FORUMS


Developer Update - September Megathread



Posted: //
Sept. 15, 2016, 1:57 a.m.


Updated //
Sept. 15, 2016, 1:57 a.m.

I only saw your first post, but having glanced through the thread again I saw your additional post. Lets keep our fingers crossed on the addition of a custom game mode! That would be amazing!


9th on August leaderboard.
3rd on September leaderboard.

Solo/duo queuer


Posted: //
Sept. 15, 2016, 2:32 a.m.



If your doing agile development, here are some user stories for new players:

FORMAT:

As a , I must/need so that .

USER STORIES:

1.) As a new player, I must have early access to a ship class of each type so that I can quickly have exposure to a playstyle that best fits my personal tastes.

2.) As a new player, I must spawn into battle in a fair location in terms of my team's positioning so that I am immediately not isolated and picked off immediately after entering battle.

3.) As a new player, my exposure to "1 shot" or instant kill mechanics that require a veteran's level of precision in skill activation must be reduced as much as possible so I am not immediately discouraged from the game in my first match.

4.) As a new player, I must have access to ship options that low control/mechanics complexity but competitive results so that the game is accessible to players of low skill levels right off the bat.

5.) As a new player, I should be warned of any mechanics or ship types that require higher skill caps prior to attempting to use them (e.g. difficulty ratings on ships for new captains, obviously a artillery cruiser/corvette would be higher than a dreadnought in difficulty to pilot).

6.) As a new player, I should have access to a training mode or sandbox that allows me to test or experiment with a ship before committing to buy it in order to ensure that I know what I am getting into when I buy a new ship.

7.) As a new player, modules and weapon descriptions should be clear in order to ensure that I understand their intended use (e.g. nuclear torp coming from the left side of the ship and the possibility to nuke yourself).

8.) As a new player, the UI for chatting with friends/adding new friends/blocking haters should be easy to use and understand to ensure that I can build a community in the game quickly and effectively.

9.) As any player, ships should not have significant raw stat advantages over other ships (e.g. 5% max, 0% preferred) in order to prevent veteran players from dominating with stats/preset loadouts instead of skill.

10.) As a new player, I should have growing access to cosmetic prestige items (titles, actual medals that can be pinned on my captains uniform, other swag) as I up in rank and grow to give me a sense of progression and accomplishment.


Posted: //
Sept. 15, 2016, 8:23 p.m.


Updated //
Sept. 15, 2016, 8:29 p.m.

i am fairly new to the game, tho i have found 5v5 not only a bit too small for the maps but slightly lack luster. An 8v8 would fix this in my opinion.


Posted: //
Sept. 18, 2016, 8:51 a.m.



Team size of 8 is something I look forward to. The game mode to go along with it is also something I'm looking forward to. Keep up the good work smile


Posted: //
Sept. 18, 2016, 11:03 p.m.


Updated //
Sept. 18, 2016, 11:04 p.m.

DN_Dariuas#6010 posted (#post-44409)

NTDF-Gierling#4700 posted (#post-44408)

These changes look fantastic, unfortunately I can't get my friends to come back to Dreadnought as long as the Tier system is still planned.

Can you let us know when the Tier decision gets reversed.

Hey there Gierling, I'd really love to dive deeper into your comments about why the Tier system will be a detractor for you and your friends. While we are still developing and hashing out the systems, feedback is always welcome and we'd love to really get a deeper understanding of your thoughts on it.

Thanks!

Ok, I spoke with several of my friends over the weekend. The common complaint is that the Tier system unnecessarily segments the playerbase, and adds a lot of unneeded complexity. It also represents a shortcut towards playbalance that comes at the expense of depth.

Fundamentally, there is the belief that every ship in the game needs to be able to play against every other ship. What if I want to play a Tier3 ship, my one friend wants to play a tier 1 and another wants to play a Tier 5. It is a messy situation exacerbated by the ships having different stats and possibly modules available.

The Tier system is artificial progression, and fairly arbitrarily splits up the playerbase.

I should add though that the consensus was that separate from the tier system the Tech Tree's were a fine idea. The common thought is that building a ship towards the role you wanted would be very cool. HOWEVER (this is a biggie) the options on the tech tree should be optional, and ideally involve tradeoffs (Say -10% hull strength for +5% weapon damage, or vice versa as different options on the tree).

This would allow you to modulate the experience for newer players (by having the base ships be fairly bland) without making a fully modified ship flat out superior to a base one.

Ultimately though the core discussion was always about unnecessarily dividing the playerbase. Everyone online should be able to see and fight against everyone else, with considerations being made for soft limits via matchmaking. Tiers just add a bunch of repetitive and needless administration and overhead to the act of building a collection of ships you want to play with.

Please, drop the tier idea and go towards softer methods for managing the experience. The game is already very VERY good, there is no need to add a whole bunch of needless complexity and overhead to the experience.


Posted: //
Sept. 19, 2016, 1:04 a.m.



I'm not keen on the tiers. Or the divide or the 3 man squads. That said... I'm willing to test them. Just so long as the awesome core of this game isn't lost in all the experiments. At it's core a balanced premade 5 v 5 is what I was looking for in the final product. I get that testing that right now given the population and everything else they've got going on puts that on the back burner.

It'd be disappointing to the point of quitting if we can't have that experience in the final product.


Posted: //
Sept. 22, 2016, 9:43 a.m.



I think you should keep 5 man squads and split 5v5 and 8v8 into 2 game modes.


Posted: //
Sept. 24, 2016, 9:06 a.m.



New team sizes looks promissing and will for sure open new ways to play. But...

Most annoying thing for me is lack of information about most modules, some information is wrong and some is missing. Let me give you example of well discribed module first.
Jump drive for example gives player every information it needs:
1. To who you can jump (TACs can only jump to ally, destroyers and dreads to everyone in range)
2. Maximum range of jump
3. Cooldown
But in case of destroyers and dreads it doesn't say that I can just jump straight ahead. Nothing biggie.

Now some terrible example - nuclear missiles and torpedoes:
1. Damage bar. I would prefer number instead of bar.
2. Blast radius. Again number. What is even worse: dreadnought nuclear missile have in description "Very Large" or "Large", while destroyer torpedoes "Huge". In this game "Huge" is smaller than "Very Large".
3. While some of these weapons say they have no effects on target, nuclear torpedoes have effects on it's owner who is in this "Huge" blast range when they explode and like someone pointed, despite my target position they are always lunched from the left side of ship. For weapon that can kill or reduce it's owner armor (nuclear mine too) it's just terrible mistake.

Many other weapons and modules have this "fancy" range and damage bars, while providing number is simpler and gives more information. Ships also have this bars for speed and armor it's not as important there for now.

This is for now most important thing to do. Drop the bars, give me numbers because they exist in game and there is no reason to hide it. I would really like to see it in Progression 2.0.

I would also like to test ship before I'll decide to buy it, and it can be done using "Training Match" which is already in game.

As for the rest, Progression 2.0 needs to be tested smile


"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you."
-Friedrich Nietzsche


Posted: //
Sept. 24, 2016, 12:39 p.m.



It's not just weapons. I've been playing for a few days now and It's already started to annoy me. The beginning class dread is classified as light, the destroyer is heavy. I want to compare their armor values and all I get is a bar. But in game I find them to have the exact same armor.


Posted: //
Sept. 24, 2016, 1:14 p.m.



Paul_Shakur#6280 posted (#post-44910)

Most annoying thing for me is lack of information about most modules, some information is wrong and some is missing.

We have tested and balanced the modules during the alpha/beta process. Not all descriptions may be up to date. We will see more adjustments as we move forward into Dreadnought 2.0.


This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.