your job easier - but it doesn't improve gameplay. Balancing speed differences with differences in mass, build time, numbers of slots would be far preferrable to this grey lump of blah we are being presented with. One thing left out by Paul is that ships currently have different speed characteristics in different directions: forward, strafe, rotate. Some ships had better strafe (Eagle), some ships had better rotate (Python), some straight up forward speed (Komodo). Removing all of this drastically cuts the choice of ships we have. A lot of ships have the same slots, so now it's just mass. That's it.
You can't explain this away.
Actions speak louder than words.
We need this poorly thought out rebalance off the table.
Edit: I can see some of the reasoning for this boring flattening of all speeds: as Paul said, lower level players find it hard, and the speed disadvantage is a big part of that. You COULD just do balancing the way it works best, by adjusting the "outliers" (as has been done before), and you could do it in a way that makes ships MORE interesting not less: ie give the lower level rebel ships faster turnrate, or faster forward speed, but not both.
"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."
Did you know that today I got a notice about how tomorrow I can get the chance to upgrade my Corinthians by purchasing coins? You know, those same Corinthians that are now as good as an Apoc cruiser, but not even worth a **** compared to Heretic cruisers? Contradictions don't make for great means to build trust.
You are over nerfing carrier speed consider using a higher set of values as it is the only normalization change that takes the lowest value. Most normalization takes the highest or nearly the highest values.
Well, Paul tried and Paul failed. Vega dies.
I still didn't see any real explaintion in that at all...
I will wait see how things go but you have lost a coiner a big one I've dropped thousands on these bloody apps not bragging more pissed with myself I didn't use the money more wisely but now I will be
I hope you have something great coming soon to shod why your doing this as so much talk I do feel it's just talk of players quiting but if even a 1/3 it's not going to help keep others here
What's planned in future for reason for all this change ? You want us to fight as been asked so much get build times down there crazy
Makes no difference, the day those speeds change is the last day i will log in
@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 ???
Simply allow simultaneous repair of all fleets. Nice and simple. Then people will pvp a lot more knowing that 7 fleets will be mostly repaired tomorrow instead of just one.
EDIT: ...and low level players can come back in 1 hour with 7 ranc fleets repaired! woohoo (oh... that's 1 hour for a current ranc farming fleet. 3+ hours for that same fleet with the new "repair time rebalance")
You state that the new meta is higher damage but lower armour builds that will have lower repair time...... but this really does not seem to be the case.
The ISC ships that you mention do have an armour health bonus yes, but they also trade a reduced number of weapon slots for more armour slots and are clearly intended now as the top tier ships. So far from encouraging higher dps lower armour builds these encourage higher armour lower dps builds at the top level.
Secondly the fact that all armours now have the same repair cost per health encourages the use of Z armour as soon as you have it. This can of course bee seen as freeing up mass for the same health to spend on guns.... but it also negates the value of those extra ISC armour slots which could previously be used fro providing the same health at a much lower repair cost. Again the rellity here seems to contradict your stated goals.
How does reducing the effectiveness and strength of shields fit in here. Hmm, no I cant see that it does.
Finaly we have the much heralded FB11. Well this ecnourages much larger more powerfull fleets which in turn have a much higher repair time. You can say that we should build glass cannon fleets with little armour but in truth in order to compete in pvp it will be necessary to max out that mass and repair times per battle will not go down.
I appreciate that on mobile where micro management and control of groups is much harder (hint allow more zoom would help) the fact that ships of the same class have differnt speeds makes control harder, so I can sort of see that even if i dont like it. A repair time (and build time) change is needed. But overall i do not feel that you have achieved your stated goals. Time will tell but I am pessimistic and feel that you these changes are in danger of backfiring on you in a spectacular fashion. A case in point here is that it will now be much harder for new players to really get into the game and progress, because it will be much longer before they can build effective farming fleets for 27-45 vega and vsec fleets which dont require a lot of repair. The high bar to making progress already turns away many new players within a week or two... I think you may have just made it harder still to grow the player base.
Regards,
Sparrow Hawk 64
Rock, Paper, Coins
I feel utterly deceived. Kixeye must have known what they were planning and still offered the deals. I see no mention anywhere about any intention to compensate us hoaxed fools.
Not that anyones going to take this to heart from kixeye but if you all actually played the god **** game played against the vsec, played against others in clan wars hell played the **** game just for a few months every day for about an average of 6 hours against someone youd see where youd be **** the player base both new and old and how you have **** the player base already. Ive seen your employees bases they straight suck balls and are complete farms which goes to show they dont play the game long enough to understand its mechanic currently or the repair times and builds we have.
The speed change is completely bogus you might as well have everything go rancor speed thats a battleship, genesis speed thats a crusier, harrier speed thats a frigate, etc. You all really didnt think this through im all about change but when its complete garbage then i have to speak on it. You all gear towards crafting but farming is your biggest concerns aside from the yearly bonus you all want to make. Events every week is kinda burning out the player base new and old. My biggest pet peave is your employees dont play the game long enough to understand how it effects the player base. Either that or the leading game designer only cares about money. Hell you really didnt even address any of our questions...AGAIN!
Whats the point of even asking them if they are generalize listed per what the ceo wants you to answer and what the players want to ask and be heard. Now this update isnt a complete fubar but get like half a star out of 5 and thats only because of the mk upgrades to isc ships. Hell many of your employees have given your company bad rating for years. Kixeye is all over the spot light in a bad way and ots because you all in charge at kixeye dont give a **** about what the players want which seems in a nut shell what is hurting your company ratings. This is your achilles heel here. Your problem and i hope you get counseling for this is that YOU DONT LISTEN TO THE PLAYER BASE i really dont know how much more it can be stressed by every player in vega that this is your prime issue you are like children and dont listen. As many will we will see how this update affects us but im pretty **** sure youll lose alot of players over it and again deny it. What you all are wanting is low armor like titanium armoring and spectoral 5 shields and heavy maxed out guns thats all fine and dandy if you are playing against people with the same if not weaker armor. The whole point of our builds is to last in combat and continue fighting not 2 seconds of pleasure and 3 days of repairs. Im going to see how this goes but honestly if you guys dont square up and listen you will enevitably doom your vegafarmville game.
If you want more variety in fleets then allow different characteristics in speed etc within classes. It is what makes this game and is a real USP. With these changes you just become 'boom beach' in space. A good game, but not one I love.
If you think this speed difference in classes is why you are losing new players you need another look. People leave for a host of reasons - I nearly left from frustration trying to get a efficient way to kill 27's and actually get the hydra blue print. Once cracked, it made life much easier. I never considered leaving because someone's cruiser was faster than mine and I could not hot back - I just went after than later with something faster. In fact in your new rebalance, certain fleets can now just run away if they might not win. Sometimes I could not win - like 1 Eagle vs a Genesis fleet, but you lick you wounds for another day.
From a player view I just completed the Apoc BP's, which I really wanted for that extra speed because it let me take on something bigger and badder. Now I have no incentive to chase new hulls if it is just more mass. Event weapons are not worth the effort if mass/damage ratio is the same for everything including normal weapons, and the hulls definitely not worth the effort. I should just build cheap glass cannons and grind my enemy down now - it will take me less effort.
What you are doing now is devaluing all my time, effort and coins expended which is what most people are actually frustrated over. Why not just buff the ISC hulls - that way you would not have got this backlash.
If new players are complaining about getting their 35'**** by bigger fleets, simple enforce that +/- 5 levels on all fleets (except thieves). I can understand their feeling - I went through it too - but put in the effort and you get a sense of reward coming out the other end. Giving in to their sense of self entitlement to demand being able to hit back gives them no engagement or commitment the game, just an instant gratification resulting in no loyalty.
Now I have a lvl 47, python fleets, fleet mk rag, appoc fleet.
It is not the speed difference that would make me lose the desire to play.
Precisely because I have invested a lot of effort and money in the riot, event, to catch up with technology.
So ... **** the new guy if they do not have the courage to go through.
It is not the speed difference who do screw up the game, it's the **** crafting system that allowed all these to cheat and coin.
For less than spending lots of money, or stop to live and devote themselves to farm, cheating, is impossible to catch the players.
The difference in speed is always compensatable with riot.
You turn your back on all those players who have given you their trust, their time, their money, for "new players." F ****
I would add that your words are false, because once everyone will shipbay level 11, level 70 fleets , BELIEVE ME .... new players will also have a different kind of disgusting ...... .....
i use google translate... sorry for that ! Ahaha
ps : this is an alt.
Mark4 Furry = Mark4 Zeal = Mark4 Dread. The complexity is killing me here. Mass differences means nothing at this level.
Energy Weapons being 50% more effective in all possible fields (mass/damage, range/damage, 100% hitrate,no minimum range,... hell even coining energy weapon is 50% cheaper). Very Complex decision what to use even with (positive) shield changes.
Going from Midgard + 5x Rev TO Rag + 5x Corinth difference is 1 year of grind (time/money) for 15% combat efficiency improvement. Easier to build 5x Midgard/Rev fleets and hit more times on auto since why not. Complex.
Migrates game to Steam where PC gamers live. Dumbs game down and expects results. Whoa give a medal.
There is so many good to great options to implement variety an complexity based on hulls (read my posts in 'the other forum'). 100% speed normalization is not one of them. Yes excessive speed differences were problematic, see my older posts... but this is worse.
but indeed, i guess almost half of us gonna quit the game lol
As much as I love this game I suspect these are the last months of the game and yes I know its been said before but never before has the entire community be united against an update like it is now.
I play on mobile, and the issue/ frustration with the game had more to do with control/ fleet movement commands and high punishment in general for mistakes/ disconnects, too much grinding in general and less to do with the factors addressed in the rebalance. I am sorry to say, but I agree with your general assessment that confidence in your product has been fundamentally eroded.
I am changing from a frequent purchaser of coins to a non purchaser simply because these actions have made me acutely aware that you are willing to de-value my time and purchases through changes of your product whenever developers see fit. I finally have fleets that can complete events at a medium to high level without all the high grinding times with auto fleets. This option is gone; you changed my product that I worked for and purchased and now it cannot do what I paid for. I would not have invested time any money into this product had I known you were going to change it. Your company knew this change was happening and instead of informing the consumer you waited and then made changes that you knew were in benefit of other things. Let be honest, everyone is using the time/money resource to purchase a non-real thing. We all secretly feel guilty for it. You have made us feel like fools for ever investing when you make sweeping changes without telling us. For you it was ripping the band-aid off. For us who had no idea what you were doing, it was like stabbing us in the back.
The relationship between consumer and producer is based fundamentally on trust. At the end of the day, the action you and your company did can only make sense from the standpoint of attempting to make the most money before this change so that you could offset the lost of players making future purchases. I know I purchased things to get the Rag and the Dread for the hope that I would finally have a fleet that could consistently hit higher level Vsec. Your company put out deals for these things knowing you would later lower its value. I understand the terms of service, but doesn't that feel fundamentally dishonest? If you put your time into something that the other party knew they were going to de-value, wouldn't you feel cheated?
You hope that overall the changes will be viewed favorably so that new players can enjoy your product. Maybe you have some metric where you determined you can no longer extract value from long time players. The problem with this logic, is your base as eroded. As a newer player, older players helped to keep me invested in the game with their experience and the general concept that their is a light at the end of the tunnel. Without that, I too would have quit this long ago. If the goal post keeps moving, there is no light, just changes to the base parameters to make more money. You could have made VSec the best fleet, you didn't because you thought you could extract more if you made the worst ships better. Save on development cost, save on producing new product. Some new guy can't lean on Kixeye to show them the ropes and make this game enjoyable, the forum and the players did that. There has to be a way to meet your overall objectives and still make the player base happy.
I will continue to enjoy your game to the best I possibly can, but until you re-establish trust, I would be foolish to invest money into this game. Maybe you can recoup the difference on new players, but i just can't see myself putting all the previous effort in again when you could change things in a month.
Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter.
Okay...but what about the fact that now I cant build **** because I have my entire fleet bay to refit?