FORUMS


Developer Update - September Megathread



Posted: //
Sept. 25, 2016, 11:27 p.m.



NTDF-Gierling#4700 posted (#post-44564)

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.

Thanks for your feedback. I would be remiss if I did not say we are too far in development to simply drop the Progression 2.0 system. That being said, with beta such as it is, the community can help forge what the final product looks like with feedback such as this. I will pass this along to the appropriate teams.

I have a favor to ask of you and your crew. Hang out until you've gotten your hands on 2.0 and let me know what you think about the play. We're implementing some pretty spectacular systems to increase the excitement of the games, so I'd love to hear what you guys think after you've had a chance to touch it. Is that something you guys are willing to do?


Tim "Kalvothe" Slager Positive feedback is good for morale, critical feedback is good for the game.

Follow me on Twitter: @kalvothe


Posted: //
Sept. 26, 2016, 12:23 a.m.



Im gonna toss in here as well @Gierling

If your friends issue with the Tier system is due to WOT and such.. keep in mind how BIG those games are.. per round I mean.. isn't it like 15v15 or MORE? .. that means lots of time to get all those matchmaking things done.

We're at a max of 8v8 right now. The tiers are going to be 1-2, 2-4, 4-5 (3 sets) instead of... what, the 6 that WOT has?

All in all.. Wait till you see it.

I'm not a huge fan of power differentials being matched together (eg a tier 5 ship has 3-5% more dmg then a tier 4 [made up numbers, no numbers released yet]) .. but I'm going to at least see it first smile


Posted: //
Sept. 26, 2016, 1:19 p.m.


Updated //
Sept. 26, 2016, 1:19 p.m.

Draex#3006 posted (#post-44916)

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.

Description wouldn't solve anything, give us a numbers. It's all I'm asking for.


"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: //
Oct. 11, 2016, 2:14 a.m.



16 players also means this game needs much more optimization. So players don't have to play it in "potato" settings.


http://i.imgur.com/L0dC4XO.gif


Posted: //
Oct. 11, 2016, 8:34 a.m.



Paul_Shakur#6280 posted (#post-44972)

Description wouldn't solve anything, give us a numbers. It's all I'm asking for.

We will probably get those numbers sooner or later,be patient,we asked about this already plenty times.

Liet_Atreides#0508 posted (#post-46532)

16 players also means this game needs much more optimization. So players don't have to play it in "potato" settings.

Indeed,thats why i guess there is a small delay on 2.0..


"The First Of His Name"


Posted: //
Dec. 19, 2016, 11:01 p.m.



As much as i like this, the fact that for the beta you give 3 extra "friends" links and only a party of 3 causes one friend to be left out, if you all wish to play together.


Posted: //
Dec. 19, 2016, 11:22 p.m.


Updated //
Dec. 19, 2016, 11:26 p.m.

DN_Dariuas#6010 posted (#post-44958)

I would be remiss if I did not say we are too far in development to simply drop the Progression 2.0 system.

With how consistently negative the community response has been, I don't think that's a reasonable attitude to be taking at this point.

Progression 2.0 was a mistake before it happened. It was a mistake when it happened. It still is a mistake now. People were telling you EXACTLY what NOT to do with progression 2.0 before it was announced, and that was ignored. Immediately after, it was made VERY clear that it was a bad idea, and you kept pushing forward. Now you're saying it's too late to go back? Sorry, but no.

Just because you kept making a mistake for a long time, doesn't mean it's too late to fix.

Polling the community shows a solid >70% support for reverting to the previous build. The petition which I created in response to that poll is also gaining support, because it's very definitely the better choice for the future of the game.
https://www.greybox.com/dreadnought/en/forum/topic/37192/

Not everything from the development of progression 2.0 can be re-purposed, but a lot of what was built for it is totally useful, and can help monetise the game in ways that aren't anti-fun. The new ship models are awesome, and will make for a great variety of skins for the ships. With or without the progression 2.0 system, we only have 15 ships with a bunch of reskins. Actually labeling them as reskins instead of slapping a bucnh of them with slightly worse stats than the game was balanced around would be a massive improvement. And it gives you a whole pile of new things to sell.

I know this is an old thread, but after seeing it bumped and reading that post, it felt like it needed the comment.


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

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.