FORUMS


How can we help this game make money without feeling used?



Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 9:26 a.m.



Browsing through this thread was actually quite a positive experience compared to many others, which creates some motivation to actually also post at the end smile


Technical Artist


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 1:27 p.m.



obliviondoll#5677 posted (#post-99054)

Jawayne#8001 posted (#post-98977)

All proposals I see are rather short time, while the progression lasts, what about long term, how do you get people to pay for the next 15 years (my guess for the planned longest lifetime of the game)?

See my first post in the thread which addresses long-term progression (with potential for infinite scaling as long as the devs work on new content to grind towards), solves the problem progression 2.0 introduced where you can't have multiple loadouts for a single ship, and avoids maintenance.

Some people still hope for some competetive environment, and an infinitely scaling grind is pretty much the opposite direction, as time played/money invested will always create an advantage, while the current system has a hard cap, which of course might take a long time to actually reach.

So I am not too fond of this, as I would prefer some cap at which the competetive part of the game starts, and I do not have to think about my progression anymore.


Recruit Engineer


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 1:37 p.m.



I totally agree with Jawayne-there needs to be a consistent top level to the game in order to facilitate competitive play, a feature which I look forward to above all others. If that keeps changing, it either interrupts comp play until players are able to get to the new cap every time it's altered or mandates use of a non-top tier for comp, which is not good for the game as most players would only bother reaching that comp tier.


Make The Forums Great Again!


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 1:53 p.m.



DN_Rachsucht#8109 posted (#post-99079)

Browsing through this thread was actually quite a positive experience compared to many others, which creates some motivation to actually also post at the end smile

None of us here like taking a dump on the game we do it cause we want it to succeed as much as you devs do.

Moving on

Since tiers are going to linger about like a bad fart make the not statistically better as adding more hp dps just make it look pay to win and since community is small splitting them up any more is a bad idea. How about make the tiers have more unity so decrees amount of module slots available. So T1 guns and primary and perimeter T2 has all the modules T3 assess to 2 officer briefs t4 all of them. Then can split ships down again by having them specialise in a certain role in the tiers.

Example been have a tactical line designed around force multiplying eg weapon boost other ships, debuffs and energy transfer. Another tac aimed at long range healing another with team-mate blink (forget name) as a rapid deployment. Have those variants have a hull bonus to cater for those roles and just made another good money slink. With the tiers those variants can also mix it up what modules they have available so the force recon don't have the primary module and only internals, where as the t2 rapid deployment has the internal and primary so can burst heal and gtfo. Add of the fact can tweak variants by having more speed, energy hp and cool downs can split ship progression 4 ways per tier easy so technically extend the grind but since give more options it looks a lot better. And since every ship down that variant path technically the same save for utility it not so much a kick in the teeth for new players to face them but they will strive to purchase them and they then can do more and have a slight edge.

Giving more stuff to purchase is a dam sight better than trying to hamstring the players. Make them buy modules as a unit so if I buy a weapon booster mod I have 1 of them and can install it into 1 ship of my ships in my line-up if i want another ship to have it I have to buy another. This is a dam sight better than having to unlock then buy it for every ship and means don't have to tie modules to certain ships and can easily tell if certain modules are lacking and buff/ nerf accordingly. Then turn your xp into masteries of certain modules and you have to use them to get xp. You then could make a tech path for them what can only go 1 way and if want to change have to reset or make harder to grind but you have to select what mode you want when building the ship. Say make them cool down reduction, longer duration , larger buff and jack of all.


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 1:54 p.m.



I came from similar project "Star Conflict" because i hate pay-to-win. And i hate GRIND.
and my opinion - i prefer to pay month payment for full content
and
should be free account with limited content(without grind). For example special side of lore or special force like "zerlings".


Mostly Harmless


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 2:29 p.m.



klop41#1995 posted (#post-99111)

I came from similar project "Star Conflict" because i hate pay-to-win. And i hate GRIND.
and my opinion - i prefer to pay month payment for full content
and
should be free account with limited content(without grind). For example special side of lore or special force like "zerlings".

The progression system is going to stay-the devs have been quite clear on that. For this to remain a free-to-play game, they need a strong monetization model and this is what they've chosen. The current model is open to adjustment and tweaking, and will no doubt be optimized, but they are not going to change their entire business model after what was likely a multi-million investment in the months-long development of said model.

Asking them to change everything to an entirely new system (or even revert to the old one) is simply unreasonable, as I've said before. To help the game become as good as it can we need to give our thoughts on how to best adjust what is already here.


Make The Forums Great Again!


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 7:46 p.m.


Updated //
Jan. 27, 2017, 7:48 p.m.

Another major problem with the tier system is that because T4/5 is so hard to reach, most players are going to hit T3 and never make it into the higher levels simply because they don't grind enough. Essentially what happens is you've now just reduced the game to a lesser state than it was pre-2.0, because that gameplay is now behind a nigh impossible grind wall. The monetization here is also especially bad because players don't want fork over cash and not have tangible satisfaction. You want the player to spend money and get the rush of excitement to play with their new shiny, not feel bad about spending money just to ease the ridiculous grind to T5. And once they get to T5, the pool of competitors will be significantly smaller. It may even be less fun if they pay to get there because it is going to be comprised of a lot of people who play the game way more and got there without paying - they'll get demolished.

Now, without tiers you eliminate this problem and you can cut right to selling goodies with instant satisfaction, which keeps people coming back. See my post about side-grade progression for details.

Edit: No, current progression is not a strong model. As I've detailed, you don't get that instant satisfaction of buying a shiny - hero ships are the closest, and they're mediocre at best because you can't customize them.

Little Miss Sunshine#7845 posted (#post-99112)

The progression system is going to stay-the devs have been quite clear on that. For this to remain a free-to-play game, they need a strong monetization model and this is what they've chosen.


Spork's Guide to the Fulgora and Medusa

Medusa and Murometz gameplay


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 8:34 p.m.


Updated //
Jan. 27, 2017, 8:51 p.m.

They. Won't. Get. Rid. Of. Progression. They. Have. Been. Clear. On. That. They know where they want to take their game, and are adjusting things to optimize that vision constantly. For one, grinding is about to become much faster as they are correcting a bug that reduced credit income for everyone above T1. They've also said they are looking into reworking maintenance. Again, saying the system sucks DOES NOT HELP. And also, by the logic of people who grind to the top being better than people who buy their way there, then in an all-is-equal system every new player is liable to be matched with the longest-standing veterans. It's a simple fact of online video games. At least Dreadnought isn't hard to learn- it's pretty easy to grasp (or at least it was for me).

Also, I might add, some very successful games have much harder grind walls. Ever played WoT (or even War Thunder)? I did for years, and Dreadnought is a cakewalk compared to that grinding, even with the obvious issues (which, I say AGAIN, they are working on correcting).

If they were making enough money to keep the game afloat in the previous no-tier model, they'd have stuck with that model. However, a keep-everybody-happy-and-fun model is not the best way to make a profit on a game under development. If they saw a way to monetize the game sufficiently without instituting a progression system (which they already knew was not a popular idea), they'd have done it. I think we can be reasonably sure that they know what is necessary for the game better than the players. We might know what's fun, but they know what's necessary. For the last time, SAYING PROGRESSION 2.0 IS TERRIBLE AND DEMANDING A TOTAL OVERHAUL IS NOT REASONABLE. This thread is supposed to be constructive, not another useless thread with people bashing the game. It's been going pretty well thus far; can we keep it that way, please?

At the very least, if people insist on arguing this same point for the quintilionth time, can you open a new forum? I already feel bad polluting this one with this.


Make The Forums Great Again!


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 9:13 p.m.


Updated //
Jan. 27, 2017, 9:15 p.m.

Hey, I'm not the one shouting here. Two pages ago you praised my suggestion:

Little Miss Sunshine#7845 posted (#post-98975)

That looks pretty solid to me- I think that, coupled with Oblivion's suggestions, there is some real potential for a good alternative system. I hope the devs will at least look into it- again I'm fine with how it is now but a lot of people aren't. Even integrating some of these types of changes could yield significant results for player satisfaction. I'm still most into the voice lines/emotes though =p

I'm not demanding an entire overhaul, just a rearrangement of the tier system to be horizontal instead of vertical. Progression is intact in my proposal, you have to grind out ships and modules as you do now. There's still a carrot and stick, and there's way more monetization options plus the ability to add more on easily. What's the point of having this thread if you shoot down every serious suggestion? Emotes are not a serious way to make money. The only other way you can squeeze money out of Progression 2.0 is by directly selling bypass tokens on research/ships/modules. At that point, you essentially have a standard purchase-to-play game with a watered down free version stapled on.

It's like you've entirely forgotten my earlier post or your response to it.


Spork's Guide to the Fulgora and Medusa

Medusa and Murometz gameplay


Posted: //
Jan. 27, 2017, 9:42 p.m.



Jawayne#8001 posted (#post-99102)

obliviondoll#5677 posted (#post-99054)

Jawayne#8001 posted (#post-98977)

All proposals I see are rather short time, while the progression lasts, what about long term, how do you get people to pay for the next 15 years (my guess for the planned longest lifetime of the game)?

See my first post in the thread which addresses long-term progression (with potential for infinite scaling as long as the devs work on new content to grind towards), solves the problem progression 2.0 introduced where you can't have multiple loadouts for a single ship, and avoids maintenance.

Some people still hope for some competetive environment, and an infinitely scaling grind is pretty much the opposite direction, as time played/money invested will always create an advantage, while the current system has a hard cap, which of course might take a long time to actually reach.

So I am not too fond of this, as I would prefer some cap at which the competetive part of the game starts, and I do not have to think about my progression anymore.

Did you even READ my first post before replying to that?

Done right, THAT MODEL can work, and will work WELL - it opens up players who want to be competitive to focus on the competitive options and get them early on. It also allows more casual players to run with the things they think are cool, IMMEDIATELY. When rebalances shif the meta, more experienced players have 3 options:

  1. Grind hard
  2. Drop some cash to accelerate/skip the grind
  3. Adapt to the shift using the tools they already have unlocked, until they get the next new toy

Less involved players are a bit more open, since they haven't already built up a grindwall, and it'll only be a short few matches before they unlock a couple more of the latest top-tier toys.

Competitive players - the ones who are hardcore into the game and have already gotten invested - will be incentivised to EITHER pay OR play more (with playing more being support for the game's playercount, which keeps it active and fun for everyone).

An endlessly expanding grind that gets longer with every new item the devs add in will NOT mean an unbalanced game where you can'y play competitively, IF IT'S DONE RIGHT.


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

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.