FORUMS


Community Hot Topics #2



Posted: //
Feb. 15, 2017, 7:58 p.m.



Herosupport#3506 posted (#post-107320)
after your "credit payout fix" i went into a match and played a repair ship got a score above 3400 got about 1800 credits and 4900 xp. its not cool to punish players for being a team player what i would expect for fair credit payout is at least equal to match score before bonuses this will most likely mean that repair ships will get less points has a result however thats fine.
Edit; credit and xp payout needs to be reworked so the gain is the same for everyone if someone gets a high score they should reap the rewards for it ribbons should just be the icing on the cake.

If I can suggest something, head on over here and fill out this Dreadnought Earnings form after every game!

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScDtV6zQit90gkdl53Rk_xDOpDDWZCxTUluW4RpItiHZZMycA/viewform?c=0&w=1

It will help BOTH you and the devs, since you'll be able to have a better idea of your current payouts, and it'll help the devs see the actual, cold hard cash that you're earning (or missing out on) !

Thanks for the good feedback, and keep on keeping on, captain! smile


  • Your local amateur novelist, Sash

Curious to hear what a newbie's view on the game looks like? Drop on by my thread!


Posted: //
Feb. 15, 2017, 8:35 p.m.



Just another quick thing i'd like to add for mm is the balancing of teams. Many matches where its 5 t4s vs 1-2 t4s and 3 t2s on one side vs 1. Much appreciated smile


Posted: //
Feb. 15, 2017, 9:15 p.m.



@ Dreadnought Devs


Matchmaker Fleet Rating 'buckets' tweak

FR 0-2
FR 2-3
FR 4-5

Implementation Pro's and Con's

Pro's =
Tier 5 will see constant use
Tier 3 is only under-powered against T4's but are balanced against T2's.
Better monetization sense (Hero ships, Elite status, relevant demographic)

Con's=
No overlap for T4
Economy requires tweaking for Legendary fleet


Match distribution of 16 players

Semi random distribution of 16 players into 2 teams based on 'fleet rating' has limited success in balancing. There needs to be another set of index to sort 16 players better. Squad and Win (Lose) Streak multiplier needs to be introduced or be weighted more accurately.

Case Study:

I played ~8 matches as solo queue
Had to play against a very strong squad
Played AGAINST this same squad 7 times in 8 matches
Lost 6 times

Sure, based on probability over long term sorting players by fleet rating might trend towards balanced near infinite. But that cannot be your best effort surely ?

Recommendation:

  1. Use better individual rating (hidden stat) to sort players once 16 players are found
  2. Track win-loss streak and use this as multiplier to inflate / deflate individual rating
  3. Calculate individual ratings of players in a squad separately but add weight to their 3-man total

This way strong players in a squad are fairly handicapped without punishing average players who may or may not squad.


Hope this gets consideration. R.ape squads are harvesting randoms unabated by matchmaker.


☜☆☞ no victory without war ☜☆☞


Posted: //
Feb. 15, 2017, 9:24 p.m.



Ravensfang#9968 posted (#post-107303)

Considering "I got thrown into a vet match in my t2 fleet!" is THE number one complaint on the discord you might wanna consider t1+2, t3+4 and t4+5 as brackets ^^

I can safely say, that freshly bought T4 vs fully (or mostly) upgraded T5 (I'm pretty sure there are few by now, and there will be more of them in the future) IS in fact more unbalanced, than T2 vs T4.

So, personally, I wouldn't like this option, nope.


"Hang in there!" (™)


Posted: //
Feb. 15, 2017, 11:54 p.m.



It's a bit of a sticky problem, the stat difference between tiers is pretty harsh. I can sort of see why it ended up where it is now. It's not like World of Tanks with 10 tiers of vehicles to help smooth out the curve. (maybe one day? but that's a lot of work). It also doesn't have nearly as large a player base as other games I've tried with a similar matchmaking model.

I just hope that Dreadnought does very well, and meets it's promise. If we can raise the playerbase to a large enough number, then it becomes easier to create more tier divisions.

After all, it's not just what's fun that sets the various skill tiers, but the players available to fill those tiers.

That being said, as a player who is primarily tier 2, when I see tier 4, I just wonder what I did to deserve it. I would also like to see t2's separated from t4.


Posted: //
Feb. 16, 2017, 1:02 a.m.


Updated //
Feb. 16, 2017, 1:38 a.m.

While deeply appreciated.... the detailed explanation regarding matchmaking is a bit of an irony... While the explanation itself was meant to give reasons how it works, the practical effect and view of the actual players, turns this into a really detailed explanation why it in fact does NOT work. You can throw stats and intentions out all week... in the end, the end user experience trumps. Currently, it takes a very rare nutter to enjoy getting up tiered against ships +2 tiers. I know, it's not supposed to happen.... it however is. Aside from the random luck mlg pro moments your generally going to be stomped repeatedly or spend your matching hiding and earning some team member hatred. Not a hot retention model. If you need specific stat based info on why that's no fun, it's time to put down the pencils and coding project for a day or two an go play on new accounts with new ships vs veterans... as SOLO players. You may find that despite all hoped for outcomes, being up tiered does in fact suck outside the +/- 1 range.

Hopefully the credit situation has improved to something closer to fun, and not simply this side of indentured servitude. Looking forward to testing out the income vs maintenance ratio. Will be great to see you guys get into the balancing phase of things an start leveling out ship performance. That along with finance and match making tweaks will go a long way toward staving off initial player frustrations.

EDIT: T3 match, losing side - VERY close game at 96/100 middle of scoreboard... 1084 credits.... 900 maintenance... not sure who's working on this.... I'm sure someone just LOVES losing 3/4 of their earnings for upkeep of a digital entity in a fictional universe for arbitrary reasons.... fairly sure that someone isn't the majority of your player base. I know I'm going all crazy out on a limb, but maybe someone could edit that algorithm to something a bit less not fun sometime in the next several months...successfully? Nearly 10 games into my only T3... and I've YET to see enough credits to upgrade even ONE module due to justbecause fee's. That wasn't even a gradual build up...T2 to T3...flat wall of you get next to no credits.

Keep up the hard work an communication, it's much appreciated.


Posted: //
Feb. 16, 2017, 3:18 a.m.



This is just a representation of what it looks like when one of your fleets is in maintenance.

What does this mean? When I have finished a veteran match I am not allowed to use any of these ships?!


The community should not be afraid of the developers- The developers should be afraid of their community. carrier

^I want to believe^

https://youtu.be/z_Gd9-IfYzw


Posted: //
Feb. 16, 2017, 3:21 a.m.


Updated //
Feb. 16, 2017, 3:25 a.m.

Ravensfang#9968 posted (#post-107303)

you might wanna consider t1+2, t3+4 and t4+5 as brackets

EDIT: Also the new UI looks AMAZING! But could you please also give us speed as a number? Like... how fast the ship goes when I hold down W?

+1, for both of it.

T3+T4 as Veteran and T4+5 as the Top Tier bracket sound much more promising than the actual T2-T4. I mean, you know the numbers better than most of us do, so what significant damage could do a bunch of T2 to an Armada of fully trained T4 ships? smile

Ok, then maybe a new bracket for T2+T3 (the mediocre ^.^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rjmV-Rh130 ) would also make sense, then you have a good overlapping between all brackets.


Jede Geschichte hat vier Seiten: Deine Seite, Ihre Seite, die Wahrheit und das, was wirklich geschehen ist. Welten brechen auseinander, Formationen nicht.


Posted: //
Feb. 16, 2017, 6:44 a.m.



Ravensfang#9968 posted (#post-107303)

Considering "I got thrown into a vet match in my t2 fleet!" is THE number one complaint on the discord you might wanna consider t1+2, t3+4 and t4+5 as brackets ^^

Well considering that the actual Recruit and Veteran fleet lists actually show T1-T2, T2-T4, T4-T5, I don't personally see why the fleet brackets should change. The explanation they gave was very detail oriented and helpful in every sense. My blame falls on the individual pilots that refuse to place a T-1 in their fleet to "lock" them into a T1-T2 match. If the system looks through your selected fleet and SEES a T1 ship, based off the information given, it shouldn't place you with a fleet that has a T4. NOW if no pilot has a T4, only T3s, then by all means it's fair game.


Posted: //
Feb. 16, 2017, 6:50 a.m.


Updated //
Feb. 16, 2017, 7:07 a.m.

MM Question:
so a full tier 2 recruit fleet can see tier 4 because there is a 2-4 bracket.
a full tier 4 veteran fleet can see tier 5 because legendary bracket is 4-5.
but why does my full tier 3 fleet see tier 5?

weapon stat feedback:
a better way to show damage of weapons which has damage drop would be to give the maximum damage stat, the range in which it does said maximum damage, the minimum damage stat, and the range at which it does said minimum damage - if damage drop is linear per distance traveled.
all this can be shown within one small graph so you can simply throw one in, especially if there are weapons which damage drop is not linear.

to better explain what I mean, take a look at how Planetside 2 shows its weapons stats. keep in mind though, most planetside 2 weapons have unlimited range, which is why the graphs show that damage stops dropping at a certain distance.

weapon stat question:
does the average damage per second stat mean what I would call a 'full-cycle' (full clip unload time + clip reload) damage per second, or just the clip-damage per second?

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.