FORUMS


This Game Will Fail..



Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 11:10 a.m.



Beowulf#6663 posted (#post-79840)

obliviondoll#5677 posted (#post-79836)

https://www.greybox.com/dreadnought/en/forum/topic/33237/

Long-running petition from some of the more active fans, created based on the NON-RESPONSIVENESS of the developers to the consistent negative feedback against almost everything that progression 2.0 stands for. The group of active Dreadnought supporters who have essentially given up on making real change settled on a set of small changes to push for in place of actually demanding the kind of meaningful change the game will need to survive long-term.

If you can deal with them keeping the tier system, but trying to refine it, support the petition. If you're ok with maintenance, but changed up a bit to be less punishing, support the petition. If you want the devs to build the game around "must spend money to keep playing how you want", support the petition.

https://www.greybox.com/dreadnought/en/forum/topic/37192/

This newer petition is one I created. It pushes for more changes, and more meaningful change, than the older one. It doesn't have much support yet, but it's only just started. And unlike the first petition which is based on discussion back and forth between a small group of players already disillusioned by their persistently-ignored attempts to make the kind of changes the game NEEDS, this was backed up by a poll of the community, and is based on what the majority of players have been asking for - a return to the state we had before progression 2.0 - and building on THAT as a starting point to make the game work.

Before 2.0, your problems with tiers simply did not exist. There were no tiers. Ships were all relatively well balanced against one another - actually much better balanced than a lot of already-released class-based games. Before 2.0, the progression system still needed work, but there were several valid and helpful ways to develop it into a more player-driven and fun system (which could also become an effecitve monetisation mechanic), where the current system is strictly linear with no real option to expand out from being linear and restrictive.

Personally, I think we need to go back. Obviously, Odin is a good example of someone who has given up on seeing that change (he's openly countered my previous arguments NOT with anything that actually goes against them, but with "the devs worked for months on the update, they're not going to go back"). He's not alone in accepting the state of the game and being willing to accept far less change than many others who have quit.

If we can get enough people to support a petition - ANY petition - we might see enough change ot keep the game alive. I would rather see enough change to bring me back, and to bring many players I know of EITHER back to the game OR into it for the first time. I have 3 invites which I plan to share with friends, but only if there's enough change to bring me back to the game. I'm not going to invite people to a game I no longer have any interest in playing. I have several friends who WERE lined up with plans to buy into the beta before progression 2.0, but hesitated because of the concerns about it - and are currently very glad they DIDN'T buy in after seeing how it's been (mis)handled. I have other friends who were watching the game with interest until 2.0 and ended up looking for ways to cancel their registration for a chance at a beta key. There are people out there who are actively AVOIDING news they had previously been trying to find, because of the complete ignorance of player feedback coming into this update and pushing forward with the direction it took.

So i just got a Key yesterday and havent been able to play yet (keeps saying the servers are down, not sure of the problem is on there end or mine) What exactly did this recent update do and is it as bad as you guys are making it out as?

You just got your key? And you think I am salty? Wait until you actually get in and see how bad your bent over and F*ed up the A before you think we are "Just Being Salty"

My advise is buy the founders pack now or you don't stand a chance. Its Pay to Win at its best.


-----Tier 5 Ohkta Pilot-----Tier 5 Invictus Pilot-----Tier 5 Athos Pilot-----
-------------------------Fully Researched Tier 4 Fleet------------------------
-------------------What the @#$% are you talking about?----------------


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 11:49 a.m.


Updated //
Dec. 17, 2016, 11:53 a.m.

Beowulf#6663 posted (#post-79840)

So i just got a Key yesterday and havent been able to play yet (keeps saying the servers are down, not sure of the problem is on there end or mine) What exactly did this recent update do and is it as bad as you guys are making it out as?

Point 1 - ship numbers/tier system

Before the update: We had 15 ships. Every ship was on fairly even ground with the others, and they all felt powerful and useful in every match. There were no "tiers" of ships - there were later unlocks in the progression mechanics, but they didn't make a player directly more powerful because the different ships were all effectively a single tier.

After the update: We now have "50" ships... but we ACTUALLY only have 15 actually complete ships, with between 3 and 5 variants of each tracing down from t5 (where you get the "whole" ship) to tier 1, which only has 3 classes and limited customisation as well as massively gimped performance that leaves them incapable of standing up to a player with a higher-tier ship than you.

Prior to the progression 2.0 release, afer the devs announced the plan for a tier-based progression system, players mentioned that this type of model was a concerning possibility. Basically, there was a fairly consistent recurring "please don't do this" request, with "this" being the exact model the devs chose. Since then, there have been consistent "please remove that change, it was a bad idea" requests, even from new players who never knew the game before the update. The response has been to dismiss these concerns at best, and more often to simply pretend the question doesn't exist at all.

Point 2 - maintenance

Before the update: There were no maintenance fees. You earn credits in a match, they're yours.

After the update: Significant maintenance fees cutting into player earnings. The devs said this was a "bug" and that they were going to "fix" the costs - the update which "fixed" the maintenance costs has driven them even higher.

When progresison 2.0 was announced, this kind of forced paywall was a minor concern very few players even considered a possibility coming from these devs. It was mentioned, and was, again, mentioned as "please don't do it" by everyone who brought it up, but it was basically dismissed as never going to happen by much of the community without even bothering to add voices to the "don't do it devs" calls. Also, the dev response to players saking why it even needs to be in the game has been a blatant "it's there to force you to buy premium time". The only reason that system exists is to extort money from players.

Point 3 - tech tree

Before the update: The progression was purely linear. Not the best, but a model VERY open to being adapted into a really solid and player-driven system, and ALSO really open to having good monetisation mechanics built into it.

After the update: Strict tech tree with limited branches requiring players to use specific ships they often don't like in order to unlock other ships, including ships of different classes, and ships which have core required upgrades locked to the higher-tier versions.

This was, as with the other major changes, a commonly-mentioned way to completely screw up the proposed new update before progression 2.0 came out. Instead of taking this feedback on board, the devs did almost EXACTLY the worst version of what players asked them to try and avoid. Since then, they've scrambled to ask for ways to "tweak" the system, instead of listening to the repeated calls for them to REMOVE it.


http://i.imgur.com/f5SVkIz.jpg
---V^^^V---
Step into your daydreams, and follow them home


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 12:08 p.m.



Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79843)

Beowulf#6663 posted (#post-79840)

obliviondoll#5677 posted (#post-79836)

https://www.greybox.com/dreadnought/en/forum/topic/33237/

Long-running petition from some of the more active fans, created based on the NON-RESPONSIVENESS of the developers to the consistent negative feedback against almost everything that progression 2.0 stands for. The group of active Dreadnought supporters who have essentially given up on making real change settled on a set of small changes to push for in place of actually demanding the kind of meaningful change the game will need to survive long-term.

If you can deal with them keeping the tier system, but trying to refine it, support the petition. If you're ok with maintenance, but changed up a bit to be less punishing, support the petition. If you want the devs to build the game around "must spend money to keep playing how you want", support the petition.

https://www.greybox.com/dreadnought/en/forum/topic/37192/

This newer petition is one I created. It pushes for more changes, and more meaningful change, than the older one. It doesn't have much support yet, but it's only just started. And unlike the first petition which is based on discussion back and forth between a small group of players already disillusioned by their persistently-ignored attempts to make the kind of changes the game NEEDS, this was backed up by a poll of the community, and is based on what the majority of players have been asking for - a return to the state we had before progression 2.0 - and building on THAT as a starting point to make the game work.

Before 2.0, your problems with tiers simply did not exist. There were no tiers. Ships were all relatively well balanced against one another - actually much better balanced than a lot of already-released class-based games. Before 2.0, the progression system still needed work, but there were several valid and helpful ways to develop it into a more player-driven and fun system (which could also become an effecitve monetisation mechanic), where the current system is strictly linear with no real option to expand out from being linear and restrictive.

Personally, I think we need to go back. Obviously, Odin is a good example of someone who has given up on seeing that change (he's openly countered my previous arguments NOT with anything that actually goes against them, but with "the devs worked for months on the update, they're not going to go back"). He's not alone in accepting the state of the game and being willing to accept far less change than many others who have quit.

If we can get enough people to support a petition - ANY petition - we might see enough change ot keep the game alive. I would rather see enough change to bring me back, and to bring many players I know of EITHER back to the game OR into it for the first time. I have 3 invites which I plan to share with friends, but only if there's enough change to bring me back to the game. I'm not going to invite people to a game I no longer have any interest in playing. I have several friends who WERE lined up with plans to buy into the beta before progression 2.0, but hesitated because of the concerns about it - and are currently very glad they DIDN'T buy in after seeing how it's been (mis)handled. I have other friends who were watching the game with interest until 2.0 and ended up looking for ways to cancel their registration for a chance at a beta key. There are people out there who are actively AVOIDING news they had previously been trying to find, because of the complete ignorance of player feedback coming into this update and pushing forward with the direction it took.

So i just got a Key yesterday and havent been able to play yet (keeps saying the servers are down, not sure of the problem is on there end or mine) What exactly did this recent update do and is it as bad as you guys are making it out as?

You just got your key? And you think I am salty? Wait until you actually get in and see how bad your bent over and F*ed up the A before you think we are "Just Being Salty"

My advise is buy the founders pack now or you don't stand a chance. Its Pay to Win at its best.

I say your salty because of how over the top you are, you make it sound like this games beyond hope when it's still in closed beta, while i'm not saying you shouldn't talk about the game problem's, again it's in closed beta so we should, however when you talk about it like this it stops sounding like "Reasonable concerns" and goes straight to "Been drinking salt water" Take a step back, calm down, and come at this with a level head like the other guy who sounded a lot more reasonable and quite frankly sane then you are in the original post.


"Fate will unwind as it must" Beowulf


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 12:15 p.m.



obliviondoll#5677 posted (#post-79864)

Beowulf#6663 posted (#post-79840)

So i just got a Key yesterday and havent been able to play yet (keeps saying the servers are down, not sure of the problem is on there end or mine) What exactly did this recent update do and is it as bad as you guys are making it out as?

Point 1 - ship numbers/tier system

Before the update: We had 15 ships. Every ship was on fairly even ground with the others, and they all felt powerful and useful in every match. There were no "tiers" of ships - there were later unlocks in the progression mechanics, but they didn't make a player directly more powerful because the different ships were all effectively a single tier.

After the update: We now have "50" ships... but we ACTUALLY only have 15 actually complete ships, with between 3 and 5 variants of each tracing down from t5 (where you get the "whole" ship) to tier 1, which only has 3 classes and limited customisation as well as massively gimped performance that leaves them incapable of standing up to a player with a higher-tier ship than you.

Prior to the progression 2.0 release, afer the devs announced the plan for a tier-based progression system, players mentioned that this type of model was a concerning possibility. Basically, there was a fairly consistent recurring "please don't do this" request, with "this" being the exact model the devs chose. Since then, there have been consistent "please remove that change, it was a bad idea" requests, even from new players who never knew the game before the update. The response has been to dismiss these concerns at best, and more often to simply pretend the question doesn't exist at all.

Point 2 - maintenance

Before the update: There were no maintenance fees. You earn credits in a match, they're yours.

After the update: Significant maintenance fees cutting into player earnings. The devs said this was a "bug" and that they were going to "fix" the costs - the update which "fixed" the maintenance costs has driven them even higher.

When progresison 2.0 was announced, this kind of forced paywall was a minor concern very few players even considered a possibility coming from these devs. It was mentioned, and was, again, mentioned as "please don't do it" by everyone who brought it up, but it was basically dismissed as never going to happen by much of the community without even bothering to add voices to the "don't do it devs" calls. Also, the dev response to players saking why it even needs to be in the game has been a blatant "it's there to force you to buy premium time". The only reason that system exists is to extort money from players.

Point 3 - tech tree

Before the update: The progression was purely linear. Not the best, but a model VERY open to being adapted into a really solid and player-driven system, and ALSO really open to having good monetisation mechanics built into it.

After the update: Strict tech tree with limited branches requiring players to use specific ships they often don't like in order to unlock other ships, including ships of different classes, and ships which have core required upgrades locked to the higher-tier versions.

This was, as with the other major changes, a commonly-mentioned way to completely screw up the proposed new update before progression 2.0 came out. Instead of taking this feedback on board, the devs did almost EXACTLY the worst version of what players asked them to try and avoid. Since then, they've scrambled to ask for ways to "tweak" the system, instead of listening to the repeated calls for them to REMOVE it.

Everything you described sounds like its coming from World of Tanks. The different tier's, Tech tree, and the Maintenance cost. So if what your saying is right (Since i'm still yet to get in is anyone else having this problem?) i have to guess they were looking at WoT since whether we like it or not it is a successful game and wanted to see if they could copy what there doing.


"Fate will unwind as it must" Beowulf


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 12:43 p.m.



Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79813)

So I am six days in now and holy freaking s*** what a nightmare.

I wanted to like this game, I tried so hard to like this game but I just can not.

This has got to be the worst cluster f***ing pay to win disaster I have seen in a long time.

Is it possible to make it any more un-balanced?

tier 2 against tier 4 ships? WTF was you thinking?

15-20 minute matchmaker, I wonder why? Wait no I don't, player retention is down the tubes.

The grind!!!!!!! Are you kidding me? How are we even suppose to grind? Every veteran match I enter is nothing but (Pay to Win) tier 4 ships smashing tier 2 and 3. There is no way in He11 new players can grind against the players that have been here a few weeks longer or worst pay-to-win fanboys.

95,000 credits for a tier 4 ship? Is that a joke? How are we suppose to earn credits? Every veteran match I play, I lose more credits then I make. Guess I could play recruit matches to earn credits but then how are we suppose to earn the XP for our tier 4 ships?

The problem as I see it, The Developers have no clue what they have implemented as far as the grind goes. They play with maxed out ships with unlimited credits and have no idea what its like running a tier 2 or 3 ship against tier 4. They are completely clueless. The grind itself is not that bad but to have to do it with such un-balanced matches is ridiculous.

I am fully confident this game will fail miserably.

I recently gave up on another game that is very similar to this called Hawken. They just did XBox and Playstation 4 release a few months ago with the exact same tier system and skill tree and on a good day they have 150 players max. They filed bankruptcy once already and got picked up by another company that implemented this same disastrous grind and they are now bankrupt again.

To the developers: Do what you want, it is your game but listen to what I have to say. If you keep it the way it is, you are wasting your time and you can chalk up a failed game on your resume.

Another note I would like to add is the Graphics!! They are AWFUL!!! I am so sick of hearing people say how good the game looks when in fact it looks like garbage. I mean really, I am sitting here on a 4way CrossfireX system (Asus 390Xs) and the game is barely utilizing ONE CARD!!! 32% GPU usage on ONE CARD, is the best I can get. Is this some kind of joke? Max Graphics, 4K, 122 FPS and 32% GPU usage???????????

Where is the antiantilizing? Whats the deal with all the jagged edges on everything? Wheres the God-Rays? Says we are running DirectX11. Why? Looks more like DirectX9 Graphics to me. Why is DirectX12 not working? Where is CrossfireX support? Water has little to no reflections, little to no reflections in general. Where is the particle effects? I seen better explosions in Planetside 2 and its 4 years old and DirectX9.

Great concept but your greed is going to kill it like 10s of thousands of other great free to play (Pay to Win) games of the past.

Go ahead and keep ignoring your playerbase, you are young, you need a failure or two before you realize Pay to Win is a fad done past its prime.

As far as graphics cards. I'm a developer of my little own indie company so I have a little insight on this topic. UE4 does not support multiple graphics cards. UE4 is designed to run from web browsers to power PC. If the textures are not 4k ready which makes the game have a larger download size and file size you won't see the largest benefit from going 4k. But hold up. On 1card your hitting 120+ fps in 4k. And your gripeing. That's actually fuc king impressive optimization


Professional players make a living. Semi-pro's get paid enough to try again.


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 12:58 p.m.



Pantong#7792 posted (#post-79888)

Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79813)

So I am six days in now and holy freaking s*** what a nightmare.

I wanted to like this game, I tried so hard to like this game but I just can not.

This has got to be the worst cluster f***ing pay to win disaster I have seen in a long time.

Is it possible to make it any more un-balanced?

tier 2 against tier 4 ships? WTF was you thinking?

15-20 minute matchmaker, I wonder why? Wait no I don't, player retention is down the tubes.

The grind!!!!!!! Are you kidding me? How are we even suppose to grind? Every veteran match I enter is nothing but (Pay to Win) tier 4 ships smashing tier 2 and 3. There is no way in He11 new players can grind against the players that have been here a few weeks longer or worst pay-to-win fanboys.

95,000 credits for a tier 4 ship? Is that a joke? How are we suppose to earn credits? Every veteran match I play, I lose more credits then I make. Guess I could play recruit matches to earn credits but then how are we suppose to earn the XP for our tier 4 ships?

The problem as I see it, The Developers have no clue what they have implemented as far as the grind goes. They play with maxed out ships with unlimited credits and have no idea what its like running a tier 2 or 3 ship against tier 4. They are completely clueless. The grind itself is not that bad but to have to do it with such un-balanced matches is ridiculous.

I am fully confident this game will fail miserably.

I recently gave up on another game that is very similar to this called Hawken. They just did XBox and Playstation 4 release a few months ago with the exact same tier system and skill tree and on a good day they have 150 players max. They filed bankruptcy once already and got picked up by another company that implemented this same disastrous grind and they are now bankrupt again.

To the developers: Do what you want, it is your game but listen to what I have to say. If you keep it the way it is, you are wasting your time and you can chalk up a failed game on your resume.

Another note I would like to add is the Graphics!! They are AWFUL!!! I am so sick of hearing people say how good the game looks when in fact it looks like garbage. I mean really, I am sitting here on a 4way CrossfireX system (Asus 390Xs) and the game is barely utilizing ONE CARD!!! 32% GPU usage on ONE CARD, is the best I can get. Is this some kind of joke? Max Graphics, 4K, 122 FPS and 32% GPU usage???????????

Where is the antiantilizing? Whats the deal with all the jagged edges on everything? Wheres the God-Rays? Says we are running DirectX11. Why? Looks more like DirectX9 Graphics to me. Why is DirectX12 not working? Where is CrossfireX support? Water has little to no reflections, little to no reflections in general. Where is the particle effects? I seen better explosions in Planetside 2 and its 4 years old and DirectX9.

Great concept but your greed is going to kill it like 10s of thousands of other great free to play (Pay to Win) games of the past.

Go ahead and keep ignoring your playerbase, you are young, you need a failure or two before you realize Pay to Win is a fad done past its prime.

As far as graphics cards. I'm a developer of my little own indie company so I have a little insight on this topic. UE4 does not support multiple graphics cards. UE4 is designed to run from web browsers to power PC. If the textures are not 4k ready which makes the game have a larger download size and file size you won't see the largest benefit from going 4k. But hold up. On 1card your hitting 120+ fps in 4k. And your gripeing. That's actually fuc king impressive optimization

Thats not optimization, thats p1ss poor hardware utilization. OPEN YOUR EYES AND ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS!! Or lack there of.


-----Tier 5 Ohkta Pilot-----Tier 5 Invictus Pilot-----Tier 5 Athos Pilot-----
-------------------------Fully Researched Tier 4 Fleet------------------------
-------------------What the @#$% are you talking about?----------------


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 1:01 p.m.



Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79902)

Pantong#7792 posted (#post-79888)

Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79813)

So I am six days in now and holy freaking s*** what a nightmare.

I wanted to like this game, I tried so hard to like this game but I just can not.

This has got to be the worst cluster f***ing pay to win disaster I have seen in a long time.

Is it possible to make it any more un-balanced?

tier 2 against tier 4 ships? WTF was you thinking?

15-20 minute matchmaker, I wonder why? Wait no I don't, player retention is down the tubes.

The grind!!!!!!! Are you kidding me? How are we even suppose to grind? Every veteran match I enter is nothing but (Pay to Win) tier 4 ships smashing tier 2 and 3. There is no way in He11 new players can grind against the players that have been here a few weeks longer or worst pay-to-win fanboys.

95,000 credits for a tier 4 ship? Is that a joke? How are we suppose to earn credits? Every veteran match I play, I lose more credits then I make. Guess I could play recruit matches to earn credits but then how are we suppose to earn the XP for our tier 4 ships?

The problem as I see it, The Developers have no clue what they have implemented as far as the grind goes. They play with maxed out ships with unlimited credits and have no idea what its like running a tier 2 or 3 ship against tier 4. They are completely clueless. The grind itself is not that bad but to have to do it with such un-balanced matches is ridiculous.

I am fully confident this game will fail miserably.

I recently gave up on another game that is very similar to this called Hawken. They just did XBox and Playstation 4 release a few months ago with the exact same tier system and skill tree and on a good day they have 150 players max. They filed bankruptcy once already and got picked up by another company that implemented this same disastrous grind and they are now bankrupt again.

To the developers: Do what you want, it is your game but listen to what I have to say. If you keep it the way it is, you are wasting your time and you can chalk up a failed game on your resume.

Another note I would like to add is the Graphics!! They are AWFUL!!! I am so sick of hearing people say how good the game looks when in fact it looks like garbage. I mean really, I am sitting here on a 4way CrossfireX system (Asus 390Xs) and the game is barely utilizing ONE CARD!!! 32% GPU usage on ONE CARD, is the best I can get. Is this some kind of joke? Max Graphics, 4K, 122 FPS and 32% GPU usage???????????

Where is the antiantilizing? Whats the deal with all the jagged edges on everything? Wheres the God-Rays? Says we are running DirectX11. Why? Looks more like DirectX9 Graphics to me. Why is DirectX12 not working? Where is CrossfireX support? Water has little to no reflections, little to no reflections in general. Where is the particle effects? I seen better explosions in Planetside 2 and its 4 years old and DirectX9.

Great concept but your greed is going to kill it like 10s of thousands of other great free to play (Pay to Win) games of the past.

Go ahead and keep ignoring your playerbase, you are young, you need a failure or two before you realize Pay to Win is a fad done past its prime.

As far as graphics cards. I'm a developer of my little own indie company so I have a little insight on this topic. UE4 does not support multiple graphics cards. UE4 is designed to run from web browsers to power PC. If the textures are not 4k ready which makes the game have a larger download size and file size you won't see the largest benefit from going 4k. But hold up. On 1card your hitting 120+ fps in 4k. And your gripeing. That's actually fuc king impressive optimization

Thats not optimization, thats p1ss poor hardware utilization. OPEN YOUR EYES AND ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS!! Or lack there of.

Yes because they do not cater to the people who can afford said hardware it's poor utilization. Because they don't want to increase the file size for the less than 1% of the population that can use it, it's poor hardware utilization. Open your eyes sheeple


Professional players make a living. Semi-pro's get paid enough to try again.


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 1:07 p.m.



Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79813)
The problem as I see it, The Developers have no clue what they have implemented as far as the grind goes. They play with maxed out ships with unlimited credits and have no idea what its like running a tier 2 or 3 ship against tier 4. They are completely clueless. The grind itself is not that bad but to have to do it with such un-balanced matches is ridiculous.

Just to be absolutely transparent and clear, this is untrue. Our QA testers may have various levels of progressed and non-progressed accounts and some of them may test at max level for completeness. However, all of the Grey Box employee player accounts are explicitly forbidden from being granted special items or additional currency or experience points. I can attest to this personally because, since the new Progression 2.0 release, I am very far behind everyone and play in Tier 1 still.


Jon-Pierre "Hyphenator" Gentil

Lead Developer - Six Foot Platform Services


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 1:31 p.m.



DN_Hyphenator#0000 posted (#post-79925)

Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79813)
The problem as I see it, The Developers have no clue what they have implemented as far as the grind goes. They play with maxed out ships with unlimited credits and have no idea what its like running a tier 2 or 3 ship against tier 4. They are completely clueless. The grind itself is not that bad but to have to do it with such un-balanced matches is ridiculous.

Just to be absolutely transparent and clear, this is untrue. Our QA testers may have various levels of progressed and non-progressed accounts and some of them may test at max level for completeness. However, all of the Grey Box employee player accounts are explicitly forbidden from being granted special items or additional currency or experience points. I can attest to this personally because, since the new Progression 2.0 release, I am very far behind everyone and play in Tier 1 still.

Well at least everything else is obviously true due to your lack of even acknowledging anything else I said.

I hope you guys turn this game into something good but the way it is now, it don't stand a chance of being anything more then a fad people will play a few days and toss it aside.


-----Tier 5 Ohkta Pilot-----Tier 5 Invictus Pilot-----Tier 5 Athos Pilot-----
-------------------------Fully Researched Tier 4 Fleet------------------------
-------------------What the @#$% are you talking about?----------------


Posted: //
Dec. 17, 2016, 1:51 p.m.



Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79941)

DN_Hyphenator#0000 posted (#post-79925)

Quayjay#4843 posted (#post-79813)
The problem as I see it, The Developers have no clue what they have implemented as far as the grind goes. They play with maxed out ships with unlimited credits and have no idea what its like running a tier 2 or 3 ship against tier 4. They are completely clueless. The grind itself is not that bad but to have to do it with such un-balanced matches is ridiculous.

Just to be absolutely transparent and clear, this is untrue. Our QA testers may have various levels of progressed and non-progressed accounts and some of them may test at max level for completeness. However, all of the Grey Box employee player accounts are explicitly forbidden from being granted special items or additional currency or experience points. I can attest to this personally because, since the new Progression 2.0 release, I am very far behind everyone and play in Tier 1 still.

Well at least everything else is obviously true due to your lack of even acknowledging anything else I said.

I hope you guys turn this game into something good but the way it is now, it don't stand a chance of being anything more then a fad people will play a few days and toss it aside.

I don't know, again, from what obliv has been saying it sounds like WoT and while that game is extremely grindy it has a good player base. Also keep in mind that this update apparently only came out a few days ago; Lets see where it goes before we cast final judgments on it. Still this does not bode well for the game


"Fate will unwind as it must" Beowulf

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.