phalczen Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 I just wanted to mention a brief talk I had with Musco regarding GSF that I had at the Community Cantina on Friday April 14 at SW Celebration Orlando. i mentioned to him that it seems like with all the CXP incentives with GSF, the participation in GSF seems to be growing, and I asked him, are you seeing the same thing on your side? He nodded. I then asked him if that could translate into any development. I am paraphrasing his answer, but basically he said we (the players) don't realize it, but they (the developers) have "frequent" meetings on GSF. I alluded to Alex Modny's strike fighter thread, if Modny was with the team at all any longer, and why it had been abandoned after two years (acknowledging that Modny made no guarantees of replies or development when he posted the thread.). He replied that he did not know why the thread had been abandoned, but that they realize strikes need work. I did mention (my personal biased opinion FYI) that balancing/improving strikes would go a long way to improving the new player experience, especially in light of its iconic visceral Star Wars feel (a la Luke in his x-wing). He agreed that buffing strikes would improve that experience. Finally I mentioned to him that outside resources and player analysis of those resources seem to indicate that infiltrators had a distinct place in the meta. Without acknowledging or asking him to comment on validity of outside resources, I did ask him if there was any consideration to bringing out Infiltrators as a way to flesh out the meta. Now, I will qualify this by saying that I personally was very persuaded by this player's analysis of infiltrators and their possible place in the meta. Other players may admittedly not be so convinced, or may feel like other aspects of GSF need development (for instance, a new map), more so than a new ship class. So I will acknowledge that what I discussed with Musco is not representative of the entire GSF player base. At any rate, in regards to my question about infiltrators and overall evolution/development/enhancement of the meta, he said: "there are definitely things we have discussed about the meta and ideas that we have about it." So, I don't know if this means some GSF love has moved from the wall of crazy to something more tangible. I genuinely hope so. I took a glimmer of hope from Musco's answers. "Rebellions are built on hope," to quote Jyn Erso, and also referring to the second Blur trailer for this game prior to launch. Again, my priorities may not match those of other pilots and so I apologize if I offended anyone, but I tried to pick topics on which I think most pilots agree. Stay safe out there, pilots! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeatRacer Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 Infiltrators don't make sense here: No ships this small have a cloaking device! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavaar Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Hey! Good questions, thanks for asking them and keeping us in the know! Good to know that they know about us! *Blush* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neflarion Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Well its nice to know that GSF may get some love in the future, but its not just new maps/ships we need. New battle types would also go a long way to making GSF more enjoyable. Deathmatch and Domination get stale after awhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lendul Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Well its nice to know that GSF may get some love in the future, but its not just new maps/ships we need. New battle types would also go a long way to making GSF more enjoyable. Deathmatch and Domination get stale after awhile. True, capture the flag would be interesting in this game mode. Especially if the flag carrier couldn't boost or maybe boost was at 50% the norm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pietrastor Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 (edited) Not that you offended anyone with your choice of questions, obviously everyone cares for certain different aspects of the game/mode more than the others. Personally though, I would focus on asking questions/giving suggestions on increasing the integration of GSF with the rest of the game though. Big spikes in GSF activity happend twice - both times when they actually integrated the mode more with core gameplay. Conquests and Galactic Command. So that's what they should focus on first IMO. New map would of course be great for veterans/active players, but how many others will even care for that if they already ain't interested or incentivied to try GSF as it is? More GSF rewards/requisitions tokens/customizations handed across the ground-game, more ground-game rewards within GSF (adding Components was a VERY good move), unifying gearing process between class-ships for PVE space missions and starfighters (remove ship parts and just have class ships upgreadable with requisitions). Guild ships upgreadable with Fleet Requisitions, new Fleet Strongholds purchased by requisitions, Kuat Reputation tokens from GSF, Requisition Tokens in Galactic Command boxes, legacy-wide or faction-wide Hangars and if not at least legacy-wide requisitions (we obviously know they can do that now with Command Tokens being legacy-wide). Things like these to integrate the system heavily across the base/ground-game. Stronghols succeeded more than Starfighter because of deep integration with the base-game and constant reminders/incentives withion the ground-game about the Strongholds. GSF should recieve the same. Maybe then it will be time for new map, but for now I think it wouldn't be played enough because there's still not enough regular or semi-regular players in GSF. Edited May 2, 2017 by Pietrastor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts