Really liking the new stuff so far. I haven't explored everything in the patch just yet, but I like what I see the game feels like it has a bit more depth now, and in several ways.

I wanted to throw a suggestion out;

The end of game splash screen with our ship, can we get some bling/polish here? I would love to see the ship's name, or maybe the manufacturer too. This splash screen would have a lot more feeling and value in the postmatch with a simple addition like this I think!

Danke for reading!

I didn't start realizing the tech tree had some big flaws was until I broke into t3.

My incentive now is to unlock t4 instead of anything in the t3 tech trees. Its going to be cheaper than getting the modules on my t3 and then unlocking t4 anyways, and the weapon booster mod's cost for trafalgar makes no sense to me at all.

I agree it needs to be looked at and revised a bit. Having three currency types feels clunky the way its being applied.

Somewhat new to the party here, and disclaimer: im not a dev in any capacity, but it seems to me the fixes for some of the major things would be relatively easy fixes to implement., yeah? My biggest qualms are tier balancing & matchmaking (as these two go hand in hand and can't really be pulled too far apart imo), and the progression grind doesn't provide incentives as it should or in a way that appeals to being unlocked

They dislike it so much, that they feel the need to actively complain on the forums

Okay this has been me on one or two occasions, but as a beta tester I feel invited to do these things as well as mention what I like and talk openly about my thoughts so the development team can glean that information. I have actually legit gone to complain openly in forums before about games I've purchased and explain why I was uninstalling it without the intent to reinstall, twice ever; (Hearthstone & Diablo 3 vanilla if you're curious), but if matchmaking were to theoretically 'fix itself' by addition of large number of players, I don't know that I'd be at that point with this game. Granted I haven't made purchases in this game as I had in those others, so... what I'm getting at here is that complaints about products and complaints in testing are slightly different beasts.

Still, I'm seeing a lot of 'bitter vet syndrome' (as a bitter vet myself in other games I feel I can make this call about this one) and it strikes me as interesting. I'll admit I haven't read the petition yet and probably should so I can know a little more about that which precedes me, but to me this game looks nearly ready to launch and I'd say if they launched it next month as live I would endorse it. I'm not seeing the 'horrible' from where I am with the game right now.

LTEDan#8730 posted (#post-83477)

There's really no point to T3 other than getting enough ship XP to unlock T4. T3 modules are cheaper, yes, but T4 are more powerful and there's more variety. It seems like a waste to buy all of the T3 modules when that could be enough to unlock a good T4 loadout on a flat out better ship.

Agreed. Well that settles it. Now to decide on what purchases I >need< to make ^_^

Note that the T4 Vette starts getting noticably slower without much increase in health so the normal hit and run strategy of the T2/T3 Vette won't work as well as it did which means you might have to change up your strategy a bit.

You're the second to mention this to me I think, do you mind elaborating? My current vette strategy is to try to stagger speed boosting abilities/engine boost while saving one for the escape / timing the CD for it to be ready as I'm finished unloading. I've only ever flown the machias and its t2 variant which look like the quicker vettes. I'm interested to try flying other manufacturers. I'm sure there is a lot left to learn about the vette class, though its clearly the most fun smile

The way I'm seeing my credits and experience be dispursed, I've held off buying all but one tech unlock for the t3 ships so far (one I felt was essential, the autoguns on the machias t3 vette).

Its shaping up that it might just be easier to ignore the t3 tech trees and spend my credits on unlocking t4 ships, since those should be highest for the bracket anyway.

What do you think about this approach? Originally I had thought I might unlock all the t3's then see what I want to specialize in from there, but the way the game is played and how ship changing goes, it seems like a more efficient use of credits to buy ships instead of tech/modules as I move into higher tiers.

I didn't buy it. Probably wont. Even if I liked it, by the time I saved up enough to buy it I can unlock t3 and the base t3 kit for the otranto has it already.

Technically giving you the module for a cheaper purchase if I'm not mistaken.

Agreed though; its too high, why would it be that high... people wont want to unlock it based on its high cost and whats the point of putting modules in the tech tree that people wont want to unlock? smile

I noticed today that people left mid game on the other team and it caused me to be unable to respawn on my team until the match was over.

Could we maybe just respawn on the other team and get a notification and 'free win' bonus or something? It seems like a better approach than benching people. At least we get to play and the sides even out. Benching people punishes players who want to stay because others did not.

If we are going to have t3 and t4 fighting t2, at least allow the people who joined as recruit and have to fight t3 and t4, be able to pick from their t3/t4 ships and so on. They've played the game, unlocked the ships, bought them with whatever currency; there isn't a good reason in my mind to lock them out while they have to fight vs those very same ships on the enemy team.

I think people will eventually start leaving games to try to get more favorable ones. I'm not the kind of player to do it, but I could easily see someone going 'I'm not going to play my t2 vs t3 and t4 screw this' and leaving a game in progress just to reselect their t3 or t4 ship. I don't want a spiral effect of people leaving games and joining them and getting used to the idea of flipping through games to get one they could have fun in / constantly joining a lost game in progress, on the losing side as if the 'join game' system were a slot machine. Currently, anyone who has t2 and t3 unlocked and joins a recruit only to see t3 and t4 on the enemy team, has every incentive to leave the game and join a new one under 'veteran'. Given a choice people will likely pick; they only have to come to a level of frustration with it to make the choice.

If we're going to be adamant on allowing t2 and t4 into the same match without smoothing the performance gaps (read: rebalancing), lets allow players in mixed tier bracket matches to pick from their available tiers that are available to that match. Its bad enough to have t2 fighting t4, but to lock that player into playing t2 when they have t3's they could be using is locking that player into a bad game experience they could simply avoid by leaving the game and rejoining.

I see a lot of this abandonment of 'lost cause' games in overwatch. 6v6 becomes 11v6 where the 11 never had a full team at any point in time, people just kept joining and leaving, and it was never a fair game. This feeds into negative attitudes and toxicity, and players who dont understand that the match was decided by the matchmaking system turn on other players as the reason for failure. There almost isn't a session of overwatch I sit down to where somebody makes a negative comment about joining a lost game in progress on the losing side.

Rebalancing would be a big order at this point I would imagine, perhaps a shorter path to smoothing out the differences that tiered performance enhancements + the matchmaking system would be to not lock players into lower tiers when they have higher tier options available? I'm really not sure why we would disallow a player to fly the ships they've unlocked in the first place, and pick from a lower tier of options to fight the very same ship they are locked out of playing because its 'too high of a tier'.

I haven't had this problem you speak of.

Honestly it seems to me the tactical/healing ships are doing just fine. 1 ship + 1 healer still has the firepower of one ship. Given that mechanics like jumping, engine boosting, nukes, and high overhead arc missiles that guide around terrain are a thing; and that corvettes are also a thing, there are plenty of tools to dismantle a healer backing up another ship, or a formation of them.

2 destroyers and a corvette can easily take out 2 destroyers with 2 healers backing them up if they attack together.

Try flying a vette, it solves a lot of these problems. Drain torps and disable pulse things that shut off abilities like armor hardening can even secure a kill on a target being healed.

Just Two Questions :

1) Which of the two T3 arty ships, Vucari or Ballista, do you think is a better first pick and why?

2) How to use Furia effectively smile?