FORUMS


Are you intentionally designing a frustrating game?



Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 4:55 a.m.



"A great many mobile titles make use of mechanics that are put together with the intention of nurturing habitual behavior, frustrating a user, and then offering a slightly more enjoyable experience after money has been spent. This tactic has proven to be a more profitable model than actually offering entertainment, to the point where some companies take very careful steps to ensure that their games don't accidentally end up being fun."

I'm quitting until something is done about maintenance.

I picked up the beta two days ago. I figured it was a world of tanks clone in space, which sounded cool to me. I do really like the actual fights in game. I got two T3 ships and began playing them with auto-maintenance enabled, figuring that ill earn creds for the third one while playing my shiny new ships. I played for 6 hours and didn't have enough for the last ship I had already researched, so I unticked the auto maintenance box. Earned 1700 creds, top of the team, still slapped with a 900 cost loss. Did worse, earned 1200 creds and a 900 loss.

Between the 10 minute queues and this ultra grind, no thank you.

If devs are able to change the game at this point in the game, please copy the overwatch model of 40$ for all functionality and $ for cosmetics. The core combat is fun.


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 5:12 a.m.



This is an issue present since October 2016. It has been said numerous times that the maintenance concept is stupid the way it is, many alternatives have been presented. The only feedback we get: "It's not perfect and we will still tweak it but maintenance is there to stay".

Player retention shows that players disagree.


Dreadnought Support Tool | Customer Support | Dreadnought Discord | Ship Datamine - by Snib


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 6:04 a.m.


Updated //
March 20, 2017, 6:25 a.m.

There is nothing wrong with the system, its you as a player.

Not being harsh but good play is rewarded appropriately with enough credits. If you cannot do well in a Veteran match then you as the player need more practice and to learn the game better before going back to Veteran matches.

An indication of good play is a score of 1200-2500 a match. If you don't average that you aren't doing well and are hindering your team.

I play exclusively in veteran and have yet to run out of credits for months, especially since they increased credit earning after all the complaints.


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 10 a.m.



If you're a bad player or a bunch of bad match, you have 0 incentive to continue playing, you're only being punished.

I have a W/L ratio of 2.88, so I don't really have this problem. However, a big portion of the game, mainly new players, do have this problem. They get stuck early T3 and refuse to keep playing.

Player retention confirms this.


Dreadnought Support Tool | Customer Support | Dreadnought Discord | Ship Datamine - by Snib


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 10:13 a.m.



Hey people,

i have to agree with the above Post in some Aspects.

First i do not think, that i as a new player should get fast T4 ships.
I played for 12h now. My winratio is okay its around 60% - so i dont think i will ever run out of Credits.

I have some T3 ships and i really like playing the T3 ships. But its really annoying to play in the same Matches as nearly Full Equipt T4 Ships. Its not like i stand any chance against them.
50% of the Games are decidet purely by which Team has more Equipt T4's. That may not be entirley ture. But for me as a new player it sure does feel like that.

I dont think Maintenance is that bad. It's just super stupid to play against 6 enemys with T4's with a Team with 6 T3's and just getting dominatet. Even if i play really well in such a round the whole Team still gets "butchert out there".

I really would Like a System where T3s and T4s play on there own. But i guess with lower player numbers you would search hours for a Round.

regards


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 10:20 a.m.



Yes the maintenance model does suck. You want everyone to know how good u are? Super...dont really care.

Quite a lot of us play with limited time in the pursuit of fun, not some super competitive drive. We have disposable funds too. If i can enjoy the gameplay sans punishment and feel good about getting somewhere, more funds go to this game. Otherwise, i have other things to play. Pretty simple


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 1:47 p.m.



BadAlchemy#4871 posted (#post-114339)

There is nothing wrong with the system, its you as a player.

Not being harsh but good play is rewarded appropriately with enough credits. If you cannot do well in a Veteran match then you as the player need more practice and to learn the game better before going back to Veteran matches.

An indication of good play is a score of 1200-2500 a match. If you don't average that you aren't doing well and are hindering your team.

I play exclusively in veteran and have yet to run out of credits for months, especially since they increased credit earning after all the complaints.

this is such a BS. Remember, it is never player.. If most players hate some aspect of the game, it is design flaw. Period.


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 1:57 p.m.



ManiaCCC#0403 posted (#post-114382)

BadAlchemy#4871 posted (#post-114339)

There is nothing wrong with the system, its you as a player.

Not being harsh but good play is rewarded appropriately with enough credits. If you cannot do well in a Veteran match then you as the player need more practice and to learn the game better before going back to Veteran matches.

An indication of good play is a score of 1200-2500 a match. If you don't average that you aren't doing well and are hindering your team.

I play exclusively in veteran and have yet to run out of credits for months, especially since they increased credit earning after all the complaints.

this is such a BS. Remember, it is never player.. If most players hate some aspect of the game, it is design flaw. Period.

To quote from this post: https://www.greybox.com/dreadnought/en/forum/topic/30780/

We think you’ll be happy once maintenance costs are adjusted, but the question still remains: why were they set up like this in the first place? The short answer: “It’s a monetization mechanic,” says Jonathan. “I've read a lot of posts about it by now and I know people are unhappy about it. A lot of players understand why it was put in, but they would like to see it change. It's just too expensive, and that's one of the things we're changing in the next iteration.”
(...)
Mike: “It is a monetization method, no argument there, because the game needs to be viable.

And for some more insight from the same post:

If you only want to play Legendary, you'll probably run into credit problems pretty quickly if you're not an exceptional player with a well-equipped fleet.


Recruit Engineer


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 2:02 p.m.



well Jawayne, if this is their stance, I think most people will say just bye bye to Dreadnought. Their design philosophy is just wrong.


Posted: //
March 20, 2017, 2:20 p.m.



ManiaCCC#0403 posted (#post-114390)

well Jawayne, if this is their stance, I think most people will say just bye bye to Dreadnought. Their design philosophy is just wrong.

The game is a freemium-game, you can play it without paying, but it will take a lot longer to progress and you may not be able to play legendary all the time. You can circumvent this however with their subscription they call "Elite-Status".

I think it is a nice compromise between a subscription based and a free-to-play game. Although I would have liked a more honest way of advertising this. But I am a fan of subs, so I might be the wrong to ask/can be seen as a fanboy.


Recruit Engineer

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.