Feedback regarding CXP rate with backup reasoning

[PlasmaJohn]

Why not just make meeting the weekly conquest objective award 15,000-20,000 cxp for each character that meets the objective? If you want to meet the object with PVP, fine, GSF, fine, Ops, fine......

Not a bad thought but Conquest has some shortcomings:

 

If you're into PvP or GSF then Conquest is a gold mine since you can pretty much spam run those as many times a night as you want. Only the daily Flashpoint, Op, or Uprising counts. Once you're done with the daily FP any other FP you run won't count for squat unless there's a specific instance in the list. (Same with Ops and Uprisings). Specific instances can only be done once a week and only once per legacy. Same fault with the weeklies.

[Ibokagain]

Nice post Ryenke, thank you! I agree with alot that you said and would like to add more into that train of thought.

 

After talking with some friends and guildies we think they should add UC , CT, and more CXP to Daily and Weekly missions for everything. Now the exact numbers I'm not exactly sure however you would want to reward the harder group content with more of course but you also want to balance it out for those folks that just PVP and don't do PVE.

 

For many of us RNG is a problem and from the responses from EA/BIO it doesn't appear to be going away. So since it isn't going away what you can do is to allow folks the ability to buy the pieces of gear they want and not have to depend on rngesus for a piece of gear.

 

You could just add the UC, CT, and more CXP to the list that Ryenke made:

 

Regular Weekly Mission for Daily Areas

Planetary Heroic WEEKLY

Eternal Championship Weekly

Warzone Daily

Warzone Weekly

Solo Ranked Daily

Solo Ranked Warzone Weekly

Solo Ranked Daily

Group Ranked Warzone Weekly

Veteran Flashpoint Daily

Veteran Flashpoint Weekly

Master Flashpoint Daily

Master Flashpoint Weekly

Story Uprisings Daily

Story Uprisings Weekly

Veteran Uprisings Daily

Veteran Uprisings Weekly

Galactic Starfighter Daily

Galactic Starfighter Weekly

Operation Weekly

HM/NIM Weekly (doesn't exist) //

Toborro’s Courtyard/Monolith Weekly

Weekly Personal Conquest

 

Just my .02 however it would be nice to be able to buy the gear that I want to buy, I'm sure others feel this way too. Thanks.

[zerglord]

I can't get on board with that for one simple reason. The cxp rewards are not balanced between activities. Doubling them increases that inbalance. I don't think it would be hard to balance them but that needs to be done before doubling is a good idea.

 

I also think they need to take into account some other things during the balancing. Risk v Reward. PvP and GSF are both riskless and yet give some of the best cxp per hour out there. They also give components....GSF gives them at the highest rate yet doesn't even use the gear you would make from them....to me that is silly. HM FP on the other hand give very poor cxp per hour and give no components yet involve risk, you can die and need to spend credits to repair and you can spend an hour and fail to complete it because of a team that doesn't work. Same with even SM ops and very much true of HM and beyond ops. You can easily spend an hour or more on one boss in an operation and end up with nothing but massive repair bills. This isn't fair or balanced. If they are going to insist on leaving GSF and PvP two of the best gearing methods they need to bring other methods up to that level.

 

One step is remove repair costs and armor damage from all forms of play. It isn't balanced that one style has a cost and another does not.

 

There should be a base amount of cxp earned while in a FP or OP. If GSF and PvP will be awarding participation cxp the same needs to be true of other content as well. Yes you could walk into an op and just stand around....make it a small amount enough so doing it isn't really a good method of cxp but enough so wiping for an hour on a hm boss isn't a total waste but no so much its actually worth doing. Look I see a ton more AFK'ing in battlegrounds now, I get its not cool but to be balanced there has to be something done about time spent in FP and OPs that leads to not completing them.

 

Components for GSF need to go. I cannot see any real justification for a form of play that requires no gear and uses no gear to earn that gear. OR make it use the gear. One or the other,

 

HM FP should be a method of gearing up for OPs. That means they should drop components. That only seems right.

 

EVERY OPS BOSS MUST DROP UAs.

 

I really want the need for command tokens taken away. Its a stupid way to gate gear.

 

And then there is that elephant. RNG MUST GO AWAY. Yes I said it. The real problem with the current gearing system is the current gearing system. It can be tweaked, altered, changed. But it will never be right because its a flawed idea that should never have been used.

 

I agree that CXP reward should be more balanced, with the rest not so much. You too much worry about what others do.

 

You should play activity that you like and enjoy, not which gives you the most CXP. People that just repeat one activity over and over(especially if they don't like it) got burned and stop playing.

 

And doubling CXP will easy current grind, and make playing any activity more rewarding and fun.

[Bristol]

Great Post.

 

A couple suggestions:

 

PvE -

 

1. I would bump daily and bonus missions slightly.

2 Revert to 10 CXP per gold with a daily cap of 5,000. I never farmed golds but I was enjoying doing heroics and not skipping what ever I could. Honestly I just run past/around everything i can now.

3. Give 2 per silver. Daily cap - 5,000

 

I have to agree with this. When 5.0 1st dropped, I was actually killing stuff in the heroics and flashpoints instead of using the creative wall-slides to get around the trash. Cap the CXP for Golds/Silvers daily/weekly whatever but 2CXP is game-breaking and a joke. the Gold CXP nerf makes them not worth anyone's time, 10 was good and I for one was enjoying the gain for the random kills.

[Jplankey]

What is CXP?

[Ryenke]

I have to agree with this. When 5.0 1st dropped, I was actually killing stuff in the heroics and flashpoints instead of using the creative wall-slides to get around the trash. Cap the CXP for Golds/Silvers daily/weekly whatever but 2CXP is game-breaking and a joke. the Gold CXP nerf makes them not worth anyone's time, 10 was good and I for one was enjoying the gain for the random kills.

 

I do agree, I had fun those first couple of days finding different ways to do things which I had always "wall-walked' to avoid the trash. I've been a vocal critic of 5.x changes, but the initial 10 cxp for golds really made playing fun.

 

As I am pretty sure the reason for the nerf was they didn't want a cap - what do you think of this (just thought of it). A weekly mission (auto start/auto complete) for kill 100 gold enemies. Rewarding 1000 points. (Much like the kill 250 enemies on planet X conquest goal). That would still give the 10 cxp per gold, but wouldn't be a 'cap' per se.

[Bristol]

Not a bad thought but Conquest has some shortcomings:

 

If you're into PvP or GSF then Conquest is a gold mine since you can pretty much spam run those as many times a night as you want. Only the daily Flashpoint, Op, or Uprising counts. Once you're done with the daily FP any other FP you run won't count for squat unless there's a specific instance in the list. (Same with Ops and Uprisings). Specific instances can only be done once a week and only once per legacy. Same fault with the weeklies.

 

This is more of a conquest gripe, but kinda valid here too. If you're into PvP, rinse and repeat all day long for Conquest. If you're into PvE, oh, no, wait, only do 1 thing a day for conquest you scrub.

[Eli_Porter]

Keep in mind that values shouldn't be too high, otherwise it's saying "you should stop doing this fun thing, your weekly for the boring thing isn't done".

[Bristol]

I do agree, I had fun those first couple of days finding different ways to do things which I had always "wall-walked' to avoid the trash. I've been a vocal critic of 5.x changes, but the initial 10 cxp for golds really made playing fun.

 

As I am pretty sure the reason for the nerf was they didn't want a cap - what do you think of this (just thought of it). A weekly mission (auto start/auto complete) for kill 100 gold enemies. Rewarding 1000 points. (Much like the kill 250 enemies on planet X conquest goal). That would still give the 10 cxp per gold, but wouldn't be a 'cap' per se.

 

It might just be you and me, but I'm with you on this one. Make it a Weekly Pickup mission for 100 Golds, maybe add one for 250 Silvers too. I know they see me when I scoot by, they just don't wanna die. Give me a reason to take them out...you know you wanna...

[Ryenke]

Keep in mind that values shouldn't be too high, otherwise it's saying "you should stop doing this fun thing, your weekly for the boring thing isn't done".

 

I agree, in my multiple drafts of this post there are my notes estimates on how long/cxp everything I do in game. What I tried to do was pick a cxp value for my Weekly suggested cxp that would raise the cxp rate to 4000 to 4500 when the activity was done with the Weekly AND command mission. So, if my suggestion were implemented, the 4000 to 4500 cxp per hour would only apply the first time in a week you do those things.

 

I don't think my suggestion could completely fix the cxp rate, but I think it could be a very good start, should be easy to implement and should allow easy balancing among 'cxp rate '/ 'different types of activities'.

[Sargrith]

To avoid forcing people to do things they don't want to and allow them to do what they want to, why not have instead of weekly rewards tiered rewards.

 

 

Just throwing this out there but after say 20 PvP losses (wins count double) you get X after 50 X again harder each time to hit it but no so much to prevent it from being doable. So if someone wants to just PvP they can and still be rewarded for it.

[Kawiki]

As I am pretty sure the reason for the nerf was they didn't want a cap - what do you think of this (just thought of it). A weekly mission (auto start/auto complete) for kill 100 gold enemies. Rewarding 1000 points. (Much like the kill 250 enemies on planet X conquest goal). That would still give the 10 cxp per gold, but wouldn't be a 'cap' per se.

 

I would make it a daily but I'm flexible. Keep the good ideas rolling and have the same thing for breakfast tomorrow that you had today.

[Ryenke]

I would make it a daily but I'm flexible. Keep the good ideas rolling and have the same thing for breakfast tomorrow that you had today.

 

Oops, I skipped breakfast today. Thanks, you made me LITERALLY laugh out loud.

[DanNV]

My problem with all the suggestions I see is I can't play what I want to and have no set path to get there in less than 6 months. That's the problem with GC for end-game gearing and then the "fixes" in 5.1. It's still totally broken.

[GrandLordMenace]

As far as catchup mechanics go, here's my personal idea:

 

Give the ability to "pair CXP." This mechanic would work thusly: every action that grants CXP also gives another character CXP to a 1 to 1 ratio. If I have a Jedi Guardian I can order all of my Sith Juggernaut to also grant CXP my Jedi Guardian. This opens up a wide variety of permutations. Obviously, it would only work one way for the pairing, my guardian would not be giving CXP to my Jugg. What this would do is allow players to play on their alts while still helping progress their main. Right now you have a situation where investing all your time in a singular character is far more profitable than spreading everything out, and that's bad.

[Ryenke]

My problem with all the suggestions I see is I can't play what I want to and have no set path to get there in less than 6 months. That's the problem with GC for end-game gearing and then the "fixes" in 5.1. It's still totally broken.

 

I don't disagree. Getting gear by RNG is broken. 6 months to a year grind (for one toon!) is broken. My sub will expire if either is broken on that date.

 

Would it be better if they just FIXED the grind, made it worthwhile to play ALTS again, and removed RNG? And implemented those fixes ASAP? - Yes it would. Can/will BWA do that? I don't think there is a chance in hell that BW can or will do that in the next month. Would I resub and change my signature to reflect that if they did (and it was implemented)? Yes I would.

 

That wasn't what BW asked for, tho. Ben asked specifically for suggestions to improve the grind problem. So, I'm starting with that, and we'll see what BW does - if they do anything to change the grindiness at all. At this point, I would not place a bet that the grind will be noticeably better anytime soon, even tho they said we'd hear next week what they are going to do about it.

 

The clock is ticking. I like(d) the game enough pre 5.0 that even if my sub expires I'll "watch this space" for a while, but probably only a couple of months.

Edited January 27, 2017 by Ryenke

[gabigool]

Among the different changes/options we are looking at, Weeklies is definitely one of the things we have been talking about. Good thread, keep the feedback coming.

 

-eric

 

In complete seriousness, I'm curious if you could shed some light on the thinking behind your (well, the studio's) insistence on requiring this sort of gearing system.

 

Because as I see it, there isn't a way to make it both fair and fun. I believe it can get "better", sure. And in fairness, from a PvE standpoint 5.1 > 5.0. But from a PvP standpoint, it is the opposite. Yet if you jack up the PvP side, eventually it's going to overtake PvE in terms of efficiency. And you'll always have the argument that one "can" PvP and contribute nothing, lose 100% of the time, burden their team - yet (eventually) be geared.

 

I do not understand why you believe this is a better paradigm than having PvP gear be trivial to obtain quickly - making PvP more fair; and having PvE gear be obtainable based on PvE success.

 

We've done DvL and have dozens of characters. Why do you not want us to be able to play them all effectively, quickly, in the content we "want" to play? For many of us, the content we "want" to play requires this gear. I have 7 or 8 characters on a server I have not even logged into since 5.0 dropped. I see no possible scenario where it makes sense to even try to play them.

 

I worry, greatly, that you and Ben continue to use words like "watch", "tweak" and "tune". I believe for this game to truly be even in the same universe as "alt-friendly" you need to be using words like "massively boost" or "massively increase" because as it stands now, it's demoralizing to look at my character select screen. You're about two months in and the changes I've seen - short of the initial mega-nerf to elites/champs (which I assume you factored into the original tuning) - have been minuscule at best.

 

I'm sorry Eric, but the pace at which you guys are addressing - no, fixing - current CXP gains is inexplicable to me. And I can't help but think that you guys honestly just don't know how to fix it. I wouldn't. Because however you do fix it something will be "best" and that's going to compel players to fixate on that activity. And that's not fun.

 

I guess what I'm saying is I understand the motivations - at least some of them - to open gear to all. But you didn't factor in that the point of gear is to enable players to play better. Not just to have better gear. We're not "playing". We're gearing. And I don't understand why you seem to fear us "playing". I do not believe this is a healthy approach - especially in the weeks leading up to some long overdue content.

 

So can you please shed some light onto why you feel we need to have gear throttled, and how you see this as a better experience for the players? Perhaps if we understood your thinking, we could make suggestions you'd actually consider.

 

From where I sit, I think you guys have done a poor job of being timely in addressing CXP gain concerns. I think you'd have to agree with that. I don't know if you're understating the problem internally or you simply don't know what to do.

 

But I can say with certainty, that reverting Operations and PvP to 3.0 gearing models would improve the gameplay experience for many players and do far more towards retention than slow, incremental CXP increases. That would leave less for your team to have to sort out from a CXP adjustment standpoint as well.

 

TL;DR - Being able to gear quickly for PvP and Operations players wasn't a problem - why has it been treated as such by the studio?

[Ryenke]

I worry, greatly, that you and Ben continue to use words like "watch", "tweak" and "tune". I believe for this game to truly be even in the same universe as "alt-friendly" you need to be using words like "massively boost" or "massively increase"

(snip)

 

Even tho I'm the OP, I don't disagree with you. I can't defend or even think of ANYTHING remotely good to say about 5.x grind + gear. I want to throw something every time I hear tweak, tune and especially MONITOR.

 

I just don't know if anyone is listening, but they say they are and wanted some specific feedback, so I obliged. I guess time will tell. But will it be timely enough to save the situation?

[Avicii]

In complete seriousness, I'm curious if you could shed some light on the thinking behind your (well, the studio's) insistence on requiring this sort of gearing system.

 

Because as I see it, there isn't a way to make it both fair and fun. I believe it can get "better", sure. And in fairness, from a PvE standpoint 5.1 > 5.0. But from a PvP standpoint, it is the opposite. Yet if you jack up the PvP side, eventually it's going to overtake PvE in terms of efficiency. And you'll always have the argument that one "can" PvP and contribute nothing, lose 100% of the time, burden their team - yet (eventually) be geared.

 

I do not understand why you believe this is a better paradigm than having PvP gear be trivial to obtain quickly - making PvP more fair; and having PvE gear be obtainable based on PvE success.

 

We've done DvL and have dozens of characters. Why do you not want us to be able to play them all effectively, quickly, in the content we "want" to play? For many of us, the content we "want" to play requires this gear. I have 7 or 8 characters on a server I have not even logged into since 5.0 dropped. I see no possible scenario where it makes sense to even try to play them.

 

I worry, greatly, that you and Ben continue to use words like "watch", "tweak" and "tune". I believe for this game to truly be even in the same universe as "alt-friendly" you need to be using words like "massively boost" or "massively increase" because as it stands now, it's demoralizing to look at my character select screen. You're about two months in and the changes I've seen - short of the initial mega-nerf to elites/champs (which I assume you factored into the original tuning) - have been minuscule at best.

 

I'm sorry Eric, but the pace at which you guys are addressing - no, fixing - current CXP gains is inexplicable to me. And I can't help but think that you guys honestly just don't know how to fix it. I wouldn't. Because however you do fix it something will be "best" and that's going to compel players to fixate on that activity. And that's not fun.

 

I guess what I'm saying is I understand the motivations - at least some of them - to open gear to all. But you didn't factor in that the point of gear is to enable players to play better. Not just to have better gear. We're not "playing". We're gearing. And I don't understand why you seem to fear us "playing". I do not believe this is a healthy approach - especially in the weeks leading up to some long overdue content.

 

So can you please shed some light onto why you feel we need to have gear throttled, and how you see this as a better experience for the players? Perhaps if we understood your thinking, we could make suggestions you'd actually consider.

 

From where I sit, I think you guys have done a poor job of being timely in addressing CXP gain concerns. I think you'd have to agree with that. I don't know if you're understating the problem internally or you simply don't know what to do.

 

But I can say with certainty, that reverting Operations and PvP to 3.0 gearing models would improve the gameplay experience for many players and do far more towards retention than slow, incremental CXP increases. That would leave less for your team to have to sort out from a CXP adjustment standpoint as well.

 

TL;DR - Being able to gear quickly for PvP and Operations players wasn't a problem - why has it been treated as such by the studio?

 

You hit everything head on. Their slow snails pace response time does nothing to remedy the problems. They need to take action now and massively increase the gains and allow players the ability to get their T1 gear relatively quickly to be competitive with other players. This includes new players, alts, returning players ect. They had to know this system of gearing sucked, that it was alt unfriendly and that players would hate it yet did it anyway. Now they refuse to take the steps needed to fix the problem in a timely manner. Instead they spend their time changing the AoE target and nerfing bolster hitting the target as well as Stormtroopers,

[DanNV]

In complete seriousness, I'm curious if you could shed some light on the thinking behind your (well, the studio's) insistence on requiring this sort of gearing system.

 

Because as I see it, there isn't a way to make it both fair and fun. I believe it can get "better", sure. And in fairness, from a PvE standpoint 5.1 > 5.0. But from a PvP standpoint, it is the opposite. Yet if you jack up the PvP side, eventually it's going to overtake PvE in terms of efficiency. And you'll always have the argument that one "can" PvP and contribute nothing, lose 100% of the time, burden their team - yet (eventually) be geared.

 

I do not understand why you believe this is a better paradigm than having PvP gear be trivial to obtain quickly - making PvP more fair; and having PvE gear be obtainable based on PvE success.

 

We've done DvL and have dozens of characters. Why do you not want us to be able to play them all effectively, quickly, in the content we "want" to play? For many of us, the content we "want" to play requires this gear. I have 7 or 8 characters on a server I have not even logged into since 5.0 dropped. I see no possible scenario where it makes sense to even try to play them.

 

I worry, greatly, that you and Ben continue to use words like "watch", "tweak" and "tune". I believe for this game to truly be even in the same universe as "alt-friendly" you need to be using words like "massively boost" or "massively increase" because as it stands now, it's demoralizing to look at my character select screen. You're about two months in and the changes I've seen - short of the initial mega-nerf to elites/champs (which I assume you factored into the original tuning) - have been minuscule at best.

 

I'm sorry Eric, but the pace at which you guys are addressing - no, fixing - current CXP gains is inexplicable to me. And I can't help but think that you guys honestly just don't know how to fix it. I wouldn't. Because however you do fix it something will be "best" and that's going to compel players to fixate on that activity. And that's not fun.

 

I guess what I'm saying is I understand the motivations - at least some of them - to open gear to all. But you didn't factor in that the point of gear is to enable players to play better. Not just to have better gear. We're not "playing". We're gearing. And I don't understand why you seem to fear us "playing". I do not believe this is a healthy approach - especially in the weeks leading up to some long overdue content.

 

So can you please shed some light onto why you feel we need to have gear throttled, and how you see this as a better experience for the players? Perhaps if we understood your thinking, we could make suggestions you'd actually consider.

 

From where I sit, I think you guys have done a poor job of being timely in addressing CXP gain concerns. I think you'd have to agree with that. I don't know if you're understating the problem internally or you simply don't know what to do.

 

But I can say with certainty, that reverting Operations and PvP to 3.0 gearing models would improve the gameplay experience for many players and do far more towards retention than slow, incremental CXP increases. That would leave less for your team to have to sort out from a CXP adjustment standpoint as well.

 

TL;DR - Being able to gear quickly for PvP and Operations players wasn't a problem - why has it been treated as such by the studio?

 

You have a bunch of good stuff and good questions in here. Nicely done.

[FerkWork]

In complete seriousness, I'm curious if you could shed some light on the thinking behind your (well, the studio's) insistence on requiring this sort of gearing system.

 

Because as I see it, there isn't a way to make it both fair and fun. I believe it can get "better", sure. And in fairness, from a PvE standpoint 5.1 > 5.0. But from a PvP standpoint, it is the opposite. Yet if you jack up the PvP side, eventually it's going to overtake PvE in terms of efficiency. And you'll always have the argument that one "can" PvP and contribute nothing, lose 100% of the time, burden their team - yet (eventually) be geared.

 

I do not understand why you believe this is a better paradigm than having PvP gear be trivial to obtain quickly - making PvP more fair; and having PvE gear be obtainable based on PvE success.

 

We've done DvL and have dozens of characters. Why do you not want us to be able to play them all effectively, quickly, in the content we "want" to play? For many of us, the content we "want" to play requires this gear. I have 7 or 8 characters on a server I have not even logged into since 5.0 dropped. I see no possible scenario where it makes sense to even try to play them.

 

I worry, greatly, that you and Ben continue to use words like "watch", "tweak" and "tune". I believe for this game to truly be even in the same universe as "alt-friendly" you need to be using words like "massively boost" or "massively increase" because as it stands now, it's demoralizing to look at my character select screen. You're about two months in and the changes I've seen - short of the initial mega-nerf to elites/champs (which I assume you factored into the original tuning) - have been minuscule at best.

 

I'm sorry Eric, but the pace at which you guys are addressing - no, fixing - current CXP gains is inexplicable to me. And I can't help but think that you guys honestly just don't know how to fix it. I wouldn't. Because however you do fix it something will be "best" and that's going to compel players to fixate on that activity. And that's not fun.

 

I guess what I'm saying is I understand the motivations - at least some of them - to open gear to all. But you didn't factor in that the point of gear is to enable players to play better. Not just to have better gear. We're not "playing". We're gearing. And I don't understand why you seem to fear us "playing". I do not believe this is a healthy approach - especially in the weeks leading up to some long overdue content.

 

So can you please shed some light onto why you feel we need to have gear throttled, and how you see this as a better experience for the players? Perhaps if we understood your thinking, we could make suggestions you'd actually consider.

 

From where I sit, I think you guys have done a poor job of being timely in addressing CXP gain concerns. I think you'd have to agree with that. I don't know if you're understating the problem internally or you simply don't know what to do.

 

But I can say with certainty, that reverting Operations and PvP to 3.0 gearing models would improve the gameplay experience for many players and do far more towards retention than slow, incremental CXP increases. That would leave less for your team to have to sort out from a CXP adjustment standpoint as well.

 

TL;DR - Being able to gear quickly for PvP and Operations players wasn't a problem - why has it been treated as such by the studio?

 

+1 Signed

[Sundragon]

I think CXP gains should actually be slowed down. Lots of people are already level 300. For us to enjoy it, it should be probably 20-30% slower. I don't know why everyone wants instant gratification.

[BadHoneyBadger]

Among the different changes/options we are looking at, Weeklies is definitely one of the things we have been talking about. Good thread, keep the feedback coming.

 

-eric

 

One weekly that I am looking at specifically is the PvP because these give roughly 300ish I believe. Another may be conquest as this may be low, especially on weeks where it jumps to 50,000 to achieve it.

[Biscuitt]

2 Recommendations:

 

1. Increase CXP for non-popular classes or specializations in PVP or PVE.

 

Reasoning: Class balance is a serious issue - and it takes way to long to address these issues. Currently PVP is filled with Mercs/Mandos for DPS, Shadows/Assassins Tanks, and Sorcs/Sages heals. It's boring. Since balance is hard to find - reward people for playing classes which are not popular.

 

Base this boost off of specializations, and it allows people to stay on their same toon - and switch - if they're overall class qualifies. For instance: Shadow Infiltration and Kinetic (tank) spec are popular, but Serenity (the dot spec) is not. A CXP boost for players who play this speci would at least change things up!

 

This encourages diversity in matches and characters - and keeps each match fresh.

 

2. Increase CXP for GSF.

 

GSF is a grind in itself. It's very punishing to new players, matches take a long time to make, and people don't stick with it because they go up again people with much more experience and more powerful ships.

 

Double CXP for GSF will provide motivation for pilots to stick with it. Or - allow ships to be leveled by legacy.

 

Thank you.

[Captain_Zone]

I think CXP gains should actually be slowed down. Lots of people are already level 300. For us to enjoy it, it should be probably 20-30% slower. I don't know why everyone wants instant gratification.

 

Not everyone enjoys grinding for weeks or months on end. In fact, the majority here don't want that. RNG is already broken. I for one, and I can safely say that I speak for most here, don't want to grind for a whole year just to get a full set of endgame armor and weapons.