FORUMS


Stalled by Maintenance Fees



Posted: //
March 6, 2017, 5:28 p.m.


Updated //
March 6, 2017, 5:29 p.m.

DN_MiguelItUp#0468 posted (#post-112847)

I'm sure some of you have seen me say this before so bear with me! But the current maintenance functionality is not intended or solidified in any way. So do know that it's going to continue to be tweaked and adjusted until it feels solid across the board. That goes for multiple things within Dreadnought. We're in technical beta, and we're slowly approaching open beta, but know that we ARE still in beta. As we continue to move forward things will only get better and better. Just know that it's going to take some time. We appreciate everyone's input and feedback though! Keep it coming! smile

with due respect, some of us are seriously questioning how much time this game actually has. We see it every day with que times again approaching the 10min mark they were at when the upcoming BokenDreams 2.0 patch was due to hit with a server wipe only this time there's not looming wipe driving players away. Ditching maint fees would make a lot of people very happy very quickly and generate a good amount of immediate, sustained positive press. As it is the forums and discord continues to be littered with negative feedback and an atmosphere of depression now surrounds a game that was lauded as great and promising almost everywhere you looked.


-Citizen Soldier -"Do not bring forth an argument that can be disproved with a 10 minute google search."


Posted: //
March 6, 2017, 6:47 p.m.



Before maintenance, in early beta, the game was objectively better. It had better player retention. It was more fun. It had a more active playerbase. It had less issues with matchmaking (still had issues, but they weren't as problematic or as frequent).

Not having maintenance was just another of the things the devs USED to be doing right. Constant and persistent feedback explaining why this is a terrible system isn't getting through to the devs. They continue to argue that if they just "tweak" it the right way, it'll magically turn out good, instead of just being slightly less awful.

Sure, they CAN make maintenance far LESS awful than the current state, where it's literally game-breaking in how badly it's been implemented. But it will still be a bad decision. Well-implemented horrible design decisions are still horrible design decisions, even if they're set up to be as unobtrusive as possible.


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


Posted: //
March 6, 2017, 8:27 p.m.



Thank you Miguel! It's nice to get a response from the team. I know it's being worked on, although I'm sad at it's state currently. I will likely play here and there until a change is made, and hopefully play to the amount I'd like someday.

Thank you for the response smile! It's nice getting a formal response.


Posted: //
March 6, 2017, 8:34 p.m.



obliviondoll: Since I'm being lazy, this won't be a long response. But, I think that you're being too pessimistic. Many games with similar set ups (WOT, Armored Warfare, etc.) have unobstructive maintenance and ammo fees. And, they are generally accepted among the games' populations. With that in mind, I don't think maintenance is an inherently bad idea. The game needs an economy that has at least some friction to expect to make money off of the game, and that's okay. Playing a FTP game and being angry at pay-for-convenience is, IMO in most cases, selfish. If they bring the fees to a more workable level, such that the non-paying player makes enough progress to keep themselves interested, then I think it would be a good change.


Posted: //
March 6, 2017, 9:24 p.m.


Updated //
March 6, 2017, 9:31 p.m.

The devs for World of Tanks have gone on record saying it's a terrible mechanic they wish they could get rid of, but by the time they realised how bad it was, it was too ingrained to work their way around it.

Armored Warfare literally only did it because WOT did, and is NOT doing particularly well compared to the competition.

Robocraft tried doing it, and abandoned the system because it was anti-fun, and removing that was one of the few decisions they made that's widely viewed as a positive step from the devs.

MWO had repair and ammo costs, but removed them because they were getting in the way of players enjoying the game. It was on the verge of dying prior to the change, and saw a significant boost in players after.

FUN FACT: If you give a kid 1 piece of candy they like, they'll be really happy. If you give them 3, then take 1 away, they'll have MORE candy, but be less happy about it. Same principle works with games.


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


Posted: //
March 6, 2017, 9:35 p.m.


Updated //
March 6, 2017, 9:35 p.m.

Archopex#7897 posted (#post-112875)

obliviondoll: Since I'm being lazy, this won't be a long response. But, I think that you're being too pessimistic. Many games with similar set ups (WOT, Armored Warfare, etc.) have unobstructive maintenance and ammo fees. And, they are generally accepted among the games' populations. With that in mind, I don't think maintenance is an inherently bad idea. The game needs an economy that has at least some friction to expect to make money off of the game, and that's okay. Playing a FTP game and being angry at pay-for-convenience is, IMO in most cases, selfish. If they bring the fees to a more workable level, such that the non-paying player makes enough progress to keep themselves interested, then I think it would be a good change.

WOT is an exception and they are on record stating that if they could remove maint they would because it holds the game back (just look at the steady decline in the non-Russian player populations). your other example armored warfare can't exactly be termed 'a success' which is oblivion's point. Maint is a bad mechanic that has killed far more games than it has helped. And the ones that have succeeded with it have done so in spite of it not because of it.


-Citizen Soldier -"Do not bring forth an argument that can be disproved with a 10 minute google search."


Posted: //
March 7, 2017, 11:33 a.m.



The whole system is just idiotic, it penalises you for playing, gives with one hand and then takes it away with the other in the next breath, and discourages you from bringing your best ships to select from once in game.

It is tiresome having this response, we are working on it blah blah....just fix it already or remove it till you do!


Posted: //
March 7, 2017, 1:01 p.m.



Its all fine and dandy that we are being told its being looked at or worked on but please keep in mind we are not in closed beta anymore and at this point everybody can just participate.

This topic in particular is truly taking a spot with the veteran players but also new players are truly hating it. Especially since they are the one's getting shafted because they have to not only fight against higher tier'ed ships but also against players that have much more knowledge about the game and tend to just stomp them into submission.

The point is while you are all looking at it newer players just pick up there stuff and leave, probably telling their friends to not bother with DN. Now its impossible to satisfy everybody so its bound to happen but when a mechanic is hated as much as "maintenance". Just saying its being looked at and worked on is not going to fly with a large portion of the general gaming community. The longer you wait with this the more people will hate it and if they quit because of it you probably lost them forever. Many gamers these days tend to make up their mind and desire to keep playing a game within a week. If they don't like it they move on but since maintenance is something they run into pretty quickly many will base their experience around it.


Posted: //
March 7, 2017, 2:49 p.m.



Nataku#3670 posted (#post-113189)

Its all fine and dandy that we are being told its being looked at or worked on but please keep in mind we are not in closed beta anymore and at this point everybody can just participate.

This topic in particular is truly taking a spot with the veteran players but also new players are truly hating it. Especially since they are the one's getting shafted because they have to not only fight against higher tier'ed ships but also against players that have much more knowledge about the game and tend to just stomp them into submission.

The point is while you are all looking at it newer players just pick up there stuff and leave, probably telling their friends to not bother with DN. Now its impossible to satisfy everybody so its bound to happen but when a mechanic is hated as much as "maintenance". Just saying its being looked at and worked on is not going to fly with a large portion of the general gaming community. The longer you wait with this the more people will hate it and if they quit because of it you probably lost them forever. Many gamers these days tend to make up their mind and desire to keep playing a game within a week. If they don't like it they move on but since maintenance is something they run into pretty quickly many will base their experience around it.

It's a bit worse then that, the fact that it's being "looked at and not working well, will be fixed ASAP" is also followed by "maintenance is here to stay thou".

Think of this way, this is Beta, as in the moment where changes can still be made, where your voice should count for something but the devs answer to the most hated mechanic in the game, that is currently making this a pain in the backside rather then fun? Yeah, no we don't care what you guys think it's here to stay.

If at least it was disabled while it was broken, but no apparently souring the name and marketability of the game at this crucial junction is not important...

The fact the game is broken in Beta is understandable (kinda), the fact the devs don't listen to the feedback of their testers and new players can't progress? That's not.


Admiral: "What is best in Dreadnought!"
Knight_ldr: "To crush the enemy's ships, see them lit ablaze under your canons and hear the lamentations of their crewmen!"
Admiral: "That is good! That is good!"


Posted: //
March 8, 2017, 9:57 a.m.



This broken record will replay what I've been saying ever since I first started playing. so a few months now.

xp gain is to great, credit gain is sub sweatshop in wages next to xp gain, maintenance is extortionate, and match payouts are not in harmony to the tech tree requirements and cost.

message ends.

then i found out about the maintenance bug then veteran became playable and I was able to get to tier 4 and have 4 tier 4 ships in my fleet and it would only cost up to 500 credits on a lost match witch was perfectly acceptable with with their non working credit payout system then they had a update that promised to fix the credit payout and remove the maintenance bug only it removed the maintenance bug and failed to fix the credit payout system on top of making the servers crash every 45 minutes rather then once or twice a day, now if i have a fleet of 4 tier 4 ships like before thats 1500 credits that gets stolen from you on a loss that's more then a 300% increase from the 500 credit loss yeah that was very foolish of the developers.

I knew then what the publishers are just now seeing basing your monetization on selling credits(money grab) instead of elite status is a sure way to slowly kill dreadnought.

Veteran maintenance 500 credits, Legendary 900 credits that is the sweat spot with current match payout. I also have a progression system I could give the dev's that is about 99% better then whats in the game atm but they dont like me its just something blizzard does to keep WoW king of mmorpg's that i have applied to this game.


I WILL NEVER FORGET ABOUT MAINTENACE

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.