Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Talk about Battlefleet Gothic: Armada here!
User avatar
Avlaen
Posts: 557
Joined: 22 March 2016, 03:13
Contact:

Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby Avlaen » 24 April 2016, 17:56

I ask you how many problems result from people with many many more upgrades facing lower level players, or players with not as many upgrades and ask whether this is good for the game. which i firmly believe its not.

Whats the fun going up against a fully favoured and upgraded fleet when you barely have anything, and then losing your fleet for 2 turns?
thats 3 games that are a waste of your and your opponents time.

and its not fun being on the fully upgraded lvl 10 end either, rolfstomping people who are weaker than you.

Ive been on both ends of this having a 100% maxed out admiral in beta, and now because i took a few days to play the campaign, im facing fleets far more powerful than mine. and i can either try and fight and get my whole fleet killed for 2 whole turns which is awful and will waste my and my opponents time in "throwaway" games. or i just run away for 3 mins and warp out wasting time aswell.

if you dont want newbies getting matched in big battles that they dont know what to do with you can still have admiral levels unlock mission types.

imagine in dow if you couldnt build marines untill you won 10 games, and then if your marines died you couldnt use them for 2 games even if you went up against someone who had fully upgraded terminators
Last edited by Avlaen on 24 April 2016, 18:04, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
Littlerift
Posts: 109
Joined: 20 April 2016, 13:40
Contact:

Re: Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby Littlerift » 24 April 2016, 18:07

Some people enjoy the progression, I guess.

What Tindalos need to do is bundle the ranked MM when it arrives with a ranked multiplayer mode that allows you to customise a fleet without any limitations tied to level.

Tigga
Posts: 70
Joined: 29 March 2016, 18:44
Contact:

Re: Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby Tigga » 24 April 2016, 18:13

Long term it doesn't matter. Once you've played enough games, renown will be plentiful, and that'll be that.

User avatar
Avlaen
Posts: 557
Joined: 22 March 2016, 03:13
Contact:

Re: Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby Avlaen » 24 April 2016, 18:15

Tigga wrote:Long term it doesn't matter. Once you've played enough games, renown will be plentiful, and that'll be that.


and then ill be matched with people who dont have maxed renown and the problem cycle continues.

duck_bird
Posts: 48
Joined: 15 April 2016, 17:46
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Re: Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby duck_bird » 24 April 2016, 18:27

I completely agree. It's a very bizarre system, and can really put new players off.

Ship upgrades and skills should cost points. Renown should be removed entirely. Persistent fleets in multiplayer shouldn't be a thing. It's a great singer player mechanic, but in multiplayer it's a pretty awful idea.
Non Compos Mentis

https://www.twitch.tv/duck_bird

I stream sometimes idk

User avatar
HERO
Posts: 888
Joined: 27 October 2015, 04:09

Re: Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby HERO » 24 April 2016, 18:35

duck_bird wrote:I completely agree. It's a very bizarre system, and can really put new players off.

Ship upgrades and skills should cost points. Renown should be removed entirely. Persistent fleets in multiplayer shouldn't be a thing. It's a great singer player mechanic, but in multiplayer it's a pretty awful idea.


Just read over my post from March 10th, yeah, I was a lot nicer back then. All the points are still valid now lol.

User avatar
Bludfist
Posts: 997
Joined: 14 March 2016, 22:46
Contact:

Re: Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby Bludfist » 24 April 2016, 18:37

Littlerift wrote:Some people enjoy the progression, I guess.

What Tindalos need to do is bundle the ranked MM when it arrives with a ranked multiplayer mode that allows you to customise a fleet without any limitations tied to level.

This the renown system, isn't progression


It simply exists to slow people down and creates a whole host of unnecessary problems
Chaos walking into Aldorf be like
Spoiler : :
Image

User avatar
Avlaen
Posts: 557
Joined: 22 March 2016, 03:13
Contact:

Re: Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby Avlaen » 24 April 2016, 18:47

Bludfist wrote:
Littlerift wrote:Some people enjoy the progression, I guess.

What Tindalos need to do is bundle the ranked MM when it arrives with a ranked multiplayer mode that allows you to customise a fleet without any limitations tied to level.

This the renown system, isn't progression


It simply exists to slow people down and creates a whole host of unnecessary problems


like a fresh lvl 8 admiral vs a lvl 8 admiral who has all the unlocks maxed. lol

User avatar
Kine²
Posts: 352
Joined: 27 March 2016, 10:38
Contact:

Re: Why persistent fleet upgrades is bad for matchmaking and the playerbase.

Postby Kine² » 24 April 2016, 19:39

Scrapping progression in multiplayer may be more convincing if someone can also provide a substitute to keep players engaged over the long term. I hate progression and grind myself. But if I'm being honest, without it I'd get bored fast.
no victory without war New Game Mode Suggestion


Return to “General Gameplay Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests