Dev Diary: Season Format Changes

  • albert.roberts.92754
    albert.roberts.92754
    Potential Threat
    Joined Aug 2013 Posts: 54
    The only reason build times are high is you make them that way, with a simple code change you can reduce times at a stroke now not jam tomorrow as you keep promising but seldom for fill.
  • LSD68
    LSD68
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Oct 2011 Posts: 130
    so what you are saying is that to be able to hit the top targets, we need a fleet of new hulls every 2 months instead of every 3 months?

  • CaptainHook-GIMPS
    CaptainHook-GIMPS
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Jun 2014 Posts: 159

    Seems like all kix does these days is change a bunch of stuff, make it more confusing, say it's better this way and less confusing, "trust us" and hope people aren't smart enough to realize they just got shafted by all thestuff going on behind the curtain.
    Reducing build times by 15-50%, basing it on a potential buying scale. people who don't usually spend coins on ship builds may be more enticed to spend coin on their last ship vs last 3 ships. Reduce the amount of raids those ships are really worthwhile will entice them even more.
    While this does fix some issues I can see it creating many more. I myself only spend about 10-15 bucks a month(usually 10 on raid with grease monkeys), and have my fleet ready by the second raid, minor refits by the third, I get to hammer down for 2 full raids on top targets. Now if I don't want to coin, my fleet will only be a big producer for 1 raid and will have to grind more consistently?
    Why are S sets moving over to A sets? Are A sets going to be worth more than they are currently? 20%reduction in damage? Why are A sets going to dish out S set damage for way less points?
    Why not make a lateral move? Instead of trying to find a way to get more coins?
    Making more money will come alot easier if you stop focusing on only that. Truly caring about the user experience will make people spend more money, showing that your blood thirsty turns alot of people off. Why do we need a 2nd ship when the class raid is already on the decline?

    War does not determine who is right, only who is left
  • macheteman23704
    macheteman23704
    Potential Threat
    Joined Jun 2015 Posts: 60
    I think this will definitely help with the problem of missing one raid event and being totally hosed.  I missed the last hull raid, so I didn't even get to start building Saturns until practically the first assault raid.  I'm not going to have a full fleet by the end of this raid cycle.  The viability of the assault fleet is currently limited to the short window of raids, so I'm probably not going to be able to use my Saturns during this assault raid cycle, which is really lame and leaves me to grinding low level targets with proto-apollos.  Under the current raid cycle approach, this will box me out of getting the new cycle's ship, which will prevent me from participating at the start of the next raid cycle, hoping for a TLC that will let me get the new hull sometime between raids.  So having assault targets in the next raid would make the saturn fleet still worth building. This approach will improve the lifespan of a fleet if the goal of a raid cycle is to complete a fleet.  Being able to then use that complete fleet in the next raid would encourage more participation and not leave us in the drink if we missed one raid.  However, the risk is that if the only targets for the current ship in the current raid cycle are the top-end targets, then we will begin building a new fleet and not be able to effectively use them until the last raid in the cycle.  If we are in the process of building the current fleet, they will get totally demolished in the top targets for the first two raids in the cycle.  There won't be any chance to tune the fleet until we've sunk 3 months of build time into it, and if we made a mistake then we're married to it.

    Another thought - this approach essentially offsets the build cycles.  I think it would be more useful if the top targets in the "current" cycle used the past cycle's fleet, which encourages us to build it within the 3-month time window instead of just a 1-month window.  This will be necessary since as we are building our "current" cycle fleet we are not going to be able to complete top targets.  There could be top targets for both the current and past cycles, which would reward folks who sped up the current cycle build by being able to rack up raid points twice as fast, and the rest of us can experiment with the current fleet builds.  By the way, participating in the raid does not mean spending a hundred hours of seat time with last year's ship and getting 100k points.  Participating means having a legitimate shot at getting the tech we need in a timely manner.   The simplistic manner of reducing raid points if I use saturns in a lower target despite them being 25% done gives me absolutely no incentive to use them at all unless the fleet is finished.  Target locking by tier/cycle/hull is becoming increasingly problematic so loosening the rules will be more beneficial than trying to create a series of gateways to limit our entrance to combat, and will encourage experimenting too.

    The big problem that I see is that this approach still 100% ties up the shipyard for the duration of a raid cycle, so if we guess wrong we're hosed.  And if only the top targets are for the current cycle then we can't effectively experiment so we're almost sure to guess wrong.  Reduced build times are still necessary, especially if a second ship is involved.  I like the approach of having a primary ship and a specialist ship, but we're realistically going to have to have the primary fleet all built in order to get the specialist ship so the overall build pressure still increases.
  • ScattergunScott
    ScattergunScott
    Force to be Reckoned With
    Joined May 2017 Posts: 1,602

    Hello!


    Overview

    In this post, I will breakdown what our plans are for July, when the current Assault Season ends. Specifically, I will seek to: explain how we are lowering build times, surface the major complaints we’ve received with the current system, explain how we can bring more variety and excitement to Raids, and explain how we plan for the value of your hulls to persist for longer than it does now.


    The current system season model has a number of key defining characteristics. These are:

    • 3 month duration

    • 2 hulls, intended to be of equivalent power

    • Raid targets that are entirely one silo (Skirmish, Assault, Siege)


    While this system brings some predictability, it’s fundamentally flawed in that it necessarily creates a number of undesirable outcomes:

    • We want ‘completing a full fleet’ to be your season’s goal. However, to make that goal persist for 3 months, build times need to be relatively high. This creates a huge friction point at the first event in the season, where “catching up” is out of reach for most players. This is not an optimal gameplay experience

    • While we endeavor for both hulls to be even in terms of power and utility, a 100% balanced experience hasn’t always been the case. As a result, often one hull is unintentionally more useful than the other. This, too, is not an optimal gameplay experience

    • The targets from top to bottom each raid are extremely similar, designed for the same hulls. Over months, this gets boring

    • After 3 months conclude, the utility  of your hulls falls off a cliff when the Raid silo changes. They become less useful than hulls released a year ago which match the new Raid silo.

    • The relationship between 1 hull and 2 hulls is awkward and unsatisfying. Should you get both? Is it worthwhile? Is it required? None of these questions are enjoyable, and none of the answers are fun.


    So how do we fix this? Through a number of initiatives:


    • No more PvE seasons. Silos are staggered, with multiple silos available at any given time;

    • Significantly lower build times on PvE hulls, while increasing the lifespan of a fleet from its current 3+ months of value;

    • Changing the model from 2 equal hulls per silo released, to 1 superior hull and 1 specialized hull per silo.



    Build Times

    If the top targets persist for a shorter period of time, build times can also be lowered significantly. The goal, however, is for the hulls to still have significant value beyond 3+ months - we believe this is possible. How big a difference in build times are we talking? We’re still doing the math and reductions will vary based on the hull itself. However, the current range we’re discussing is as “low” as a 15% reduction for certain hulls, and as high as a 50% reduction for others.


    Uneven Hull Power

    By presenting players with two hulls to choose from, you have to pick blindy, not knowing which one will be better. To solve for this, we will present a Primary, and a Supplementary hull in each season. The primary hull will be more powerful and have more use. The Supplementary hull is much more specialized, but has much shorter build times. This way, your investment in hulls is always worthwhile.


    Target Diversity

    Rather than making all targets in a raid be for a specific silo and rotating them in all at once, we’ll rotate new silo targets in gradually. This allows diverse experiences and challenges in each raid, rather than the same experience repeated 100 times.


    Getting Left Behind

    In practice, when the season changes over, the S Targets (100+)  become the new silo, but the A Targets (80s) will become the previous silo. This means if you miss an event, you’re not left behind, and the value of your hulls persist for much longer.


    How does this look for the near term?

    The implementation would look like this:


    • In June:

      • The targets will be Assault

      • the season will end and we’ll have a hull store as usual. In this event, you will be able to get one new Skirmish hull with build times significantly lower than they have been before

    • In July:

      • the top targets will be Skirmish, but Assault targets would remain prominently in the raid

      • supplementary hull will be released. This would be significantly cheaper than the hull released in June, and would serve a specialized purpose

    • In August:

      • Like the previous month, the top targets will be Skirmish, but Assault targets will remain prominently in the raid

      • Siege hull will be released

    • In September:

      • The top targets will be Siege, but Skirmish targets would remain prominently in the raid

      • supplementary hull would be released. This would be significantly cheaper than the hulls released in June and August, and would serve a specialized purpose


    Thoughts?

    I’d love to hear your feedback. Do you feel this idea would address the concerns you and your friends have about the current season model? What are the advantages this proposal brings? The disadvantages?


    Step in the right direction. 

    Definitely a pro reducing build times. Having one Hull that can do the whole thing, and the second Hull being "optional" is better than trying to build two Hulls in three months, only for them to be obsolete. Better step? Go back to one single Hull. Also, reintroduce Weapons that do both types of Damage the Target is vulnerable to. All this was implemented before and lasted one whole Raid Cycle. Make it a permanent, well-designed thing. Repair Times also need to be addressed. Raid Hulls have long repair times, because Raids have half Repairs. But then, they get used in TLCs and other stuff with no half Repairs. 


  • BlackPoops98
    BlackPoops98
    Strike-force Captain
    Joined Aug 2014 Posts: 880

    Hello!


    Overview

    In this post, I will breakdown what our plans are for July, when the current Assault Season ends. Specifically, I will seek to: explain how we are lowering build times, surface the major complaints we’ve received with the current system, explain how we can bring more variety and excitement to Raids, and explain how we plan for the value of your hulls to persist for longer than it does now.


    Thoughts?

    I’d love to hear your feedback. Do you feel this idea would address the concerns you and your friends have about the current season model? What are the advantages this proposal brings? The disadvantages?


    I will keep this brief. IMHO your analysis is missing on KEY FACTOR. The top tier (100+) targets currently REQUIRE both hulls. It has been this way the past 3 raid cycles including the current cycle. The problem is NOT one hull more powerful then the other, that claim is BS.

    The prizes are priced such that you really need to be able to complete a top tier set and get the set bonus in order to be able to afford the top tier prizes without either spending a lot of coin of spending a LOT of seat time grinding like crazy. If the new cycles end up requiring the "specialized" hull in order to complete a top tier set then this while plan will be a dismal failure. 
    BlackPoops98
    <-- Firing massive chunks of black poo since '98 -->

    image
  • bob.okker
    bob.okker
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Feb 2013 Posts: 212
    Wow nothing changed with these changes i think you should reduce your number of events instead off lowering duration.

    Only benefit is for your few whalers and your staff playing this game 

    My advice read carefully what people say here and dont release a balloon and try to adjust your game afterwards its your game make it entertaining again.

    Stop adjusting hulls look at the future before you launch stuff and hurt us by nerving it. 

    If you start here you are on the right way good luck and proof us wrong 


  • Fernando Tuliao
    Fernando Tuliao
    Potential Threat
    Joined Aug 2012 Posts: 35
    1 full fleet in 1 month : 
    30/5 = 6 days per ship
    no refits and upgrades
    i hope so 
  • joe crossland
    joe crossland
    Force to be Reckoned With
    Joined May 2012 Posts: 1,576
    Heres a novel idea instead of all the smoke and mirrors bs and stating things that have been said over and over for yrs by players and taking credit for it and using "player requested" when we all know you actually mean "whale requested" why dont you just simply lower the build times we all know you can its a simple matter of coding and dont say its not that simple or that easy because it is i know i use to write code 
  • Kids Jaman Now
    Kids Jaman Now
    Potential Threat
    Joined Feb 2013 Posts: 89
    edited 17 May 2019, 11:08PM
    seasonal pve or whatever I like trying something new
    I still dont understand the meaning of Primary hull and a Supplementary hull
    - The Primary hull will be more powerful and have more use.
    - The Supplementary hull is much more specialized, but has much shorter build times
    noob side of me  wondering isnt that mean you still offer us 2 hull for each hull type (ex:skirmish,siege,assault) ?
    maybe u can make it more clear again the meaning of that 2 hull

    about build time theres only 2 choice in my mind
    - 15% reduce ship build time but move the upgrade from the shipyard to retro or whatever building as long as not the same building where we build and refit  a ship.
    - keep the upgrade in the shipyard, but reduce ship build and refit time 70%.  i think thats fair enough   :)
  • Lakhbir Singh
    Lakhbir Singh
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Aug 2011 Posts: 390
    kix is not gonna listen bout the build/ repair times of fleets
    COOT is recruiting; please PM Scorpious_DOW for details
  • kixeyeuser_1406300105962_100004147847899
    kixeyeuser_1406300105962_100004147847899
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Apr 2015 Posts: 226
    i just reread what you put and you are now moving to a 2 month raid cycle and that will be the last for me cutting the build times is not enough when you cut another month out was 4 month per cycle then 3 now you want only 2 and expect us to be ready no not worth it me and alot like me who up to a few months ago did coin and was waiting to see if it improved to coin again will leave the game faster then you can say, i promise to change for the player lies lies lies
  • whatever11
    whatever11
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Sep 2014 Posts: 304
    wrongthinker lived up to his name - he thought wrong
    goldendoodle i see will live up to his name- hes after our gold & is a  doodle
    lol
  • Robert W H Holmes
    Robert W H Holmes
    Potential Threat
    Joined Jul 2011 Posts: 60
    How about just get rid of the two hull structure altogether and stick with one?
  • graham.coel
    graham.coel
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined May 2014 Posts: 305
    There has been a trend in last month reducing those who enjoy plaing for tokens/equiptment to offering these for sale PLAY V PAY.

    Please give more play time in order to obtain tokens/Equipment so there is not so much down time.
  • Silver Stefaans
    Silver Stefaans
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Jun 2018 Posts: 440
    Doodle, your game performance puts you and WT to shame. If after 7 years Kix cannot get coders to run a game smoothly they should fall on their swords.
  • PrimalFusion
    PrimalFusion
    Potential Threat
    Joined Apr 2014 Posts: 67
    These ideas at least seem to be a step in the right direction.

    The main problem though isn't just ship build times, it's ship build times in the confines of the raid season.
    Currently if you either don't coin or coin very little(repairs and such), then the raid looks like this for you. Get ship>30 days pass>1st raid>You don't take part(because you have maybe 2 ships that you rush built)>30 days pass>You either don't take part or take part but barely get any points(you have 4 ships that you rush built)>30 days pass>You take part and if your a savvy player you do OK, enough to get the next hull for new raid at least, if your not a savvy player you get barely any points because you never had time to practice with the targets and realize what was required on your build to best complete them. On-top of this you can find out in the final raid that your choice of ships was the worse of the two, so you were handicapped from the start.(this raid the difference isn't huge but the Saturn is clearly the better of the 2 ships.)

    What's laughable is the points required to get most prizes(compared with points received), 5 D6M were 20m(4M each), how many people even reached 20m ? So even if i make it to that fleet and get to take part the amount of things i can go for is severally limited.

    It shouldn't be a surprise that people are annoyed, the time you get is too short, the difficulty is high, the difficulty goes up from the 1st to the 3rd raid, tech that is basically required in raid 2&3 is not even available until the raid starts, upgrades which at first we were told aren't required are clearly now required, the prize store seems to fairly overpriced compared with the difficulty and amount you get from targets.

    So you have.
    1st raid - 30 days to be ready
    2nd raid - 60 days to be ready
    3rd raid - 90 days to be ready

    Ship build times - 110 days
    Upgrade times - 52 days
    Refit times - 10-30 days

    FYI these numbers are basic averages and not exact, but you can at least see a ratio between the raid the build/refit/upgrade times required.

    If you want some real feed back, i'd have to see actual numbers, but even if you cut the build/refit/upgrade times by 50% you can still see it's an uphill battle.
  • Korhadrys
    Korhadrys
    Greenhorn
    Joined Mar 2019 Posts: 19
    Heres an idea:

    Stop giving crap campaigns as in 1 where megaship is needed while 1st 1 is weeks away and start giving the ones people need to do something in raids/events.

    I see a lot of bat/tail and shrike/erads needed....so give these campaigns when people can do them...not when they are lvl35-40
  • michaelg21
    michaelg21
    Force to be Reckoned With
    Joined Oct 2011 Posts: 1,926
    Well GoldenDoodle you have lots of opinion so far-here is another.
    The ideas you have ARE sound. BUT--------I have to agree with many on here. We HAVE been promised many things only to be disappointed. NONE OF US are happy about these Upgrades being added to hulls-we recognize these are done to generate revenue-you know that and we know that. With all of these "upgrades" coming to so many hulls it is nearly impossible to do them without coining-YOU KNOW THAT as do we. We fully understand you need to generate revenue or the game will shut down. This is acceptable to us. BUT-you need to stop pushing this down our throats. You simply have TOO MANY THINGS going on that virtually all come from the same shipyard- So far you have refused to do a logical step which would be to expand the Conquest Yard to do more hulls-we also understand that this would cut down on revenue from the whales. BUT most players are NOT whales. Give us a chance to do more things in that shipyard to help for one.
    Stop blocking fleets from so many things. I feel it was a MASSIVE mistake to block the older hulls from hitting bases-most of which were actually DESIGNED TO HIT BASES. That one decision essentially strips lower levels from hitting bases until they can obtain Conqueror hulls (the researchable one don't count as they aren't good enough) You once again destroyed creativity by removing their abilities. What if a player WANTS TO HIT A BASE WITH PUNISHERS, etc? Players continue to complain you take creativity out of the game-this is not an opinion but a FACT. You want to shorten build times? 15% isn't very meaningful 33% and more is. Repair times on non-Conqueror hulls remains WAY TOO HIGH!!!!! Once the hulls have finished their time as raid ships-REDUCE THE REPAIR TIMES!!!!!!
    A bit long and I have more but will leave it at this for now.

  • Vitus_Ice
    Vitus_Ice
    Potential Threat
    Joined Dec 2012 Posts: 45
    edited 18 May 2019, 10:45PM
    I was under the impression that this was part of Kixeye's consultation, instead it looks as if this is going to be brought through regardless. I really cannot understand why Kixeye has this obsession with having two fleets specifically built to do the raid?  Going back to yesteryear, we were able to build a fleet to do the raid, to our own design, often it was the hull you used to hit bases, get res, and do what ever else was thrown at us. We now have a game that has been left badly fractured between P v P and P v E,  this new set of changes do nothing to address the situation. Whichever way you look at it we are still going to have to build two fleets per raid. My questions are: has "Product" agreed to this?  On the face of it we are going to be spending less time building fleet so the inference is that it is going to be cheaper to take part? Based on past experience, the "economy of the game" (Kixeye terminology) is going to have to be shifted so that the player base will end up  having to meet the cost of the changes. So where will those costs fall?
    Destroy or Be Destroyed the Alliance in 290
  • jefe
    jefe
    Strike-force Captain
    Joined Nov 2010 Posts: 658
    In what manner is a supplementary hull a specialist?

    It appears that if you don't buy TLOs, coin builds or complete an over the top TLC you will be relegated to hitting 80s targets until you can no longer play due to Carpal Tunnel syndrome?  

    I have yet to see many players ask for shorter raid cycles as the first raid is usually a crap shoot in regards to getting a build correct.   I don't think this should be fixed by creating cookie cutter builds but providing more information on the targets and future tech to allow us to make informed decisions.
        
  • soloshooter
    soloshooter
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Dec 2012 Posts: 595


    How does this look for the near term?

    The implementation would look like this:


    • In June:

      • The targets will be Assault

      • the season will end and we’ll have a hull store as usual. In this event, you will be able to get one new Skirmish hull with build times significantly lower than they have been before

    • In July:

      • the top targets will be Skirmish, but Assault targets would remain prominently in the raid

      • supplementary hull will be released. This would be significantly cheaper than the hull released in June, and would serve a specialized purpose

    • In August:

      • Like the previous month, the top targets will be Skirmish, but Assault targets will remain prominently in the raid

      • Siege hull will be released

    • In September:

      • The top targets will be Siege, but Skirmish targets would remain prominently in the raid

      • supplementary hull would be released. This would be significantly cheaper than the hulls released in June and August, and would serve a specialized purpose


    Thoughts?

    I’d love to hear your feedback. Do you feel this idea would address the concerns you and your friends have about the current season model? What are the advantages this proposal brings? The disadvantages?


    The way I read it as the top tier targets are going to a 2 month cycle now? I really don't see any relief on the use of the shipyard. It still has to build,refit and upgrade and refit again with advanced tech!
    born in 495
  • Lady Cat
    Lady Cat
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Jan 2015 Posts: 129
    I am truly trying to understand the implications of all this.  This is such a fundamental change to the game that I am really concerned.  I've seen how the refactors have gone and how the consolidation of sectors have gone and it doesn't matter if some parts are good and some are bad (especially execution).  My concern is how many players are going to leave because of the changes?  We know you need to make money and you are a business.  But it appears that this change primarily benefits the big coiners.  Yes, us smaller coiners and especially non-coiners will be able to participate in raids more then they used to because you will spread out the use of the raid hull.  But we smaller coiners do not want to spend our game life grinding out 80s.  My personal concern is 'will i be able to compete at the top end?'.   Most of us were asking for the 4 month cycle to return and going to a null cycle is a bit different then that. I agree that hull usage needs to last longer.  I thought that tlc's and map targets were the way to increase the lifespan. If I had a vote in this then I would say... don't make this massive of a decision to change the game at this point.  Introduce it slowly by allowing the previous raid targets to co-exist with the current cycle so the non-coiners have a chance to do something at least.  Introduce baby raid targets for the new players so they can participate.   This game is such a balancing act for you.  You have to appeal to so many players at so many levels with so many different spending habits, abilities, and reasons for playing this game.  I'm afraid this will just knock the balance way off.  
  • Spider Retired
    Spider Retired
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Aug 2013 Posts: 319
    My thought is... what you say COULD be OK... BUT, history shows that while Kix may "give" with one hand they will **** slap you with the other. Reducing build times 15-50% sounds great.. till you realize that we now have to upgrade each individual hull to the tune of a 50%+ build time (most likely on the newest hull that only got a 15% reduction).  So in reality, what you are saying is that nothing is changing except the nomenclature. Sure, each hull has a "reduced" build time... but that is more than eaten up by the upgrades.  You are also saying we still have two hulls. Sooooo..... NOT impressed.
    You are correct, we have seen same or simular actions from Kixeye now for several years. But when Kixeye have no ear for players input this is how they always want to manuver to make a picture of giving players what they have been wanting. We know its not the truth, and Kixeye will see lots om players say enough is enough real soon. Ive heard lots have set a exit time of the us special day to let Kixeye and the game go down the drain. And i hope kixeye get that message clear as glas.

    For several months' players have said this game is turned into a chore just to stay current, This week we again did see lots of high priced FM prices in tier 5 and if thats the only way kixeye see they can add new stuff into the game they have lost direction. Everything has been made into limited items and upgrades like the ones we have now has no meaning. It close up our shipyards that we need to be able to build new fleets. I realy think it was the worst choice kixeye could make because so few will pay to build new raid fleet just to again start upgrading them and now they will not even be that usefull for long. Stop making this game so **** messy so we cant keep track. Kixeye will loose it all in the end.... Its a safe bet.


    Regards.
  • Chief_Barney
    Chief_Barney
    Skilled Warrior
    Joined Mar 2013 Posts: 427
    Interesting how often humans overlook the bigger picture of each project.
  • john.thompson.1000469
    john.thompson.1000469
    Greenhorn
    Joined Sep 2015 Posts: 8
    so basically you want us to coin our **** off to negate your screw ups !! so we bascially have a 2 month raid cycle with the 3rd month being an overlap for the next cycle.  with builds, refits & upgrades just trying to do the top tiers ?  you people really need to lay off on the meth  !!
Sign In or Register to comment.