Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

DISCUSSION THREAD for Petition for new content / updates to GSF.

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
DISCUSSION THREAD for Petition for new content / updates to GSF.

jaingskiratanuul's Avatar


jaingskiratanuul
07.20.2021 , 05:45 AM | #11
yes to: maps, decos, conversions(though only to bound items), legacy unlocks, and improved matchmaker

Quote: Originally Posted by Drakkolich View Post
1: New maps/Modes

I'm all for new maps of the existing modes, but after playing Star Wars Squadrons, I think a fleet battles mode is a terrible idea, that game had it as it's primary mode and still couldn't balance it. I'd hate to throw that in here, with very little follow up on it and it just be a freaking mess.

I think there's definitely room for new modes, but something more like King of the hill (A roaming area you capture for points) or VIP (Some kills are worth more points then others) would be much easier to implement.
fleet battles were unbalanced beacuse of 2 things: classes not being mirrored, and to a lesser extent capital ship shapes. there are ways to fix the capship shape problem(all damageable areas on top) but I don't think it's a huge issue anyway
Quote: Originally Posted by Drakkolich View Post
2: More GSF Decorations

I mean sure, but I wouldn't bump this above another map or mode for example, which is why I hate that you put it in the same pile. I'd probably just disagree with a petition for this if it was the only thing, just so they could focus elsewhere.
just turn all the GSF ships into decos, make them BOL or BOP, and make them purchasable for 50k ship comms on that ship. cartel ships included. don't think it would be too hard to do, we have the models already
Quote: Originally Posted by Drakkolich View Post
3: Alternate Fleet Comms and Fleet Requisition purchases

While I'd be ok with alternate Fleet Comms purchases since that has a cap, at this point I think a Fleet requisition conversion might be a little much since there isn't a cap on that and some players have pooled tremendous amounts of it over the years.
bind them
Quote: Originally Posted by Drakkolich View Post
4: Legacy Unlocks for CC ships

If you're going to add this, I'd say you'd want it at a much higher price since it's not just a cosmetic, it's player power in the sense that you get a second copy of a ship which can be very useful for having alternate builds on your bar. It would also give you ships that were unlocked on brand new characters. Secondly you'd want to refund anyone that had baught all the extra ships, since that's a lot of extra Cartel coins that they spent to get all those ships. Without that refund I don't think it would be fair in the slightest to add this.
refund all but one on each legacy, minus 400 CC, then make future unlocks of unlocked cartel ships cost 3k fleet req to ensure stock is still difficult
Quote: Originally Posted by Drakkolich View Post
6: Bug fixes and Matchmaker improvements

While of course everyone wants this stuff, this isn't a petition type thing. That's like saying we need to make a petition so the loading times are better.
we're petitioning for the devs to focus on GSF, which they clearly don't do until we raise a petition.


I responded to drako's post but my points also apply to verain's.

Ttoilleekul's Avatar


Ttoilleekul
07.20.2021 , 05:59 AM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by jaingskiratanuul View Post
yes to: maps, decos, conversions(though only to bound items), legacy unlocks, and improved matchmaker.

Quote:
fleet battles were unbalanced beacuse of 2 things: classes not being mirrored, and to a lesser extent capital ship shapes. there are ways to fix the capship shape problem(all damageable areas on top) but I don't think it's a huge issue anyway
GSF doesn't have un-mirrored classes. Don't think it matters what the mode will be, imbalance will remain. But I'm not pushing for Fleet battles. It was a by the by mention. I will amend the petition to mention other modes, and make it clear we are happy for anything.

Quote:
bind them
Great idea.

Quote:
refund all but one on each legacy, minus 400 CC, then make future unlocks of unlocked cartel ships cost 3k fleet req to ensure stock is still difficult
Staying neutral on the particulars of how to do it, but your inference is that there has to be a middle ground, and I agree. I will amend the petition to reflect this.

Quote:
we're petitioning for the devs to focus on GSF, which they clearly don't do until we raise a petition.
Exactly.

Map / mode, legacy unlock, conversions, and companions all amended in the petition to better reflect the personal wishes of comments made in this thread. An emphasis has been put on flexibility and finding a middle ground.
-Luc Nodaro
Link to My Youtube channel for GSF
Always happy to offer coaching / training for GSF.

Verain's Avatar


Verain
07.20.2021 , 12:05 PM | #13
Quote: Originally Posted by Ttoilleekul View Post
So to repeat the issue here, GSF has been largely neglected.
So? A "petition" isn't how you fix that. All of SWTOR has only a moderate amount of resources, and they help GSF when they can. Do you really feel that GSF is uniquely crapped on or something? I'd like them to pay more attention to it as well, but they don't owe us anything, we aren't some aggrieved party. At least you are being more honest now- initially you were hiding this confrontational take you had on the devs, and now it's in the open.

Quote:
If it received regular updates and content like the ground game does, then there would be no need for a multi-point petition.
I feel you'd make one anyway. Your last petition went somewhere, so you think that's a skeleton key to get all your pet requests addressed.

Quote:
The petition is essentially saying, "hey Devs, GSF kind of needs a little work please."
NO, that is NOT the "essence" of what it is saying. The essence of what it is saying is "here's stuff I want and I see other folks bring up some times so lets see if I can bully the devs into doing it". That's what it's essence is- making demands and trying to get everyone to line up and spam AGREED in your main thread.

You could easily make a thread saying "@devs GSF needs a little work please". And no, your petition isn't more likely. No, we haven't reached some fictional line in the sand where we need to take some stand. None of that. You could have made that thread, instead of these two.

Quote:
People put individual posts up all the time asking for things, and what happens? Nothing.
Hey, remember the individual thread asking for mines to not respect LOS? Or more recently, the one about slicing, that you did? Slicing got nerfed because it needed a nerf and everyone knew it, not because your chosen format was a petition.

Quote:
We tried that, it doesn't work. Time for a new approach. You'll thank me if this works. Regardless of whether you disagree with the approach.
I'm actually angry that I've never managed to sound this arrogant on the forum. I need to step up my game.

Quote:
GSF is not balanced anyway,
Lol, GSF is extremely well balanced in comparison to everything else that gets discussed. It's vastly more balanced than Squadrons ever has been on any single day of its existence, and less buggy to boot.

Quote:
So balance and mode would seem to be entirely unrelated.
So, I'm going to argue with everything you just said. First, you're incorrect that GSF is not balanced. By comparison to a lot of games, it is extremely well balanced, and keep in mind we are talking about the game modes and the ships here. The only standard by which SWS and GSF are both imbalanced is that neither will give you a perfectly balanced matchmaker thing, and that is by no means a relevant point here.

Second, you are assuming that because GSF is not perfectly balanced, suddenly, balance doesn't matter, and that every game mode will be equally imbalanced. This take is HOT GARBAGE. A MOBA is much harder to balance than a TDM. Balancing a TDM and a Dom with the same rules is a bit challenging- zone control is more relevant in domination, for instance, and healing, evasion, and player killing are more relevent in a TDM. But a MOBA thing? No, that's a whole other universe. There's a reason why League's myraid of creative modes are generally still in the framework of a MOBA instead of there being a capture the flag, or a democracy-tower type mode in there.

Squadrons was designed to be a MOBA. It was the core element of the game, and they did an ok job, but by walking away from it so fast (the devs didn't even stick around six months after launch) they guaranteed that every imbalanced would stay forever. GSF was tweaked to its current point over the span of years, and then it became something only touched carefully. Even the sweeping changes a few years back weren't as disruptive as the ludicrous crap squadrons devs did, such as "now your ship takes double damage when you use this weapon" and "we took the ships that couldn't fly good and made them fly worse as a joke".

Adding a MOBA mode would be a huge deal.

If anyone wants to suggest pvp modes, the game to look at is Star Conflict. This is because GSF's domination and TDM were lifted out of there, back when that game was young and only had those two pvp modes. They've since added several other modes that work pretty good, and some of them are pvp modes. The two that would be of interest to GSF are:

Beacon Hunt - this is like domination, but with two core changes. First, only one satellite turns on at a time. Second, the team that has the active satellite can't respawn until the active satellite times out or until they lose control of it. This mode works way better than it sounds, though I don't think it's as good a mode as domination, it's very close. You can check it out in that game versus bots pretty easily if you like. This mode could be played with domination maps, making it the most likely thing that could be added.

Detonation - This is their take on capture the flag. This would require new maps. Each team has three points, so there are six points of interest on the map. A special bomb spawns, and your team wants to capture the bomb (so capture the flag), and the bomb guy has to get to any of the enemy points, at which point it explodes.
I don't think GSF would be perfectly balanced with this mode out of the box, and it would require new maps which is a huge ask.

They also have a variant where respawns are limited, but I don't think anyone would love that here.


Quote:
I appreciate some players have tremendous amounts of fleet requisition stored up. But its still a pointless currency that becomes utterly useless beyond a certain stage. Would seem only logical to give it a purpose.
It's perfectly logical to leave it as it is. Perhaps the only change we should ask for is the ability to flex by linking our ship in a way that will show our ship and how much requisition it has available, so we can all measure our epeens in /gsf. Or perhaps we could ask for future cosmetic work to add some effect if you are willing to spend a million ship requisition.
But having it interact with the economy would be odd and strange. Whatever thing you end up being able to buy with it would have a tiny price compared to the effort put in, because everyone has all this braggable points that suddenly would be a currency.

Importantly, why would this obscure point be part of a petition?


Quote:
This is why it needs to be a very high figure for the conversion.
See, that's not fair either. I have a zillion req, sure, but why should the time I spent be less valuable? And why should FUTURE conversions be penalized here too? The moment you let it become, I dunno, tech fragments, or some tradable item, you'll be here doing a petition (BECAUSE NOTHING ELSE WORKS GUYS) begging for a better conversion of time spent in GSF to earn ship and fleet req to (whatever), and you'll be busy showing how this DOESN'T RESPECT OUR TIME and how it's TERRIBLE FOR GSF PLAYERS and the devs HATES USS SO MUUUCH. Or maybe that won't be your thread, but the next you's thread.


Quote:
Honestly the amount of fleet requisition stored up pales into comparison to the already existing ways to farm Fleet Comms.
This doesn't seem true to me.

Quote:
But at least it would give a purpose to the currency.
I'd only be interested in a purpose that keeps the ship req tied to the player, and tied to GSF. So unlocking a sparkle trail or something for a huge amount seems ok to me, especially as the game needs a few more perks to stay on mains. But I wouldn't like, petition for it.

Quote:
If the unlock price is "much higher" it defeats the purpose.
Your purpose is "free stuff for me", so yes, obviously a higher price defeats the purpose.

Quote:
You're not at an advantage. Yes its player power in the sense that its a 2nd copy which can be useful,
It is useful. You know it's powerful as well, or you wouldn't be here asking for it. It is nice to be able to put two of these ships on your bar, especially if you tune one for TDM and the other for Dom.

Quote:
As for the refund, yeah that's just not going to happen
Of course not. But nothing you want is going to happen either, and you're still asking for it. You're not asking for this because your goal is to screw over players who have bought the ships, like me, and to get free stuff for you, so you don't even bother asking or thinking about it or anything. It's not on your petition for this reason.

Quote:
I remember seeing people moaning when Nico Okarr was given away free to subscribers a few years ago, and the founders were complaining that it was no longer an exclusive founder reward. Things change. You're either thinking about other people here or you're not.
First, "the devs screwed some people before, so they should screw everyone constantly" is a terrible argument. Second, unlocking these ships on multiple characters costs a lot more than Nico Okarr, and we've had the devs come in and say that they don't have the ability or the intention to do account wide unlocks on GSF, which is pretty much the go-ahead to buy stuff with the confidence that it won't be given away free later. So you're basically asking them to go back on past statements, specifically excluding anything that would serve as compensation to those that paid, all because you want free stuff and want to punish those who bought things already. Because "things change". And then have the balls to pretend this is about "thinking about other people". I'm the one "thinking about other people", because other players have done what I have. You want what you haven't paid for, and explicitly in a way that screws over people who played by the rules.
"The most despicable person on the GSF forum."

Ttoilleekul's Avatar


Ttoilleekul
07.20.2021 , 02:49 PM | #14
Quote: Originally Posted by Verain View Post
So? A "petition" isn't how you fix that. All of SWTOR has only a moderate amount of resources, and they help GSF when they can. Do you really feel that GSF is uniquely crapped on or something? I'd like them to pay more attention to it as well, but they don't owe us anything, we aren't some aggrieved party. At least you are being more honest now- initially you were hiding this confrontational take you had on the devs, and now it's in the open.
Those are your words not mine. I never implied such. Do I feel GSF has been left out? Yes. And its clear that is has been left out. If a petition isn't how we fix it, what is? Go back to siting on our hands?

Quote:
I feel you'd make one anyway. Your last petition went somewhere, so you think that's a skeleton key to get all your pet requests addressed.
You're big on assumptions aren't you.

Quote:
NO, that is NOT the "essence" of what it is saying. The essence of what it is saying is "here's stuff I want and I see other folks bring up some times so lets see if I can bully the devs into doing it". That's what it's essence is- making demands and trying to get everyone to line up and spam AGREED in your main thread.
Bully? Demand? Again, your words. You already said we agree on "plenty of it." So its clearly not just my wants is it. You just don't like the format of a petition.

Quote:
You could easily make a thread saying "@devs GSF needs a little work please".
That's been done a hundred times if not more,.
Quote:
And no, your petition isn't more likely. No, we haven't reached some fictional line in the sand where we need to take some stand. None of that. You could have made that thread, instead of these two.
Yes I could have, but its been done.


Quote:
Hey, remember the individual thread asking for mines to not respect LOS? Or more recently, the one about slicing, that you did? Slicing got nerfed because it needed a nerf and everyone knew it, not because your chosen format was a petition.
IF that's the case how come it didn't get nerfed until I started the petition, with a corresponding discussion thread, where the devs acknowledged it, and then nerfed it. You can keep telling yourself that the petition had nothing to do with it, and that it would have got nerfed anyway. Because, quite clearly, the three years before that proves you right, doesn't it? How many countless "individual" threads about slicing were made in that time. in fact while you are on this trip trying to belittle the previous petition as proof this one stands no chance, here is your comment on the petition to nerf remote slicing>>>>>>>>>
Quote: Originally Posted by Verain View Post
Absolutely, and it looks like your thread is moving the ball here. Grats and thank you.
Quote:
I'm actually angry that I've never managed to sound this arrogant on the forum. I need to step up my game
Trust me you are doing a sterling job.

Quote:
Lol, GSF is extremely well balanced in comparison to everything else that gets discussed. It's vastly more balanced than Squadrons ever has been on any single day of its existence, and less buggy to boot.

So, I'm going to argue with everything you just said. First, you're incorrect that GSF is not balanced. By comparison to a lot of games, it is extremely well balanced, and keep in mind we are talking about the game modes and the ships here. The only standard by which SWS and GSF are both imbalanced is that neither will give you a perfectly balanced matchmaker thing, and that is by no means a relevant point here.
That is entirely the point here. Yes the class balances is extremely good, but the games are still a hot mess. Again, matchmaker threads have been common place on here.

Quote:
If anyone wants to suggest pvp modes, the game to look at is Star Conflict. This is because GSF's domination and TDM were lifted out of there, back when that game was young and only had those two pvp modes. They've since added several other modes that work pretty good, and some of them are pvp modes. The two that would be of interest to GSF are:

Beacon Hunt - this is like domination, but with two core changes. First, only one satellite turns on at a time. Second, the team that has the active satellite can't respawn until the active satellite times out or until they lose control of it. This mode works way better than it sounds, though I don't think it's as good a mode as domination, it's very close. You can check it out in that game versus bots pretty easily if you like. This mode could be played with domination maps, making it the most likely thing that could be added.

Detonation - This is their take on capture the flag. This would require new maps. Each team has three points, so there are six points of interest on the map. A special bomb spawns, and your team wants to capture the bomb (so capture the flag), and the bomb guy has to get to any of the enemy points, at which point it explodes.
I don't think GSF would be perfectly balanced with this mode out of the box, and it would require new maps which is a huge ask.

They also have a variant where respawns are limited, but I don't think anyone would love that here.
Good input. I like this.

Quote:
It's perfectly logical to leave it as it is. Perhaps the only change we should ask for is the ability to flex by linking our ship in a way that will show our ship and how much requisition it has available, so we can all measure our epeens in /gsf. Or perhaps we could ask for future cosmetic work to add some effect if you are willing to spend a million ship requisition.
But having it interact with the economy would be odd and strange. Whatever thing you end up being able to buy with it would have a tiny price compared to the effort put in, because everyone has all this braggable points that suddenly would be a currency.
I don't even know where to begin with this. I think I'll leave it.

Quote:
Importantly, why would this obscure point be part of a petition?
Re-read the petition.

Quote:
See, that's not fair either. I have a zillion req, sure, but why should the time I spent be less valuable? And why should FUTURE conversions be penalized here too? The moment you let it become, I dunno, tech fragments, or some tradable item, you'll be here doing a petition (BECAUSE NOTHING ELSE WORKS GUYS) begging for a better conversion of time spent in GSF to earn ship and fleet req to (whatever), and you'll be busy showing how this DOESN'T RESPECT OUR TIME and how it's TERRIBLE FOR GSF PLAYERS and the devs HATES USS SO MUUUCH. Or maybe that won't be your thread, but the next you's thread.
A lot of assumptions again.


Quote:
This doesn't seem true to me.
Perhaps I should summon Grav who can testify to how much fleet comms can be farmed in one evening, because he does it on a semi-regular basis. You, obviously don't. I don't. Its not that important to me. But I know how to do it, and yes, it is a thing. You've been away in SWS so it doesn't surprise me you missed this one.

Quote:
Your purpose is "free stuff for me", so yes, obviously a higher price defeats the purpose.
Assumptions assumptions assumptions.

Quote:
It is useful. You know it's powerful as well, or you wouldn't be here asking for it. It is nice to be able to put two of these ships on your bar, especially if you tune one for TDM and the other for Dom.
Not exactly pay to win is it. A noob with two cartel ships will still suck. The ace who knows how to win will do so with or without two cartel ships. The toons where I have two of the same are just for giggles, so I can run a Scout in TDM that's got more engines and is a little more robust than my DOM build, for example. But that doesn't mean I win more because of it. My try hard win toons need only standard ships available to all. And again, unlocking in collections means this small arguable "advantage" is more accessible for everyone.

Quote:
Of course not. But nothing you want is going to happen either, and you're still asking for it.
People said this about the slicing nerf, but look what happened there. I can literally show you the comments on that thread saying nothing would happen. You may be right, but if that does end up being the case, that's okay. At least I tried, and can be happy in the knowledge I tried.

Quote:
You're not asking for this because your goal is to screw over players who have bought the ships, like me, and to get free stuff for you, so you don't even bother asking or thinking about it or anything. It's not on your petition for this reason.
That arrogance you were talking about. Perhaps I should consult with Verain daily so I know what I really think and feel. Did you miss [choose to ignore] the part where I told you I have more cartel ships on more toons than you? So how can my goal be to screw over people like you?


Quote:
First, "the devs screwed some people before, so they should screw everyone constantly" is a terrible argument. Second, unlocking these ships on multiple characters costs a lot more than Nico Okarr, and we've had the devs come in and say that they don't have the ability or the intention to do account wide unlocks on GSF,
I was not aware of this. IF that is the case, then that part of the petition may be a non-starter. Either way, no that is not what I am asking, as I didn't know of that.

Quote:
which is pretty much the go-ahead to buy stuff with the confidence that it won't be given away free later. So you're basically asking them to go back on past statements, specifically excluding anything that would serve as compensation to those that paid, all because you want free stuff and want to punish those who bought things already
. Again, choosing to ignore the part where I said I have more cartel ships than you. Do you remember recently when you were trying to belittle me on some other thread? And to validate your argument (for whatever the topic was) you said that you had played more GSF than I ever will? And that just isn't true is it. Because when pointed out that I had played over 12k games, which is probably more than you at this point, and even if it isn't, it's still certainly more solo games than you. The point is you used "belittle" tactics to try and shut me up. But when I told you how many games I have played, you never replied. So now the same thing is happening here. That's three times now you have stated that I am doing this to get more free stuff and screw over those who already bought that stuff. So listen up. Just like I am confident I have more games under my belt than you, I am also confident I have more cartel ships than yoo. And if I am wrong, both are certainly still in the numbers that debunk your belittling tactics. 12k games is a lot regardless, I know a thing or two now, even though you may not like that. And I have enough cartel ships that if anyone gets screwed here, its me. So no, I am not buying into your self pitty.

Quote:
Because "things change". And then have the balls to pretend this is about "thinking about other people". I'm the one "thinking about other people", because other players have done what I have. You want what you haven't paid for, and explicitly in a way that screws over people who played by the rules.
Seriously, you really did ignore that part didn't you? How did you get through all that and not register that I explicitly stated I likely have more cartel ships than you? I'm speechless. Even in the face of me already saying that, you openly state again that I never bought any and just want to screw over those who do. Its quite arrogant you know

Do I need to take screen shots of all my characters with Cartel ships? Or are you going to insist again that I don't have any, never bought any, and only want to screw those who did? Come on Verain, you're a lot of things but you aren't stupid. You either chose to ignore that part, hoping no one (and myself) would notice that your rants are contrary to what I already told you. OR you didn't read it. Neither is good, man.
-Luc Nodaro
Link to My Youtube channel for GSF
Always happy to offer coaching / training for GSF.

Verain's Avatar


Verain
07.20.2021 , 04:49 PM | #15
Quote: Originally Posted by Ttoilleekul View Post
T If a petition isn't how we fix it, what is?
Not our job to fix it man, we're just players. We don't scream louder and louder if we don't get updates, that's absurd.

Also if we DO scream loud for stuff, it should be for stuff that matters.

Quote:
Bully? Demand? Again, your words.
When you make a petition, you encourage people to get involved in a thing where they will feel bad if they are ignored by the devs. So yes, it is bullying them in some fashion.

Quote:
You just don't like the format of a petition.
I feel it is totally inappropriate for the laundry list of things AND some of your ideas are just bad, and you've glued other things to them in hopes that people will support it. It is highly manipulative.

Quote:
That's been done a hundred times if not more,.
And here's your one-hundred-and-first and one-hundred-and-second discussion thread, except this time it's way ruder because you phrased it in the form of a petition.

Quote:
Yes I could have, but its been done.
And you're doing it again right now.

Quote:
IF that's the case how come it didn't get nerfed until I started the petition
It got fixed because it needed to be fixed AND because we all made a fuss. Your thread didn't have to be a petition thread to do that, and almost every other community-sourced change has never been part of any petition. And there's been a ton of community-sourced changes in GSF.



Quote:
That is entirely the point here. Yes the class balances is extremely good, but the games are still a hot mess.
Imbalanced games resulting from inadequate numbers of players in queue is very different from a game mode that is fundamentally imbalanced.

Quote:
Not exactly pay to win is it.
It's a small amount of player power and it is related to cash. You want it for free on all your future alts, which means you want that thing that I paid for for free.

You also claim however that

Quote:
Did you miss [choose to ignore] the part where I told you I have more cartel ships on more toons than you? So how can my goal be to screw over people like you?
There's two possibilities.

In one case, you have less than me, and my argument, and my assumption, both stand. My argument is "I payed to unlock these ships with the assumption that they would not become unlocked for free on all characters in the future, as that exclusivity was very much part of what I'm paying for". My assumption is, you want free stuff on your alts primarily, and secondarily want to destroy what I purchased.

In the other case, you have more than me, and my argument (see above) stands, but my assumption about you changes from "primarily you want free stuff on your alts" to "because you paid more than I did, you feel justified in destroying what I have". It's much worse- in the first case I was assuming you were mostly motivated by selfishness, but in this case you simply want to destroy what others have, as perhaps cartel coins have substantially less meaning for you than they do for me.

Anyway, I have 39 cartel ships on my main account assigned, with a few more in my bank unassigned. I haven't checked absolutely everywhere yet.

But if by some chance you own more than me, owning more than I do doesn't mean that my 39 shouldn't count.
"The most despicable person on the GSF forum."

DarkTergon's Avatar


DarkTergon
07.20.2021 , 05:11 PM | #16
Quote: Originally Posted by DarthCasus View Post
And opening up them up to credit payment would be nice too. They aren't as coveted as dyes and a rigid pricing structure for 1 time use items that I could only assume a fraction of the people who even touch GSF would buy, is simply ridiculous. I want to enjoy the mode and make the most of what I do have, but not so much that I'm paying 400CC for different colored blaster fire for 1 character.
They are similar to dyes, as they are once of, so I can imagine that BW won't do that, as once that happens, you'll have calls for dyes to be changed too, as they would have set a precedence. I'm not saying I wouldn't like it, if we were given a vote, I'd vote yes, but just pointing out it could be the start of a slippery slope
Beware, my friends, as you pass by. As you are now, so once was I
As I'm now, so you must be. Prepare, my friends, to follow me

“The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.”

philwil's Avatar


philwil
07.20.2021 , 07:50 PM | #17
If you ask not, you receive not
Flux
Snuffleupagus, Sishyafiq, Baby Yodda, and many, many more
23k plus matches under my belt
Please dont take my advice. I know nothing.

philwil's Avatar


philwil
07.20.2021 , 07:56 PM | #18
You could actually use the fleet req and ship req for GSF decorations for strongholds.

Or, for *special* paint jobs, colors for engine, laser (think rainbow engine/lasers) lol

just throw us a bone, haha.

As far as added maps.

TDM Denon and a DOM Iokath.

For Denon, they could clutter it up a bit more for sure for the TDM. Very wide open as it is now.

For Iokath, the nodes could be hovered above the clutter or, scattered thru the clutter to make it more hard to get form one node to another. I think the DOM iokath in that formulation would make it more challenging than the normal DOM's we are used to.

These are just off the top of my head, so there it is.
Flux
Snuffleupagus, Sishyafiq, Baby Yodda, and many, many more
23k plus matches under my belt
Please dont take my advice. I know nothing.

Ttoilleekul's Avatar


Ttoilleekul
07.21.2021 , 03:59 AM | #19
Quote: Originally Posted by Verain View Post
Not our job to fix it man, we're just players. We don't scream louder and louder if we don't get updates, that's absurd.

Also if we DO scream loud for stuff, it should be for stuff that matters.
You lobbied the devs for changes in SWS, and when you didn't get it, you quit the game and came back here. Don't give me that.



Quote:
When you make a petition, you encourage people to get involved in a thing where they will feel bad if they are ignored by the devs. So yes, it is bullying them in some fashion.


I feel it is totally inappropriate for the laundry list of things AND some of your ideas are just bad, and you've glued other things to them in hopes that people will support it. It is highly manipulative.
It is at worst short sighted. I was trying to bring together the main things I have seen on the forum, on discords, and have seen other pilots mention, both recently and in my entire time in the game. I'm trying to do something good for GSF, because honestly people do want more than just bugs fixed and matchmaker improved. Perhaps I should have just made a petition asking for "Development and Content" and "Quality of life improvements". I know you won't believe otherwise, because you are Verain and I have my suspensions about why you are being extra hostile over this matter, but I can concede that might have been a better way to do it, rather than a multi-point petition. However, that's nothing more than being a little short sighted. You won't think otherwise., but I don't care.

Quote:
Your thread didn't have to be a petition thread to do that,
See, you can keep saying that, but the bottom line is there were countless threads moaning about Remote slicing over the three years since it became meta, and it never got nerfed. I make a petition, and it gets nerfed in a matter of months. After the devs directly acknowledged the attached discussion thread. So you can keep saying the petition had nothing to do with it, but it doesn't make it true. You're just saying it because it fits your arguments now. But back then, at the time, you gave your full support to the petition, and you even credited the petition for being responsible for getting the ball moving.
Quote: Originally Posted by Verain View Post
Absolutely, and it looks like your thread is moving the ball here. Grats and thank you.
You made this comment on the petition, not on the attached discussion thread. So don't say now that petitions don't work and that the RS nerf didn't need to be a petition. Really Verain, accusing me of not having cartel ships, even after I told you I did. Now directly contradicting what you said in January this year, because it suits you. You need to step up your arguments. I expect better from you.

Quote:
Imbalanced games resulting from inadequate numbers of players in queue is very different from a game mode that is fundamentally imbalanced.
I agree, but it doesn't mean it's not relevant. People are not moaning about class imbalance like they do in ground PVP. They are not moaning about a mode that is fundamentally imbalanced. They are moaning about match balance. Matchmaker.


Quote:
It's a small amount of player power and it is related to cash. You want it for free on all your future alts, which means you want that thing that I paid for for free.

You also claim however that

There's two possibilities.

In one case, you have less than me, and my argument, and my assumption, both stand. My argument is "I payed to unlock these ships with the assumption that they would not become unlocked for free on all characters in the future, as that exclusivity was very much part of what I'm paying for". My assumption is, you want free stuff on your alts primarily, and secondarily want to destroy what I purchased.

In the other case, you have more than me, and my argument (see above) stands, but my assumption about you changes from "primarily you want free stuff on your alts" to "because you paid more than I did, you feel justified in destroying what I have". It's much worse- in the first case I was assuming you were mostly motivated by selfishness, but in this case you simply want to destroy what others have, as perhaps cartel coins have substantially less meaning for you than they do for me.

Anyway, I have 39 cartel ships on my main account assigned, with a few more in my bank unassigned. I haven't checked absolutely everywhere yet.

But if by some chance you own more than me, owning more than I do doesn't mean that my 39 shouldn't count.
Thank you for clarifying for everyone that your accusations toward me are based on assumptions. Way to look good there Verain Now, moving on to facts. You win the battle of who has the most cartel ships. I have 30. 39 is a lot. But so is 30. Are you going to apologize for calling me a liar now? But the point is, both numbers are high enough that your arguments [assumptions] fall apart. If I only had 5 cartel ships, your arguments might hold weight. Or conversely if I had 60. Either way it doesn't matter because you have admitted to making assumptions. But, I am just as screwed over as you if I get the change I want. But since you only have assumptions, and can't prove them, let me spell it out for you. And please, try not to gloss over this part and ignore it again. I want legacy unlock for cartel ships, because I think its morally correct, and would prompt more players to buy into having cartel ships.Even though I spent a lot on them already, I think its fair and just that others should not have to. I know for a fact, some players would buy them if it unlocked legacy wide.

Now, as for how powerful having a duplicate cartel ship is? Its not. Really. Simply as that. Oh, you want evidence? Sure. Of my recent 100 try-hard win characters over all servers, which netted 77-82% win ratios, none of them had cartel ships. I am willing to furnish screen shots if you call me a lair again. Actually, there is no need, I already did. Go check that thread. The only try-hard win character that has a duplicate ship (both standard and cartel variants on the same bar) is my Scout-only toon, that I did the 100 try-hard Scout games with. And that is so that I can have TDM and DOM versions of the T2S. All the other characters that have cartel ships, are running them as a singular cosmetic change, with no duplicate ship on the bar. Some of those toons are try-hard win toons, some are lulz toons.

Having a duplicate ship is probably more benefit to you than it is to me, since you play exclusively in a premade, not solo. I know you have mentioned in the past about having two different T1Gs on your bar. And i get that, in your premade, that would make sense. Two T1Gs on my bar would limit me. But you don't know about this because you know, you don't play solo. You play roles, so you don't have to worry about having a ship for every situation. As a solo try-hard win player, I do. So having two versions of the same ship on my bar, typically reduces my available ships for all situations to 4, rather than 5. I used to run T1F in two versions on my bar, but that was back when I was half the player I am now. These days I find that a limitation. The only ships I need to win, are the standard ships. This would account for why you have an inflated opinion of how powerful it is to have two versions of the same ship on your bar.
-Luc Nodaro
Link to My Youtube channel for GSF
Always happy to offer coaching / training for GSF.

Drakkolich's Avatar


Drakkolich
07.21.2021 , 10:26 AM | #20
@Luc

I'm not gonna quote stuff just wanted to clear a few things up


First up Verain actually didn't want to quit Squadrons, he was the one trying to keep us playing, I'm pretty much the one that pushed us away, because the Devs actually saying to us they weren't doing anything infuriated me. As compared to the ones here that are still reading the forums and taking feedback!

Second, you keep trying to throw this you solo queue more then us and understand it better thing in our face and keep quoting this I've played 12000 games number, well I'm closing in on 20000 games now if we're boasting and I'd say 15-20% of those are solo queue games. Verain however solo queue's way more then even I do, we just do it on alts all the time. So maybe hold off on telling us we "know nothing" about solo ing.

Third, for me it wasn't THAT you used a petition, the Remote Slicing one actually was good. It's how you used it here, you used it for multiple items at the same time, which should have all been separated in different votes or hell even different threads. (And if you're going to say well that would flood the forums, That's why petition are frowned upon IN THE FORUM RULES)

And lastly you keep saying that we've asked for stuff before and nothing happened except when you used a petition and that is FLAT WRONG. The entire damn Strike patch was from us constantly saying strikes were underpowered and then the Devs made a thread to ask us about them specifically. When they changed the matchmaking to make 90% 12v12's we made multiple threads about how that was hurting the game and guess what they changed that too! Hell remember when EMP missile did FULL damage on cleave right after 5.5, oh maybe you don't because we made threads about that and they changed it in weeks.
DrakolichDrakolích
The BastionTwitch Stream