WrongThinker Thinks #07 - Working Well Together

  • zantil
    zantil
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Aug 2016 Posts: 378
    What would be an easy and simple fix: 

    Remove all combination defences. Like deflection on a PvE hull. 
    Ajust the targets, lower the damage alot - rewamp the ressists, so hulls never will have more than 90% ressist as a hard cap. Lower damage by NPC by a factor 100, and we're good to go.

    Make it simple, instead of making a NEW arbitary value that noone understands.

    To sum it up for KIX : Remove deflection, lower damage.
  • wing-dang-doodle
    wing-dang-doodle
    Force to be Reckoned With
    Joined Sep 2012 Posts: 1,523
    Kalidor55 said:
    60% ouf your community tester  ............

    Ho many players does that represent ?

    The comnmunity this, the community that........   Who is that community.

    A bunch of your prefered playres and mods (We know who they are)

    There are hundreds of playres that comment your moves, give opinion etc  in the forum and in discord......  Some are totally stupid, i agree but most are very well elaborate.  You say you listen but your actions prove otherwise.   Again, a hand full of prefered fanboy get to say what is good or not.

    Half of them know as much about the game as their wallet does.  

    You wrote a wall of text with nice long words, and never mention one thing about that "upgrade" thing.  And CM Chriss says it is part of that defense rethinking thing ;)

    Left hand don't talk to the right hand.

    Typical.

    For a long time i wondered if the CEO really read the forum.  Now i know that he doesn't.   No way he could go thru all that crap and just sit down.

    We love that game, us coming back days afeter days even with all the crap going on is the proof.  Us being so emotional at times over it is the proof. But veryone has its limit, a breaking points where we say enough.  Lots of us have already reach it.   Lost lots of good friends in this game in the last year.  You lost a lot of good players in this game in the last year.  And nice long words won't do much to change that.
    the only time the ceo has been in touch is once in my time playing.. some of his  words were, if it just involves money i dont want it in the game. the only reason the game exists is too make money so that statement could be disregarded. the only time he has been in touch with us directly is because there was an exodus of players leaving. thats just my opinion/take on it. i might be a million miles from the truth but the impression he has left is what counts. it is not a good impression
    you keep whining like me but we are still here, i love broken pixels, how about you
  • Ser_Gregor_Clegane
    Ser_Gregor_Clegane
    Unicorn Overlord
    Joined Nov 2015 Posts: 3,474
    edited 23 Feb 2019, 5:48PM
    KISS what a good acronim that is ( KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID) if somthing is broke it needs fixing if it is,nt leave it alone we are suposed to be pirates not quatum phyisics experts to many restriction in the game to much limitation and way way to technical i would like to spend my time on here blowing crap up flatning baseing and sinking fleets and being able to hit what target i want with what fleet i want right now BP is turning into a nanny state telling us what to do and when we can do it and with what .These co called testers who the heck are they do you selcet from the main stream of players or just the whales and mods would be nice to get an invite to these tests and remember your player base is world wide not all are on PST. your rolling out all this new stuff but stuff that has been broken you ingnor the daily vanished and nothing been said why or when it comming back FVF major part of the game just beacuse some top players crying about getting snaged or chor fleets getting sunk heck it a pirate game MTFU repair fleet or learn not to ge snaged.Stopping FVF was not a good move hurry up andfix that the majority of players want it so stop catering for the minority.Raid start time what master mind changed that 11.00pm it starts in UK i  or ishould say most of the players in UK miss 1.5 day of raid cause of the stupid start time build times repair times reduce those thats your main problem reduce those and it would increace seat time as people will be willing to play longer and spend a bit more insted of waiting 12 hours plus for fleets to repepair 
    Dude, I've said it before in another post, and I'll say it again, seeing as you've obviously missed it.

    Raid times were adjusted to suit the Australian Kixeye staffers who fix raid problems. They have to wake up, tend to their morning chores, commute to work, log into the Kixeye system and be ready to fix issues as they occur. There are 2 Australian offices, btw, 1 in Brisbane, & the other in Melbourne.

    This is why, currently, raid targets are generally smooth now, rather than folks whining about problems with raid targets both here & on FB as the Au staff weren't awake to correct them in the original start times.

    I'm in NZ, did I complain about the original start/finish times, where once I logged out for the last night, if I wanted extra, I'd have to be up at 4am?
    No, I sucked it up.

    YOU should do the same, instead of whinging (yes, you're a whinging pom, ok?) and learn about TIME MANAGEMENT like everyone else in the game. And with a name like yours, you sound like a pikey ffs.

    How on Earth do you lose 1.5 days of play time when the raids have the same duration? What, others have magically gained 1.5 days of raid time because of that change?

    In regards to FvF

    That wasn't exactly FvF. It was slaughter. Obviously you're one of those who liked tooling around like a tool with a conq hull or 2 killing chore fleets in your bubble.
    I specialize in wife removal, crushing heads & other forms of violence, like roasting faces, or cutting horses in two with a single swing of my sword
    I fear nothing, your pixels are dust compared to my physical might (8'0", 420lb)
  • BattlePirate_BlackShark
    BattlePirate_BlackShark
    Master Tactician
    Joined Sep 2011 Posts: 2,263
    Kalidor55 said:
    60% ouf your community tester  ............

    Ho many players does that represent ?

    The comnmunity this, the community that........   Who is that community.

    A bunch of your prefered playres and mods (We know who they are)

    There are hundreds of playres that comment your moves, give opinion etc  in the forum and in discord......  Some are totally stupid, i agree but most are very well elaborate.  You say you listen but your actions prove otherwise.   Again, a hand full of prefered fanboy get to say what is good or not.

    Half of them know as much about the game as their wallet does.  

    You wrote a wall of text with nice long words, and never mention one thing about that "upgrade" thing.  And CM Chriss says it is part of that defense rethinking thing ;)

    Left hand don't talk to the right hand.

    Typical.

    For a long time i wondered if the CEO really read the forum.  Now i know that he doesn't.   No way he could go thru all that crap and just sit down.

    We love that game, us coming back days afeter days even with all the crap going on is the proof.  Us being so emotional at times over it is the proof. But veryone has its limit, a breaking points where we say enough.  Lots of us have already reach it.   Lost lots of good friends in this game in the last year.  You lost a lot of good players in this game in the last year.  And nice long words won't do much to change that.
    the only time the ceo has been in touch is once in my time playing.. some of his  words were, if it just involves money i dont want it in the game. the only reason the game exists is too make money so that statement could be disregarded. the only time he has been in touch with us directly is because there was an exodus of players leaving. thats just my opinion/take on it. i might be a million miles from the truth but the impression he has left is what counts. it is not a good impression
    & I read something in Discord from another player, this dates back a few years, but allegedly, Will Harbin called the free-to-play players a waste of bandwidth on his servers. (This was to a member of an unnamed alliance)
    I personally think that says so much about the CEO of Kixeye.
    Free-to-play folk may not contribute financially to the game, but how many have you seen that had bases good enough to make an attacker coin repair on the map after prepping the base a bit?
    Certainly I've made that happen.
    If those freeloaders, as WH would refer to them, can create coin via other means.. That's a win for Kix, surely?
    Thats like i contribute to the game...my base will make the coiners coin, so i am a part of helping to pay the bill.
    BlackShark        Born in Sector 429

    Decoding Pirateslangword "F.A.R.M." = Foolish Amateur Reaches Midgame
  • Ser_Gregor_Clegane
    Ser_Gregor_Clegane
    Unicorn Overlord
    Joined Nov 2015 Posts: 3,474
    Kalidor55 said:
    60% ouf your community tester  ............

    Ho many players does that represent ?

    The comnmunity this, the community that........   Who is that community.

    A bunch of your prefered playres and mods (We know who they are)

    There are hundreds of playres that comment your moves, give opinion etc  in the forum and in discord......  Some are totally stupid, i agree but most are very well elaborate.  You say you listen but your actions prove otherwise.   Again, a hand full of prefered fanboy get to say what is good or not.

    Half of them know as much about the game as their wallet does.  

    You wrote a wall of text with nice long words, and never mention one thing about that "upgrade" thing.  And CM Chriss says it is part of that defense rethinking thing ;)

    Left hand don't talk to the right hand.

    Typical.

    For a long time i wondered if the CEO really read the forum.  Now i know that he doesn't.   No way he could go thru all that crap and just sit down.

    We love that game, us coming back days afeter days even with all the crap going on is the proof.  Us being so emotional at times over it is the proof. But veryone has its limit, a breaking points where we say enough.  Lots of us have already reach it.   Lost lots of good friends in this game in the last year.  You lost a lot of good players in this game in the last year.  And nice long words won't do much to change that.
    the only time the ceo has been in touch is once in my time playing.. some of his  words were, if it just involves money i dont want it in the game. the only reason the game exists is too make money so that statement could be disregarded. the only time he has been in touch with us directly is because there was an exodus of players leaving. thats just my opinion/take on it. i might be a million miles from the truth but the impression he has left is what counts. it is not a good impression
    & I read something in Discord from another player, this dates back a few years, but allegedly, Will Harbin called the free-to-play players a waste of bandwidth on his servers. (This was to a member of an unnamed alliance)
    I personally think that says so much about the CEO of Kixeye.
    Free-to-play folk may not contribute financially to the game, but how many have you seen that had bases good enough to make an attacker coin repair on the map after prepping the base a bit?
    Certainly I've made that happen.
    If those freeloaders, as WH would refer to them, can create coin via other means.. That's a win for Kix, surely?
    Thats like i contribute to the game...my base will make the coiners coin, so i am a part of helping to pay the bill.
    In short, yes.
    I specialize in wife removal, crushing heads & other forms of violence, like roasting faces, or cutting horses in two with a single swing of my sword
    I fear nothing, your pixels are dust compared to my physical might (8'0", 420lb)
  • Mick Connors
    Mick Connors
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Jun 2012 Posts: 357
    KISS what a good acronim that is ( KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID) if somthing is broke it needs fixing if it is,nt leave it alone we are suposed to be pirates not quatum phyisics experts to many restriction in the game to much limitation and way way to technical i would like to spend my time on here blowing crap up flatning baseing and sinking fleets and being able to hit what target i want with what fleet i want right now BP is turning into a nanny state telling us what to do and when we can do it and with what .These co called testers who the heck are they do you selcet from the main stream of players or just the whales and mods would be nice to get an invite to these tests and remember your player base is world wide not all are on PST. your rolling out all this new stuff but stuff that has been broken you ingnor the daily vanished and nothing been said why or when it comming back FVF major part of the game just beacuse some top players crying about getting snaged or chor fleets getting sunk heck it a pirate game MTFU repair fleet or learn not to ge snaged.Stopping FVF was not a good move hurry up andfix that the majority of players want it so stop catering for the minority.Raid start time what master mind changed that 11.00pm it starts in UK i  or ishould say most of the players in UK miss 1.5 day of raid cause of the stupid start time build times repair times reduce those thats your main problem reduce those and it would increace seat time as people will be willing to play longer and spend a bit more insted of waiting 12 hours plus for fleets to repepair 
    Dude, I've said it before in another post, and I'll say it again, seeing as you've obviously missed it.

    Raid times were adjusted to suit the Australian Kixeye staffers who fix raid problems. They have to wake up, tend to their morning chores, commute to work, log into the Kixeye system and be ready to fix issues as they occur. There are 2 Australian offices, btw, 1 in Brisbane, & the other in Melbourne.

    This is why, currently, raid targets are generally smooth now, rather than folks whining about problems with raid targets both here & on FB as the Au staff weren't awake to correct them in the original start times.

    I'm in NZ, did I complain about the original start/finish times, where once I logged out for the last night, if I wanted extra, I'd have to be up at 4am?
    No, I sucked it up.

    YOU should do the same, instead of whinging (yes, you're a whinging pom, ok?) and learn about TIME MANAGEMENT like everyone else in the game. And with a name like yours, you sound like a pikey ffs.

    How on Earth do you lose 1.5 days of play time when the raids have the same duration? What, others have magically gained 1.5 days of raid time because of that change?

    In regards to FvF

    That wasn't exactly FvF. It was slaughter. Obviously you're one of those who liked tooling around like a tool with a conq hull or 2 killing chore fleets in your bubble.
    AND YOU ARE WITH YOUR LVL 53 BASE?
  • Dropper_mudzz
    Dropper_mudzz
    Greenhorn
    Joined May 2013 Posts: 3
    i fail to understand how having a ship with 99% defense is a problem for future (higher tier) ships, every cycle the targets get harder than the last. do you really think eradicators will be able to do higher tier targets next siege cycle? look at buccs compared to eradicator even at 99% defense (example) they would not last as long in higher targets due to lower armor stats. Thus, an increase in armor every new cycles' ship will in fact make the past ship less valuable for the cycle. i suggest leaving defense alone and just add more armor for future ships (targets always do more damage compared to previous one)
    friends are like liquor, the more you have the less you care
  • Ser_Gregor_Clegane
    Ser_Gregor_Clegane
    Unicorn Overlord
    Joined Nov 2015 Posts: 3,474
    KISS what a good acronim that is ( KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID) if somthing is broke it needs fixing if it is,nt leave it alone we are suposed to be pirates not quatum phyisics experts to many restriction in the game to much limitation and way way to technical i would like to spend my time on here blowing crap up flatning baseing and sinking fleets and being able to hit what target i want with what fleet i want right now BP is turning into a nanny state telling us what to do and when we can do it and with what .These co called testers who the heck are they do you selcet from the main stream of players or just the whales and mods would be nice to get an invite to these tests and remember your player base is world wide not all are on PST. your rolling out all this new stuff but stuff that has been broken you ingnor the daily vanished and nothing been said why or when it comming back FVF major part of the game just beacuse some top players crying about getting snaged or chor fleets getting sunk heck it a pirate game MTFU repair fleet or learn not to ge snaged.Stopping FVF was not a good move hurry up andfix that the majority of players want it so stop catering for the minority.Raid start time what master mind changed that 11.00pm it starts in UK i  or ishould say most of the players in UK miss 1.5 day of raid cause of the stupid start time build times repair times reduce those thats your main problem reduce those and it would increace seat time as people will be willing to play longer and spend a bit more insted of waiting 12 hours plus for fleets to repepair 
    Dude, I've said it before in another post, and I'll say it again, seeing as you've obviously missed it.

    Raid times were adjusted to suit the Australian Kixeye staffers who fix raid problems. They have to wake up, tend to their morning chores, commute to work, log into the Kixeye system and be ready to fix issues as they occur. There are 2 Australian offices, btw, 1 in Brisbane, & the other in Melbourne.

    This is why, currently, raid targets are generally smooth now, rather than folks whining about problems with raid targets both here & on FB as the Au staff weren't awake to correct them in the original start times.

    I'm in NZ, did I complain about the original start/finish times, where once I logged out for the last night, if I wanted extra, I'd have to be up at 4am?
    No, I sucked it up.

    YOU should do the same, instead of whinging (yes, you're a whinging pom, ok?) and learn about TIME MANAGEMENT like everyone else in the game. And with a name like yours, you sound like a pikey ffs.

    How on Earth do you lose 1.5 days of play time when the raids have the same duration? What, others have magically gained 1.5 days of raid time because of that change?

    In regards to FvF

    That wasn't exactly FvF. It was slaughter. Obviously you're one of those who liked tooling around like a tool with a conq hull or 2 killing chore fleets in your bubble.
    AND YOU ARE WITH YOUR LVL 53 BASE?
    And you know nothing, Mick Snow.
    Some here know me very well.
    Account is 4 years old, but not my 1st nor my last, so stfu pikey.
    I specialize in wife removal, crushing heads & other forms of violence, like roasting faces, or cutting horses in two with a single swing of my sword
    I fear nothing, your pixels are dust compared to my physical might (8'0", 420lb)
  • whatever11
    whatever11
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Sep 2014 Posts: 304
    nomad 666 said:
    Wrong thinker. When you put your 1st posting up introducing yourself your words were  " players first " and players welcomed you . To be honest you haven't really lived up to our expectations and to the image your 1st post portrayed.  Who has asked for this change. maybe a quick poll on here then we can see for ourselves if this is a player request or not.  Players have told kixs time after time about the main issues that they would like to see sorted out. Yet time and time again they are ignored.  Your main concern should be getting player numbers back up and keeping lower levels interested in the game . Yes i understand that you have to have revenue coming it and as in real like i get it that you do most for your better customers ( coiners) but when the cannon fodder for these has left your game will collapse as they will have no one to hit.  Stop chasing players away
    You're right out main concern is making the experience better, but that's why we're making this change.  Not doing this change makes the experience worse and we can't allow that.


    The Defense system as it currently stands is broken.  It brutally punishes any and all customization, crushes diverse play-styles, and scales poorly.  It compresses ultra-high volatility into low variance, which makes targets often way harder than they should be.  And this system's BIGGEST problem?  It seems simple and understandable (but isn't).

    That's not the defense system that's broken dude. That's the hull restrictions, weapons restrictions, and ship restrictions you put in place which are castrating creativity of the players.

    The players actively seek out ways of being creative in our builds/play styles. But the hull class restrictions, which set which targets deal which damage types, and the corresponding player ships are susceptible to those damage types are really what limit our creativity. It used to be that players built ships with high evade and specials that protected against a wide range of damage types. And targets dealt a wide range of different weapon types. This is evident in salvages which utilize explosive, missile, and ballistic damage, or even old campaigns in the campaign menu. This allowed us players to build a ship as essentially a generalist, to which we would make changes how we saw fit according to our preferred play style.

    NOW, we're forced by the class system to build ships that defend against a specific type of damage and use weapons that deal a specific type of damage. On top of that, any creative loopholes to this are punished rather than rewarded.

    For example, When inferno dragons first came out, and there was no flag, people used savage kodiaks, a ship of a different class, and of substantial age (I think it's T3 or T4), to buff our whole fleet with 50% missile defense. Rather than being reward for this creative approach, we were punished. For when the ID flag came out, it gave the same buff, but with it, targets were tier locked, so those high level FM targets that we used to use a savage kodiak in, we could no longer due to tier restrictions.

    I would say "he's partially right, you know."

    I don't deny that the Hull Class system puts constraints on your ability to play as you want, but at least that's clear.  You might not like that you have to bring a Garrison Hull to Garrison Targets, but it's very understandable.  If you bring a Siege Hull to a Garrison Target, you would expect to do poorly.

    What makes the Defense System so much more dangerous to the community is that they don't recognize the constraints.  You are being penalized by a series of rules you don't know exist (because the rules themselves are not good).  You may have a great time or a terrible time, but then misattribute that good or bad experience to something that was not responsible for it.  You might think your driving was bad when it was good; you might think your build was good, when it was bad.  These misplaced conclusions will always lead to frustration and anger and suspicion.

    We have to clean this mess up.

    In the future, I'm totally open to considering other ways to provide more creative options (I'm not even tied to the Hull Class system, frankly), but we have to start with the thing that's causing the most damage.  This change will pave the way to more improvements.

    Top598 said:
    Kix logic at its finest! I may have misread or misunderstood but if my starting setup is D, then I already have a better build than C. If repair time after C=2 coins, then it is impossible for repair time for D to be 3 coins. The change in D might not lower the total repairs below 2 but it wouldn't result in higher repairs.

    Personally I gauge my builds on total repair time. Obviously I would always like the optimal build but If I dont have it and repairs are reasonable I can live without it. Besides if I dont have the optimal build what chance do I have to fix it anyway? very little. There has been a lack of tokens in recent raids (last event excluded) and its hard to harvest FM tokens all the time. A lot of components are ~1 day equip so thats at least 250 coins in you want to refit on the fly. I can refit after a raid but by the time the next raid comes the targets might be different.

    Lastly and probably most importantly, the arbitrary "difficulty" increases during events. This was denied by Kix until recently but we all knew it was happening. To the eye I see higher repair in a target but what actually is happening? Has my or the enemy DPS increased/decreased? Has my or the enemy reload rate increased/decreased? Has the enemy turrets/fleets health increased? Potentially thats 5 different specials that might become relevant and again, what chance do I stand of refitting them anyway.

    Dont get me wrong, I appreciate your efforts in communication and explanation, but ultimately my raids for probably the last 12-14 months have depended on what mood kix is in. If its a good mood, ive probably has a good raid, if its a bad mood then ive probably not done so well. My build isn't necessarily always at fault. 

    When KIX sets the difficulty for a target, we have to pick a benchmark build against which the target is tuned.  This much is probably pretty obvious, since we don't want targets to be too hard or too easy.  We also can't tune against every build, because there's literally hundreds of build variants for any given hull.  So, we look at the data at our disposal as well as our own judgment to pick a benchmark build to tune a target against.  Again, I doubt any of this will come as a surprise, as this is just fundamental good practice.

    However, when you piece this all together, what you get is a scenario where build D doesn't necessarily start out better than build C (in terms of how many minutes or repair you take).  It all depends upon what the benchmark build is.  That's is: it's all relative.  That's why in the example the premise is that you start with 100 minutes of damage for each scenario.

    Though I talked about this briefly in a previous post, it's worth calling out here: the whole reason you guys see adjustments to targets during the Raid (and make no mistake: targets are made easier just as frequently as they're made harder), is because of the ultra-high variance in build strength.  One of the benefits of the new system is that it should actually reduce the frequency and magnitude of these adjustments, making for a more stable experience for everyone.

    In other words, it is one of the objectives of this change that your experience during the raid will hinge much less on "KIXEYE's mood" and much more on your build and your skill.

    OK, let me try and get my head around this?

    There has been a preview test done by I guess the usual folks? Now I see in Discord, some who are so good at the game, they think they are awesome (yet we know at least some of these get to play in test servers).

    So did 60% of these awesome players have to change their builds? If so that tells me it is like refactor, done to make refits compulsory?

    They didn't make changes because of the improvements to the way Defense worked, they made changes because they had access to more information courtesy of Battle Reports and saw opportunities they didn't see before.  We're working hard to give you new information and it's true that as you learn more about the targets you face you'll make some changes to fight them, but empowering you to make an informed decisions is a good thing.

    Now the refit side of things, we already know favours those who have had the experience of being in the test server (double whammy for the rest of us). If any limited time tokens are available it will not be for long enough, for us to get our minds around the changes, work through all the changed specials etc and know what we are doing. Whilst those in the server will be straight on the case, along with their alliances.

    Yes resistances have reached stupid levels, but this is only because they have been pushed that way , eve amongst all the class and level locks, the numbers have still been allowed to run out of control.

       Let us remember refactor, this was done because numbers were getting out of control (after a PvP/PvE, resistance/deflection, split to stop that from happening.).

    Many decisions that have been made in the past were short-term or mid-term "pass-the-buck" solutions.  That is: the changes solved problems in a way that created more problems (sometimes worse problems) down the road.  I can't talk to the conditions under when those decisions were made, but I can say that with the Defense improvements we've invested a massive amount of time in making something robust and future-proof.  I'm not interested in just putting a bandage on an infected wound, I'm interested in curing the underlying infections that are ravaging this game.

    The new Defense system is a step in this direction.  The Battle Report is also.  More will follow.


     Now after refactor, with forced refits, ranges and  numbers are straight away getting out of control,  I suspect refactor 2 will be needed very soon.

    We don't actually have any plans for additional refactors at this time.  We've been working on this Defense update for over 3 months to get it right, rather than do a series of incremental refactors.

    Does this fill me with any confidence tor the PvE refactor?  Well, just look at new megaship weapons brought out this week.....It would appear no one has ever heard the term "baby steps"

    I foresee extra forced damage being taken after this refactor ...............We can already see how stupid the damage is in the new TLC's :(

    Please prove me wrong, but I cannot see it

    While I can't promise I'm going to prove you wrong when this goes live, I sure as hell am going to try my best.

    first- anyone who knows how to build knows "c" give the most gain.
    2nd- bullshit & don't believe a word you say
  • Mick Connors
    Mick Connors
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Jun 2012 Posts: 357
    KISS what a good acronim that is ( KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID) if somthing is broke it needs fixing if it is,nt leave it alone we are suposed to be pirates not quatum phyisics experts to many restriction in the game to much limitation and way way to technical i would like to spend my time on here blowing crap up flatning baseing and sinking fleets and being able to hit what target i want with what fleet i want right now BP is turning into a nanny state telling us what to do and when we can do it and with what .These co called testers who the heck are they do you selcet from the main stream of players or just the whales and mods would be nice to get an invite to these tests and remember your player base is world wide not all are on PST. your rolling out all this new stuff but stuff that has been broken you ingnor the daily vanished and nothing been said why or when it comming back FVF major part of the game just beacuse some top players crying about getting snaged or chor fleets getting sunk heck it a pirate game MTFU repair fleet or learn not to ge snaged.Stopping FVF was not a good move hurry up andfix that the majority of players want it so stop catering for the minority.Raid start time what master mind changed that 11.00pm it starts in UK i  or ishould say most of the players in UK miss 1.5 day of raid cause of the stupid start time build times repair times reduce those thats your main problem reduce those and it would increace seat time as people will be willing to play longer and spend a bit more insted of waiting 12 hours plus for fleets to repepair 
    Dude, I've said it before in another post, and I'll say it again, seeing as you've obviously missed it.

    Raid times were adjusted to suit the Australian Kixeye staffers who fix raid problems. They have to wake up, tend to their morning chores, commute to work, log into the Kixeye system and be ready to fix issues as they occur. There are 2 Australian offices, btw, 1 in Brisbane, & the other in Melbourne.

    This is why, currently, raid targets are generally smooth now, rather than folks whining about problems with raid targets both here & on FB as the Au staff weren't awake to correct them in the original start times.

    I'm in NZ, did I complain about the original start/finish times, where once I logged out for the last night, if I wanted extra, I'd have to be up at 4am?
    No, I sucked it up.

    YOU should do the same, instead of whinging (yes, you're a whinging pom, ok?) and learn about TIME MANAGEMENT like everyone else in the game. And with a name like yours, you sound like a pikey ffs.

    How on Earth do you lose 1.5 days of play time when the raids have the same duration? What, others have magically gained 1.5 days of raid time because of that change?

    In regards to FvF

    That wasn't exactly FvF. It was slaughter. Obviously you're one of those who liked tooling around like a tool with a conq hull or 2 killing chore fleets in your bubble.
    AND YOU ARE WITH YOUR LVL 53 BASE?
    And you know nothing, Mick Snow.
    Some here know me very well.
    Account is 4 years old, but not my 1st nor my last, so stfu pikey.
    Oh my bad i can see who you are now a pre-pubesent teenager who like,s putting out raceist  demening staements which could cause  hate and violence  to ward the traverling comunity  and i do hope a mod see,s these staements and pass this up to kieye for the appropriate action to be taken against you as i am sure kix will not  view your hate to wards the traverling comunity lightly.If you can only attack a minority group and make personal attacks in a perfectly normal and open conversation then sir you really do need to seek some medical  profesional help
  • Spider Retired
    Spider Retired
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Aug 2013 Posts: 319
    Wrongthinker !

    The biggest issue we as player have with the game is a constant growing of buildtimes and repare times, so go figure what we want?

    I must say after you joined the development team i cant say i can see much good improvements yet, and i do mean its about time you do deliver on the words you stated when you did your first post here.

    We see to many new items in every new FM week to keep up and it all cook's down to refitt time and vacant shipyard's we realy do not have since Kixeye still push 2 fleet's into doing 1 sycle. Just to make it clearer how do kix see us make a full fleet of exs. Era's that take close to 60day's in total and the same for the shrike's. Numbers no longer come close to adding up for us players without massiv coining and most dont do that we have RL task's we use money for.

    Then we see you release new hull's with massive range, just to see it do chit or realy not adding up to what was expected. I bet lots of those who have built them and used coins feel it is yet one more fraud from Kixeye developers.

    I do feel this game going down the wrong path and thats how i have feeling now for a long time. So guess when your 1 % pets get borred and finaly see that coins dont make up for how the game is tuning its a quick exit also for them. You cant live on just of a limited 0,01% of the players or do you think so?

    Well i dont.

    Regards.


  • FiremanHawk
    FiremanHawk
    Strike-force Captain
    Joined Nov 2011 Posts: 844
    working well together my ****. this team has done very little to help the players or make the game better. it just keeps going down and down. 
  • johnshaw666
    johnshaw666
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Feb 2013 Posts: 245
    Hire a clown get a circus congrat lol

  • Ser_Gregor_Clegane
    Ser_Gregor_Clegane
    Unicorn Overlord
    Joined Nov 2015 Posts: 3,474
    KISS what a good acronim that is ( KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID) if somthing is broke it needs fixing if it is,nt leave it alone we are suposed to be pirates not quatum phyisics experts to many restriction in the game to much limitation and way way to technical i would like to spend my time on here blowing crap up flatning baseing and sinking fleets and being able to hit what target i want with what fleet i want right now BP is turning into a nanny state telling us what to do and when we can do it and with what .These co called testers who the heck are they do you selcet from the main stream of players or just the whales and mods would be nice to get an invite to these tests and remember your player base is world wide not all are on PST. your rolling out all this new stuff but stuff that has been broken you ingnor the daily vanished and nothing been said why or when it comming back FVF major part of the game just beacuse some top players crying about getting snaged or chor fleets getting sunk heck it a pirate game MTFU repair fleet or learn not to ge snaged.Stopping FVF was not a good move hurry up andfix that the majority of players want it so stop catering for the minority.Raid start time what master mind changed that 11.00pm it starts in UK i  or ishould say most of the players in UK miss 1.5 day of raid cause of the stupid start time build times repair times reduce those thats your main problem reduce those and it would increace seat time as people will be willing to play longer and spend a bit more insted of waiting 12 hours plus for fleets to repepair 
    Dude, I've said it before in another post, and I'll say it again, seeing as you've obviously missed it.

    Raid times were adjusted to suit the Australian Kixeye staffers who fix raid problems. They have to wake up, tend to their morning chores, commute to work, log into the Kixeye system and be ready to fix issues as they occur. There are 2 Australian offices, btw, 1 in Brisbane, & the other in Melbourne.

    This is why, currently, raid targets are generally smooth now, rather than folks whining about problems with raid targets both here & on FB as the Au staff weren't awake to correct them in the original start times.

    I'm in NZ, did I complain about the original start/finish times, where once I logged out for the last night, if I wanted extra, I'd have to be up at 4am?
    No, I sucked it up.

    YOU should do the same, instead of whinging (yes, you're a whinging pom, ok?) and learn about TIME MANAGEMENT like everyone else in the game. And with a name like yours, you sound like a pikey ffs.

    How on Earth do you lose 1.5 days of play time when the raids have the same duration? What, others have magically gained 1.5 days of raid time because of that change?

    In regards to FvF

    That wasn't exactly FvF. It was slaughter. Obviously you're one of those who liked tooling around like a tool with a conq hull or 2 killing chore fleets in your bubble.
    AND YOU ARE WITH YOUR LVL 53 BASE?
    If I'm such a noob, how did I solo effort an Overkill badge in December?


    I specialize in wife removal, crushing heads & other forms of violence, like roasting faces, or cutting horses in two with a single swing of my sword
    I fear nothing, your pixels are dust compared to my physical might (8'0", 420lb)
  • Mick Connors
    Mick Connors
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Jun 2012 Posts: 357
    well wild stab that your little  base is an alt of a prebubesent teenager with homone problems and gets pleasure from discriminating minority groups if i were black you would not be allowed to call me the N word but as iam a travler it seems ok for you to use the derogatery and hate crime provoking treminolagy of PIKEY .MOD i request you act on this player for promoting hate to wards the traverling comunity.
    THIS IS  THE PM HE HAS SENT ME


    Your pikey mates came to NZ, some are in jail, others got convicted of shoplifting, ALL got trespassed from Burger King NZ (83 outlets) and 4 were served with deportation notices.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12190622

    So don't try to be a hero, pikey.
  • anisixia
    anisixia
    Master Tactician
    Joined Dec 2011 Posts: 2,198
    Hello Captains, WrongThinker here.

    Over the weekend we ran a Focus Test of our upcoming Battle Report and Defense Improvement features.

    While we technically used the “Preview” server, it’s worth noting that this was not really a preview.  There’s a reason I use the word Focus Test: these features are still very-much in progress and needed your input to ensure they were doing what they needed to do.

    So how did the Focus Test go?  Personally, I think it went great, but let me give some details, starting with the Battle Report feature.


    BATTLE REPORT UPDATE

    First off, a whopping 60% of our community testers did use the Battle Report feature to optimize their builds, which is a darn good sign.  You guys will definitely love this feature when it goes live. However, we received feedback that certain information wasn't super useful (the “Avoided” damage category) and that the color scheme made it a little hard to read.

    We’re taking the feedback to heart!  First, we’re going to be upping the contrast and colors to improve the readability of the Battle Report.  More importantly, we’re going to be changing the nature of the information the Battle Report shows. Instead of showing damage you successfully Avoided or counter-measured (which you can already see as you play anyway), we’re going to focus information around things that are a less visible!  Now we’ll be showing Taken Damage, Resisted Damage (which is damage reduced by Defenses and Deflection) and Evaded damage. This will be way more informative.




    I like this, so long as the meaning of each part is clear. If it is clear I don't see a problem with adding a 4th for 'avoided' so that those that are playing on the app or autoing can see the benefit they would get from driving.

    ...

    DEFENSE IMPROVEMENTS UPDATE

    For the Defense Improvements, the community immediately found that high-level tanking strategies were punished by the newer system, with players seeing significantly higher damage against their Flags.  Discovering this sort of oversight is EXACTLY the reason we run focus tests. Since the intention of the Defense improvements is NOT to make your lives worse, we’re going back and adjusting the durability of Flags in the new system to ensure that players don’t see a repair hike with the changes.

    ...



    This is an AI issue. Fix the AI rather than band-aid it and it won't be a problem. In the past the AI stacking and driving did not have this issue, it is a new issue and should be resolved rather than coated over. Just slapping a band-ais on it will cause issues further down the line. I'd much rather not have history continue to repeat itself.


    ...

    The community also flagged two other concerns which we’re investigating.  The first is that the changes result in PvE Hulls being able to compete unreasonably well against PvP Hulls, with the community suggesting that we just wall-off PvE from PvP completely (we already do this restriction with PvP attacking PvE, so this would be ensuring PvE can’t attack PvP).  This is a really great catch by the community, so we’re going to be working towards resolving this. The second issue, which is to be expected, is that the new system will take some learning.  To address this point head-on, this is just straight-up true.  The “transition cost” of changing from one system to another is never free, but we can lower the cost by talking a bit more about the system itself and what it looks like.

    ...



    1. If the balance were adjusted properly on the back end (weapons, specials etc.) this would not be a problem. It is the apparent separation of balance that is causing part of this issue. Instead of working hand in hand and bringing everything in line, you guys seem to be doubling down on separating the game into two games within one.
    2.Players currently know and are comfortable with the systems in place. Some of the angst and issues could have been resolved by simply adding 2 decimal places to the prints for transparency/clarity. Then the next step would have been one discussed previously many times - introducing a new damage type to transition out of the old ones allowing you to reign in the numbers and start 'fresh' without upsetting the current system or forcing the player base to learn a new system after almost a decade of consistency under the old one.
    3. Players still have some trouble under the current one, this new system is more complex and complicated, allows for less transparency and will make it more difficult for players to understand and build in the niche way that the game has progressed.


    ...

    So, to that end, let’s take a look at a picture!

    This blank Erad will hopefully start to give you a sense of what’s going on with the new system.  There are three things to note here. First, the health value is MUCH higher than it was before (keep in mind the cost/time for repairing a fully damaged Hull will not change with this heath increase).  Adding health to our Hulls is what’s allowing us to move away from the old system while maintaining a consistent experience in targets. Second, where we list our Defense values you see a flat value (in this case, 2700).  Components and buffs add to this number. The higher the number, the longer your hull survives. Third, the percentage that appears after the flat Defense value (the number shown in parentheses) is how long your Hull survives as a result of the Defense of the Hull.  If you see Corrosive DEF 3600 (200%), that means you’re surviving 2 times as long as you would without that 3600 Corrosive Defense. So, if you would have survived 10 seconds without that Defense, you’ll survive 20 with it.

    Note that the values in this image may not be final, but you get the idea.


    ...




    What is the fixed value derived from?
    How do weapons, specials and armor affect this number? Is there a fixed calculation we can use?
    What is that percentage in relation to?
    -Base value?
    -Survives in relation to what? Targets? Weapons?
    -If it is a damage type, why aren't we using a value we can equate into a calculation to have some transparency? Why are we using a seemingly arbitrary number here?
    -How do weapons, specials and armor affect this number?
    How are we to determine the surviveability of a build other than a %-to-time relation, particularly when we do not have a clear understanding of how the numbers are now working? (Especially when designing a build when we have zero reference to the targets beforehand?)

    ...

    TIMING

    The only bit of bad news is that, in order to incorporate as much player feedback as possible, we’re going to be pushing these changes out into March, probably after the March Raid, so as to ensure we don’t mess with your builds mid-season.  We believe this delay will improve the quality of both Battle Reports and the Defense Improvements, so it’ll be worth it.  We’re going to be running an additional focus test in the near future for our FM targets, and we’ll run more if necessary after that to make sure we hit the mark.

    We work well together, Captains, let’s keep it going.  Until next time, this is WrongThinker signing off.

    -WT


    UPDATE (02.24): WHY IS THE CHANGE TO DEFENSE A GOOD THING?

    It appears I've done a pretty poor job of explaining why the Defense changes are as critical as they are, which is on me.  In my attempt to be thorough, maybe I haven't been seeing the forest from the trees (when it comes to my explanations of this feature).  Let me try to clear this up by being as explicit as possible (and my apologies for not being more straight-forward from the outset).

    The Defense system as it currently stands is broken.  It brutally punishes any and all customization, crushes diverse play-styles, and scales poorly.  It compresses ultra-high volatility into low variance, which makes targets often way harder than they should be.  And this system's BIGGEST problem?  It seems simple and understandable (but isn't).

    Let me give you an example.  Which of the following (in the current system) is most useful?

    • A : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 60% to 80%.
    • B : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 70% to 85%.
    • C : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 97% to 99%.
    • D : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 99.4% to 99.7%.
    Highlight for the answer: Option C.  In fact, this option is SIGNIFICANTLY better than the others.  Even if the answer was obvious to you, we can tell by looking at active Hull builds that most players would answer this question incorrectly.  To be very clear, I don't fault anyone for guessing wrong, the system is not good.  It leads people down a wrong path.

    If you get a single component in your build "wrong", it could be the difference between 3 coins and 7 coins.  Getting two components wrongs can be the difference between 3 coins and not being able to do the target at all.  Worse still, some players might actually be missing a critical component or two, so they're just totally screwed.  This means the current system isn't just broken, it's not fair.

    Ultimately, it is possible that the new system won't make a ton more sense (though I hope it does once people get used to it), but it WILL be a more forgiving system for all players, allowing more customization and many play-styles to flourish.  Optimizing your build will still save you coin, but missing a single component from the "best build" will no longer by synonymous with "I guess I can't play the Raid at all now."

    I hope this all makes some sense.


     

    Timing: Push it more. I'm not convinced of either the need or implementation of this and have grave concerns.

    For Why: Your example is flawed. Precisly because the game is more complex that that makes it out to be. That aside, it still does not explain the need. That explanation is a justification for the change. You do not illustrate an actual need for the change. Again, a simple cycling of damage types would have been far, far easier to implement and negates a need to learn a new system. The reason the system is 'broken' using your definition is that you guys have escalated the defense numbers unimaginably in order to illicit a desire for new tech. That's fine and all, but again, is easily corrected. Hell, a refactoring would have been easier than this.

    As far as 'normalizing' builds, how is this not a punishment to those that can build at the 'edge' for optimal builds? The reward for excelling is reduced and the benefit of mediocrity is significantly increased. I'd much rather see a simpler correction and maybe have the company help players with builds rather than this.


    Come visit that Dragon_Bane guy over at Battle Pirates on BACON!

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/bponbv/
  • allythevan
    allythevan
    Potential Threat
    Joined Nov 2012 Posts: 77
    anisixia said:
    Hello Captains, WrongThinker here.

    Over the weekend we ran a Focus Test of our upcoming Battle Report and Defense Improvement features.

    While we technically used the “Preview” server, it’s worth noting that this was not really a preview.  There’s a reason I use the word Focus Test: these features are still very-much in progress and needed your input to ensure they were doing what they needed to do.

    So how did the Focus Test go?  Personally, I think it went great, but let me give some details, starting with the Battle Report feature.


    BATTLE REPORT UPDATE

    First off, a whopping 60% of our community testers did use the Battle Report feature to optimize their builds, which is a darn good sign.  You guys will definitely love this feature when it goes live. However, we received feedback that certain information wasn't super useful (the “Avoided” damage category) and that the color scheme made it a little hard to read.

    We’re taking the feedback to heart!  First, we’re going to be upping the contrast and colors to improve the readability of the Battle Report.  More importantly, we’re going to be changing the nature of the information the Battle Report shows. Instead of showing damage you successfully Avoided or counter-measured (which you can already see as you play anyway), we’re going to focus information around things that are a less visible!  Now we’ll be showing Taken Damage, Resisted Damage (which is damage reduced by Defenses and Deflection) and Evaded damage. This will be way more informative.




    I like this, so long as the meaning of each part is clear. If it is clear I don't see a problem with adding a 4th for 'avoided' so that those that are playing on the app or autoing can see the benefit they would get from driving.

    ...

    DEFENSE IMPROVEMENTS UPDATE

    For the Defense Improvements, the community immediately found that high-level tanking strategies were punished by the newer system, with players seeing significantly higher damage against their Flags.  Discovering this sort of oversight is EXACTLY the reason we run focus tests. Since the intention of the Defense improvements is NOT to make your lives worse, we’re going back and adjusting the durability of Flags in the new system to ensure that players don’t see a repair hike with the changes.

    ...



    This is an AI issue. Fix the AI rather than band-aid it and it won't be a problem. In the past the AI stacking and driving did not have this issue, it is a new issue and should be resolved rather than coated over. Just slapping a band-ais on it will cause issues further down the line. I'd much rather not have history continue to repeat itself.


    ...

    The community also flagged two other concerns which we’re investigating.  The first is that the changes result in PvE Hulls being able to compete unreasonably well against PvP Hulls, with the community suggesting that we just wall-off PvE from PvP completely (we already do this restriction with PvP attacking PvE, so this would be ensuring PvE can’t attack PvP).  This is a really great catch by the community, so we’re going to be working towards resolving this. The second issue, which is to be expected, is that the new system will take some learning.  To address this point head-on, this is just straight-up true.  The “transition cost” of changing from one system to another is never free, but we can lower the cost by talking a bit more about the system itself and what it looks like.

    ...



    1. If the balance were adjusted properly on the back end (weapons, specials etc.) this would not be a problem. It is the apparent separation of balance that is causing part of this issue. Instead of working hand in hand and bringing everything in line, you guys seem to be doubling down on separating the game into two games within one.
    2.Players currently know and are comfortable with the systems in place. Some of the angst and issues could have been resolved by simply adding 2 decimal places to the prints for transparency/clarity. Then the next step would have been one discussed previously many times - introducing a new damage type to transition out of the old ones allowing you to reign in the numbers and start 'fresh' without upsetting the current system or forcing the player base to learn a new system after almost a decade of consistency under the old one.
    3. Players still have some trouble under the current one, this new system is more complex and complicated, allows for less transparency and will make it more difficult for players to understand and build in the niche way that the game has progressed.


    ...

    So, to that end, let’s take a look at a picture!

    This blank Erad will hopefully start to give you a sense of what’s going on with the new system.  There are three things to note here. First, the health value is MUCH higher than it was before (keep in mind the cost/time for repairing a fully damaged Hull will not change with this heath increase).  Adding health to our Hulls is what’s allowing us to move away from the old system while maintaining a consistent experience in targets. Second, where we list our Defense values you see a flat value (in this case, 2700).  Components and buffs add to this number. The higher the number, the longer your hull survives. Third, the percentage that appears after the flat Defense value (the number shown in parentheses) is how long your Hull survives as a result of the Defense of the Hull.  If you see Corrosive DEF 3600 (200%), that means you’re surviving 2 times as long as you would without that 3600 Corrosive Defense. So, if you would have survived 10 seconds without that Defense, you’ll survive 20 with it.

    Note that the values in this image may not be final, but you get the idea.


    ...




    What is the fixed value derived from?
    How do weapons, specials and armor affect this number? Is there a fixed calculation we can use?
    What is that percentage in relation to?
    -Base value?
    -Survives in relation to what? Targets? Weapons?
    -If it is a damage type, why aren't we using a value we can equate into a calculation to have some transparency? Why are we using a seemingly arbitrary number here?
    -How do weapons, specials and armor affect this number?
    How are we to determine the surviveability of a build other than a %-to-time relation, particularly when we do not have a clear understanding of how the numbers are now working? (Especially when designing a build when we have zero reference to the targets beforehand?)

    ...

    TIMING

    The only bit of bad news is that, in order to incorporate as much player feedback as possible, we’re going to be pushing these changes out into March, probably after the March Raid, so as to ensure we don’t mess with your builds mid-season.  We believe this delay will improve the quality of both Battle Reports and the Defense Improvements, so it’ll be worth it.  We’re going to be running an additional focus test in the near future for our FM targets, and we’ll run more if necessary after that to make sure we hit the mark.

    We work well together, Captains, let’s keep it going.  Until next time, this is WrongThinker signing off.

    -WT


    UPDATE (02.24): WHY IS THE CHANGE TO DEFENSE A GOOD THING?

    It appears I've done a pretty poor job of explaining why the Defense changes are as critical as they are, which is on me.  In my attempt to be thorough, maybe I haven't been seeing the forest from the trees (when it comes to my explanations of this feature).  Let me try to clear this up by being as explicit as possible (and my apologies for not being more straight-forward from the outset).

    The Defense system as it currently stands is broken.  It brutally punishes any and all customization, crushes diverse play-styles, and scales poorly.  It compresses ultra-high volatility into low variance, which makes targets often way harder than they should be.  And this system's BIGGEST problem?  It seems simple and understandable (but isn't).

    Let me give you an example.  Which of the following (in the current system) is most useful?

    • A : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 60% to 80%.
    • B : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 70% to 85%.
    • C : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 97% to 99%.
    • D : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 99.4% to 99.7%.
    Highlight for the answer: Option C.  In fact, this option is SIGNIFICANTLY better than the others.  Even if the answer was obvious to you, we can tell by looking at active Hull builds that most players would answer this question incorrectly.  To be very clear, I don't fault anyone for guessing wrong, the system is not good.  It leads people down a wrong path.

    If you get a single component in your build "wrong", it could be the difference between 3 coins and 7 coins.  Getting two components wrongs can be the difference between 3 coins and not being able to do the target at all.  Worse still, some players might actually be missing a critical component or two, so they're just totally screwed.  This means the current system isn't just broken, it's not fair.

    Ultimately, it is possible that the new system won't make a ton more sense (though I hope it does once people get used to it), but it WILL be a more forgiving system for all players, allowing more customization and many play-styles to flourish.  Optimizing your build will still save you coin, but missing a single component from the "best build" will no longer by synonymous with "I guess I can't play the Raid at all now."

    I hope this all makes some sense.


     

    Timing: Push it more. I'm not convinced of either the need or implementation of this and have grave concerns.

    For Why: Your example is flawed. Precisly because the game is more complex that that makes it out to be. That aside, it still does not explain the need. That explanation is a justification for the change. You do not illustrate an actual need for the change. Again, a simple cycling of damage types would have been far, far easier to implement and negates a need to learn a new system. The reason the system is 'broken' using your definition is that you guys have escalated the defense numbers unimaginably in order to illicit a desire for new tech. That's fine and all, but again, is easily corrected. Hell, a refactoring would have been easier than this.

    As far as 'normalizing' builds, how is this not a punishment to those that can build at the 'edge' for optimal builds? The reward for excelling is reduced and the benefit of mediocrity is significantly increased. I'd much rather see a simpler correction and maybe have the company help players with builds rather than this.


    I mean no disrespect but if you can understand the post by wrong thinker you must be physics teacher..?? lol ;) I gave up on the first paragraph of his or her post. I wish they would just fix stop fixing the game. The slow but steady give us players who don't coin big time to at least have half a chance of keeping up. I don't mind spending a few sheckles now and again....
  • anisixia
    anisixia
    Master Tactician
    Joined Dec 2011 Posts: 2,198
    ...


    I mean no disrespect but if you can understand the post by wrong thinker you must be physics teacher..?? lol ;) I gave up on the first paragraph of his or her post. I wish they would just fix stop fixing the game. The slow but steady give us players who don't coin big time to at least have half a chance of keeping up. I don't mind spending a few sheckles now and again....
    lol, not hardly, just have a fairly good grasp of the mechanics of the game. ;)
    Come visit that Dragon_Bane guy over at Battle Pirates on BACON!

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/bponbv/
  • GordM1
    GordM1
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Apr 2013 Posts: 165
    KISS what a good acronim that is ( KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID) if somthing is broke it needs fixing if it is,nt leave it alone we are suposed to be pirates not quatum phyisics experts to many restriction in the game to much limitation and way way to technical i would like to spend my time on here blowing crap up flatning baseing and sinking fleets and being able to hit what target i want with what fleet i want right now BP is turning into a nanny state telling us what to do and when we can do it and with what .These co called testers who the heck are they do you selcet from the main stream of players or just the whales and mods would be nice to get an invite to these tests and remember your player base is world wide not all are on PST. your rolling out all this new stuff but stuff that has been broken you ingnor the daily vanished and nothing been said why or when it comming back FVF major part of the game just beacuse some top players crying about getting snaged or chor fleets getting sunk heck it a pirate game MTFU repair fleet or learn not to ge snaged.Stopping FVF was not a good move hurry up andfix that the majority of players want it so stop catering for the minority.Raid start time what master mind changed that 11.00pm it starts in UK i  or ishould say most of the players in UK miss 1.5 day of raid cause of the stupid start time build times repair times reduce those thats your main problem reduce those and it would increace seat time as people will be willing to play longer and spend a bit more insted of waiting 12 hours plus for fleets to repepair 
    Dude, I've said it before in another post, and I'll say it again, seeing as you've obviously missed it.

    Raid times were adjusted to suit the Australian Kixeye staffers who fix raid problems. They have to wake up, tend to their morning chores, commute to work, log into the Kixeye system and be ready to fix issues as they occur. There are 2 Australian offices, btw, 1 in Brisbane, & the other in Melbourne.

    This is why, currently, raid targets are generally smooth now, rather than folks whining about problems with raid targets both here & on FB as the Au staff weren't awake to correct them in the original start times.

    I'm in NZ, did I complain about the original start/finish times, where once I logged out for the last night, if I wanted extra, I'd have to be up at 4am?
    No, I sucked it up.

    YOU should do the same, instead of whinging (yes, you're a whinging pom, ok?) and learn about TIME MANAGEMENT like everyone else in the game. And with a name like yours, you sound like a pikey ffs.

    How on Earth do you lose 1.5 days of play time when the raids have the same duration? What, others have magically gained 1.5 days of raid time because of that change?

    In regards to FvF

    That wasn't exactly FvF. It was slaughter. Obviously you're one of those who liked tooling around like a tool with a conq hull or 2 killing chore fleets in your bubble.
    AND YOU ARE WITH YOUR LVL 53 BASE?
    If I'm such a noob, how did I solo effort an Overkill badge in December?


    You talk like a noob little boy ... act your age not your shoe size 

  • allythevan
    allythevan
    Potential Threat
    Joined Nov 2012 Posts: 77
    anisixia said:
    ...


    I mean no disrespect but if you can understand the post by wrong thinker you must be physics teacher..?? lol ;) I gave up on the first paragraph of his or her post. I wish they would just fix stop fixing the game. The slow but steady give us players who don't coin big time to at least have half a chance of keeping up. I don't mind spending a few sheckles now and again....
    lol, not hardly, just have a fairly good grasp of the mechanics of the game. ;)
    wish i had 
  • Kalidor55
    Kalidor55
    Master Tactician
    Joined Jul 2012 Posts: 2,260
    anisixia said:
    Hello Captains, WrongThinker here.

    Over the weekend we ran a Focus Test of our upcoming Battle Report and Defense Improvement features.

    While we technically used the “Preview” server, it’s worth noting that this was not really a preview.  There’s a reason I use the word Focus Test: these features are still very-much in progress and needed your input to ensure they were doing what they needed to do.

    So how did the Focus Test go?  Personally, I think it went great, but let me give some details, starting with the Battle Report feature.


    BATTLE REPORT UPDATE

    First off, a whopping 60% of our community testers did use the Battle Report feature to optimize their builds, which is a darn good sign.  You guys will definitely love this feature when it goes live. However, we received feedback that certain information wasn't super useful (the “Avoided” damage category) and that the color scheme made it a little hard to read.

    We’re taking the feedback to heart!  First, we’re going to be upping the contrast and colors to improve the readability of the Battle Report.  More importantly, we’re going to be changing the nature of the information the Battle Report shows. Instead of showing damage you successfully Avoided or counter-measured (which you can already see as you play anyway), we’re going to focus information around things that are a less visible!  Now we’ll be showing Taken Damage, Resisted Damage (which is damage reduced by Defenses and Deflection) and Evaded damage. This will be way more informative.




    I like this, so long as the meaning of each part is clear. If it is clear I don't see a problem with adding a 4th for 'avoided' so that those that are playing on the app or autoing can see the benefit they would get from driving.

    ...

    DEFENSE IMPROVEMENTS UPDATE

    For the Defense Improvements, the community immediately found that high-level tanking strategies were punished by the newer system, with players seeing significantly higher damage against their Flags.  Discovering this sort of oversight is EXACTLY the reason we run focus tests. Since the intention of the Defense improvements is NOT to make your lives worse, we’re going back and adjusting the durability of Flags in the new system to ensure that players don’t see a repair hike with the changes.

    ...



    This is an AI issue. Fix the AI rather than band-aid it and it won't be a problem. In the past the AI stacking and driving did not have this issue, it is a new issue and should be resolved rather than coated over. Just slapping a band-ais on it will cause issues further down the line. I'd much rather not have history continue to repeat itself.


    ...

    The community also flagged two other concerns which we’re investigating.  The first is that the changes result in PvE Hulls being able to compete unreasonably well against PvP Hulls, with the community suggesting that we just wall-off PvE from PvP completely (we already do this restriction with PvP attacking PvE, so this would be ensuring PvE can’t attack PvP).  This is a really great catch by the community, so we’re going to be working towards resolving this. The second issue, which is to be expected, is that the new system will take some learning.  To address this point head-on, this is just straight-up true.  The “transition cost” of changing from one system to another is never free, but we can lower the cost by talking a bit more about the system itself and what it looks like.

    ...



    1. If the balance were adjusted properly on the back end (weapons, specials etc.) this would not be a problem. It is the apparent separation of balance that is causing part of this issue. Instead of working hand in hand and bringing everything in line, you guys seem to be doubling down on separating the game into two games within one.
    2.Players currently know and are comfortable with the systems in place. Some of the angst and issues could have been resolved by simply adding 2 decimal places to the prints for transparency/clarity. Then the next step would have been one discussed previously many times - introducing a new damage type to transition out of the old ones allowing you to reign in the numbers and start 'fresh' without upsetting the current system or forcing the player base to learn a new system after almost a decade of consistency under the old one.
    3. Players still have some trouble under the current one, this new system is more complex and complicated, allows for less transparency and will make it more difficult for players to understand and build in the niche way that the game has progressed.


    ...

    So, to that end, let’s take a look at a picture!

    This blank Erad will hopefully start to give you a sense of what’s going on with the new system.  There are three things to note here. First, the health value is MUCH higher than it was before (keep in mind the cost/time for repairing a fully damaged Hull will not change with this heath increase).  Adding health to our Hulls is what’s allowing us to move away from the old system while maintaining a consistent experience in targets. Second, where we list our Defense values you see a flat value (in this case, 2700).  Components and buffs add to this number. The higher the number, the longer your hull survives. Third, the percentage that appears after the flat Defense value (the number shown in parentheses) is how long your Hull survives as a result of the Defense of the Hull.  If you see Corrosive DEF 3600 (200%), that means you’re surviving 2 times as long as you would without that 3600 Corrosive Defense. So, if you would have survived 10 seconds without that Defense, you’ll survive 20 with it.

    Note that the values in this image may not be final, but you get the idea.


    ...




    What is the fixed value derived from?
    How do weapons, specials and armor affect this number? Is there a fixed calculation we can use?
    What is that percentage in relation to?
    -Base value?
    -Survives in relation to what? Targets? Weapons?
    -If it is a damage type, why aren't we using a value we can equate into a calculation to have some transparency? Why are we using a seemingly arbitrary number here?
    -How do weapons, specials and armor affect this number?
    How are we to determine the surviveability of a build other than a %-to-time relation, particularly when we do not have a clear understanding of how the numbers are now working? (Especially when designing a build when we have zero reference to the targets beforehand?)

    ...

    TIMING

    The only bit of bad news is that, in order to incorporate as much player feedback as possible, we’re going to be pushing these changes out into March, probably after the March Raid, so as to ensure we don’t mess with your builds mid-season.  We believe this delay will improve the quality of both Battle Reports and the Defense Improvements, so it’ll be worth it.  We’re going to be running an additional focus test in the near future for our FM targets, and we’ll run more if necessary after that to make sure we hit the mark.

    We work well together, Captains, let’s keep it going.  Until next time, this is WrongThinker signing off.

    -WT


    UPDATE (02.24): WHY IS THE CHANGE TO DEFENSE A GOOD THING?

    It appears I've done a pretty poor job of explaining why the Defense changes are as critical as they are, which is on me.  In my attempt to be thorough, maybe I haven't been seeing the forest from the trees (when it comes to my explanations of this feature).  Let me try to clear this up by being as explicit as possible (and my apologies for not being more straight-forward from the outset).

    The Defense system as it currently stands is broken.  It brutally punishes any and all customization, crushes diverse play-styles, and scales poorly.  It compresses ultra-high volatility into low variance, which makes targets often way harder than they should be.  And this system's BIGGEST problem?  It seems simple and understandable (but isn't).

    Let me give you an example.  Which of the following (in the current system) is most useful?

    • A : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 60% to 80%.
    • B : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 70% to 85%.
    • C : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 97% to 99%.
    • D : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 99.4% to 99.7%.
    Highlight for the answer: Option C.  In fact, this option is SIGNIFICANTLY better than the others.  Even if the answer was obvious to you, we can tell by looking at active Hull builds that most players would answer this question incorrectly.  To be very clear, I don't fault anyone for guessing wrong, the system is not good.  It leads people down a wrong path.

    If you get a single component in your build "wrong", it could be the difference between 3 coins and 7 coins.  Getting two components wrongs can be the difference between 3 coins and not being able to do the target at all.  Worse still, some players might actually be missing a critical component or two, so they're just totally screwed.  This means the current system isn't just broken, it's not fair.

    Ultimately, it is possible that the new system won't make a ton more sense (though I hope it does once people get used to it), but it WILL be a more forgiving system for all players, allowing more customization and many play-styles to flourish.  Optimizing your build will still save you coin, but missing a single component from the "best build" will no longer by synonymous with "I guess I can't play the Raid at all now."

    I hope this all makes some sense.


     

    Timing: Push it more. I'm not convinced of either the need or implementation of this and have grave concerns.

    For Why: Your example is flawed. Precisly because the game is more complex that that makes it out to be. That aside, it still does not explain the need. That explanation is a justification for the change. You do not illustrate an actual need for the change. Again, a simple cycling of damage types would have been far, far easier to implement and negates a need to learn a new system. The reason the system is 'broken' using your definition is that you guys have escalated the defense numbers unimaginably in order to illicit a desire for new tech. That's fine and all, but again, is easily corrected. Hell, a refactoring would have been easier than this.

    As far as 'normalizing' builds, how is this not a punishment to those that can build at the 'edge' for optimal builds? The reward for excelling is reduced and the benefit of mediocrity is significantly increased. I'd much rather see a simpler correction and maybe have the company help players with builds rather than this.


    You sir just prove and demonstrate that you know more and uderstand more this game than he will ever do. ;)
  • Louis Kakascik
    Louis Kakascik
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Oct 2012 Posts: 410
    biggest problem I see is a limited amount of information being returned since you use the same people on test servers. You should want a more well rounded idea of what is happening from all different levels of players ranging from non coiners all the way to your "whales"
  • Casper_SAS
    Casper_SAS
    Potential Threat
    Joined Feb 2013 Posts: 80
    After many years of being a dedicated and faithful player in Battle Pirates, I think my time has come to an end. With all of the chores and money that Kix wants us to do, it's no longer a fun game but a full time job. It was great in the beginning, but my time is over. I wish you all the best. I have found another game that is definitely user friendly. A LOT of BP players have started migrating over to that game. I of course will not mention the name of the game here because I do not want to slight Kixeye. To those I have fought beside, its been great. To those who have hit and flattened me, thank you. I learned from each and every hit. It has been a great run, but I can't do this anymore. I put in a ticket explaining my and a lot of friends problems with the games and all I get in response is expired links from "in game experts". I request new links and they never send me one. Evidently the support staff does not want to hear from the players either. The staff at Kix think because they think something is new and great that every player in the game will think the same. News flash, the majority do not think the same thing. Hopefully this will actually get Kixeye to listening to ALL of the players and not just a select few that they hand pick to preview or test this stuff out before they release it. Have a great one everybody. I have had a blast hitting and getting hit by you all and I will miss the players more than anything. The game, not so much. I work a full time job and the last thing I want to do is come IN from a full time job and sign on to my computer to ANOTHER full time job when the game is or was originally played for the down time, relaxation and stress relief. But alas, those times are long time gone now.
  • Damnation-n-Hellfire
    Damnation-n-Hellfire
    Strike-force Captain
    Joined Nov 2011 Posts: 896
    edited 26 Feb 2019, 10:50PM
    anisixia said:

    Let me give you an example.  Which of the following (in the current system) is most useful?

    • A : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 60% to 80%.
    • B : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 70% to 85%.
    • C : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 97% to 99%.
    • D : Increasing your Corrosive Defense from 99.4% to 99.7%.
    Highlight for the answer: Option C.  In fact, this option is SIGNIFICANTLY better than the others.  Even if the answer was obvious to you, we can tell by looking at active Hull builds that most players would answer this question incorrectly.  To be very clear, I don't fault anyone for guessing wrong, the system is not good.  It leads people down a wrong path.
    You may wish to check your math on which is actually the more beneficial defense jump take note on this image based a 100k health and how much damage it can absorb. Leading people down a path by starting them off with a false premise seems pretty par for the course tho 
    I do see where you're coming from, but this is the trap of the current system.  It tells you to care about how much damage you resist, when what is actually important is how long you survive (which is a result of how much you take, not how much you resist).

    I shall now officially go into Hardcore Math Mode.  Please only read ahead if you're ready to go down the rabbit hole.

    Since what IS important is how much damage you take, we need to look at the compliment of each resistance, not at the resistance itself.  So, for Option A, you're resisting 60% before the component and 80% after the component, which means you're taking 40% of the projectiles damage before the component is equipped and 20% after.  The improvement of going from 40% to 20% is actually 50% (because 20% divided by 40% is one-half). reduction in damage taken.  That is, if you WERE taking 100 damage from a projectile when you had 60% resistance you'd be taking 50 damage from that same projectile with 80% resistance.  It would take twice as many projectiles to take out your Hull.

    This is also true for Options B and D.

    For option C, however, you go from 97% resisted to 99% resisted, which means you're going from 3% damage taken to 1% damage taken.  Which means if you were taking 100 damage at 97% resisted, you'd be taking about 33 damage taken at 99% resisted.  So for Option C, it takes 3 times as many projectiles to kill you with that improvement, as opposed to 2 times as many projectiles with all other options (which is a massive difference).  To put this in coin terms: options A, B, and D are the difference between 6 coins and 3 coins.  But Option C gets would get you from 6 coins down to 2 coins.

    Ultimately, this gets harder and harder to parse (and show) the higher the numbers get, which is why it wasn't really an issue 2 or 3 years ago, but is a serious issue now.
    So, I wanted to mull this one over because 1. I needed time to think through and word this properly and 2. I wanted to make sure I read this post correctly. 
    You have actually fallen into the trap as well. Kinda. Or are purposefully obfuscating the issue.

    Your premise is damage taken, ie, survivability, however, you are playing on the wrong side of the equation, sort of...

     Before I explain, let me forward a simple truth here: you guys control both TtK (target) and applied DPS/Damage Ceiling (our fleet) in the targets. That makes it obvious that this is on the design side. That said, no discussion can be made using these numbers in a vacuum, which is where the fallacy begins.  So, let's start with the number BUT give them a bit of context and make them easier to understand, shall we?



    Here we can see a few things. The last column is the part many of us focus on, but my use and your use of this differ greatly

    The way in which you are using it is completely out of context. Sure a 200% increase in survivability (taking 3x the damage) is the 'winning' number... or is it? What is that compared to and in context to what? You aren't using the numbers in context to gameplay. The 'math' trap you reference is not a trap at all, it is merely math. Just math.

    This is vary clear when you don't skip the first step of going from 0% to 60%. Going from 0% to 60% is only a 150% survivability increase, which still loses in your example. But does it really? In actual gameplay would that actually happen?

    See, the thing is that last column is used by us to see the impact of our build numbers. Idgaf about 97 to 99 if that isn't where I'm looking. That last column is only good for use in context to the gameplay. Which means we need that Damage ceiling number, which we never, ever get. See my previous post above to note some issues therein.

    To illustrate, let's use the same chart, but instead, bring that damage ceiling more in line with what we see in game, shall we?



    Oh myyyyyyyyyyy.... that paints a different picture entirely, no? Why do we want our percentages to stick around?? Because of this exact reason. Context. 

    So then that brings us to WHY a clear, calculateable and repeatable flat % number is best - because we are always missing part of the equation. Simply adding decimal places to the end of that percentage is all we needed currently. YOU guys have jacked up the ceiling to insane levels wherein the base number % is mostly irrelevant. 

    There are also several aspects that you overlook in this simplification of 'damage taken', ie. survivability - our TtK means a great deal. This is another aspect of the equation that you deny us. So why are you insisting on denying us yet another aspect when there is no actual need for doing it??

    Oh- and just a side note, going from 99% to 99.7% yields a 230% increase, almost exactly like your 97% to 99% example. THAT is where players are having issue, NOT with the system the way it is.
    its pointless george, when he acted like the damage i resist wasnt DIRECTLY proportional to how long i survived i gave up. that not math thats not even Kixeye math that just common sense. the more i resist the less i take the longer i live. so simple a caveman can do it

  • MiniBalken
    MiniBalken
    Potential Threat
    Joined Dec 2017 Posts: 41
    STOP MAKING IT HARDER TO UNDERSTAND THAN IT NEEDS TO BE! - stop all that math BS to figure out how much dmg a base gotta have to kill a ship - it really DONT need to this BS way! - put like others - ive just given up on trying to see it how you want us to - so i just play and test and refit - MORONS
Sign In or Register to comment.