How to save Galactic Starfighter from the steaming hot pile of garbage it is now.

[SeCKSEgai]

@Despon - I'm really not sure how to interpret the dudes with flightsticks comments. As far as a stand alone game, I still think x-wing, tie fighter and x-wing vs tie fighter were better, but they were definitely a basis for gsf, the energy management system being a shining example.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think describing GSF as a "steaming hot pile of garbage" is excessive, but it generally takes some interest for someone to bother posting at all. When I was away I would check on the gsf forums from time to time and the majority of threads I saw were people hoping for changes of one sort or another.

 

@Greezt - Given how passionate I used to be before my departure, it's a little silly to claim that I don't care. The difference now is that I'm not so emotionally attached and am looking at it from more of an outsider perspective with insider information.

 

When I left, I lost count of how many times I would see a player intentionally throw matches as they were clearly disgusted and upset. Since I've been back, I have not seen that once. That's not to say that I haven't seen people suicide to avoid someone getting a kill credit, but they were essentially dead and the outcome was the same.

 

I think you're misjudging my interpretation of a new player - as from what I've seen try as they might they're almost exclusively cannon fodder and doing very little to contribute despite their best efforts. I see nothing wrong in that, as its hardly their fault they're ineffective, the learning curve is crazy. When you see an entire team barely making it out of spawn and three sats owned by the opposing team it's pretty clear that the losing side is ineffective and essentially helpless.

 

As for the premades, while I really don't enjoy the one-sided matches those groups are still bodies in the queue. Tonight I spent time on the strong side knowing full well the other side was struggling hard. Luckily by the time I had switched back that side finally got a few more capable pilots and things were getting competitive again.

 

I could have joined the weak side at any time to try and help. 4.0, that's what I used to do and it lead to a sharp decline in my win rate and a lot of frustration. Even though I know I'm a capable pilot, I can't fight 6-8 people at the same time.

 

Instead, I simply did my dailies and while none of the matches were all that fun, I wasn't irritated either.

 

All in all, my point being is that sometimes you have to be more willing to deal with "undesirable players or factors" when there are so few people to sustain the queue.

 

Lastly, pilots' behaviors and decisions can change dramatically depending on how competitive a match is. If a match is close, I will do my best to facilitate the win. If I'm certain my side will win I generally let up to ease the suffering for the other side as I'm well aware of what its like to be in their shoes. And, if I know that my team has no chance of winning, I'm simply not able to put in a huge effort.

 

When I was new, no matter how hard I tried I was not truly contributing despite the effort. My performance then was hardly different than that of someone flying around and shooting at random things.

[Greezt]

You compared a player who openly admits to not caring about the game with players who don't know how to play. That reads to me as if you don't care which type of player is on your team.

 

All the talk about learning curve, opposition, team stacking and such is irrelevant to this post. You can talk about it in the "Friction Points" thread, but this thread is about a person who is throwing a tantrum because the game isn't what he wants. What I came here to say is that he does not have valid points (which you said he does). He's not trying to improve, he's not interested in it. He wants a different game than what there is, and this has nothing to do with premades, balance, ships or whatnot.

 

So yeah, I get you're frustrated by the fact that bugs persist, that gunships and bombers are dominant, that strikes are weak. All these do not give this player any justification to be so rude (both on this thread and ingame). What he says and does are not defendable.

Edited August 17, 2017 by Greezt

[caederon]

@Despon - I'm really not sure how to interpret the dudes with flightsticks comments.

Well, let's refer back to the OP:

 

I know you are going to have some crybabies out there who say whaaa whaaa whaaa it is not fair, I do not have a Stick/HOTAS combo. Well Boo Freaking Hoo. Casual gamers are not who you should be marketing to, they get bored easily and move on to the next shiny toy that comes out. X-Wing VS Tie Fighter was a huge success, it had a huge community that played it for YEARS. If GSF was revamped into a proper sim it would attract players.

The whole point of his screed was that he wanted GSF to be a simulator, and wanted to use his flightstick (technically, his flightstick AND throttle) to play. He very clearly espouses the idea that it is inconsequential whether 'crybabies' do not have or want to purchase a flightstick HOTAS or full pod-shaped cockpit, probably, to play GSF. This stick-o-philia is not an uncommon strain of bacterial whine infecting the forum these days. People wishing for GSF to be some other kind of game are not going to get that. The best you can hope for is that the game which currently exists fulfills its potential. If you do not like tactical arcade space shooters, you will not like GSF.

 

As far as a stand alone game, I still think x-wing, tie fighter and x-wing vs tie fighter were better, but they were definitely a basis for gsf, the energy management system being a shining example.

There are some similar game mechanics, but they are distinctly different game types. GSF is an e-sport with some of the play mechanics from previous generations of space game. X-Wing Alliance was the only game out of that series that I played (alongside many Wing Commander, Privateer, and other less name-brand space games) and that sort of game had scripted missions more akin to a military flight sim.

 

GSF is a sporting event held in a space arena. The game most similar to GSF is Star Conflict. If you set aside all the grind and actual p2w junk in that game and look just at the game modes and ship mechanics, it is a pretty good picture of what GSF would look like if it was developed into a standalone game... though some of what SC offers would be applicable even to the game-within-a-game version.

 

When I was away I would check on the gsf forums from time to time and the majority of threads I saw were people hoping for changes of one sort or another.

Most of the non-complaint GSF conversation has moved to the GSF Discord, where there are usually 60+ people active at any given moment who aren't trying to turn GSF into Falcon 4.0.

 

I don't have a problem with people posting here asking for changes. I do have a problem with the way the OP's argument is presented (along with a number of other recent threads of a similar ilk) and will argue against proposals that try to change GSF to another genre of game or gut out half of its content.

 

- Despon

Edited August 17, 2017 by caederon

[SeCKSEgai]

 

All in all, my point being is that sometimes you have to be more willing to deal with "undesirable players or factors" when there are so few people to sustain the queue.

 

When I was new, no matter how hard I tried I was not truly contributing despite the effort. My performance then was hardly different than that of someone flying around and shooting at random things.

 

You misunderstand me. Where you think I'm trying to defend unsportsmanlike behavior I'm trying to explain basically that beggars can't be choosers.

 

If I could magically have my way, I would be able to enjoy a close and competitive match at any time of the day. But the reality is if I don't queue during limited windows I'm likely not to see a match at all.

 

Most people who have a few unpleasant experiences simply write off the mode as lame and say nothing at all. The OP on the other hand cared enough at least to bother posting. Sure, it was exceedingly negative - but where you're just seeing a jerk, I was seeing someone who could become a regular pilot with a gentle nudge in the right direction.

 

I know that I felt a lot of the same when I started GSF. I think too many of us forget our own humble beginnings. Just last night I was talking with a gsf regular that used to be a lot more negative -- but has since integrated within the community and become a very capable pilot.

 

And lastly, I never stated I would prefer one over the other - to put it bluntly dead weight is dead weight regardless of intention. Someone flying around aimlessly or someone who has yet to learn the dynamics of GSF - the intentions may be different but the performance (or lack thereof) is essentially the same. It should be apparent that I like the idea of new pilots if I'm able to see the potential in a disgruntled one.

[phalczen]

Roland, it is not necessary for us to tolerate toxicity simply to maintain a queue size. The game is hardly so desperate for pilots that we need to just accept griefing. Call outs are not allowed on the forums, but if someone makes a thread about how they deliberately sabotage games, I think it's fair game to shame that type of behavior, and use the available mechanisms in game to report the behavior of an individual person.

[SeCKSEgai]

@ Des - it's clear you're passionate about all this.

 

I remember dusting off my wingman extreme only to find out there was no joystick support. No big deal. If I had the finances to afford a full pod-like cockpit setup for leisure, I don't think I'd expect GSF to be catering to such a lavish setup being a simple mini-game within an MMO.

 

But I do think you've got a pretty harsh view towards people just for having a desire to use a joystick. In the Mechwarrior games it was far easier to perform well with a mouse and keyboard, but I enjoyed them more using a joystick with force feedback as it added a little bit more realism, a bit more like firing weapons from a piloted vehicle and a little less clicking on a screen. It shouldn't be odd to see requests for joystick support, and given that GSF will likely never have said support, there is no need for such hostility is there?

 

I played the wing commander series and remember it fondly, even during the 8bit lookin graphics of the older editions. Between them and the Star Wars games, they set up my expectations for space shooter type games. Frankly, I don't hold the same regard for GSF as you do, and found it really disappointing.

 

I was fairly excited to relive my tie fighter experience only to

-find myself shooting at people within range taking little to no damage

-blowing up having no idea what happened

-wailing on turrets to barely scratch them before they destroy my ship

-missing frequently at targets within range while lined up with the reticule

-respawning only to be blown up right next to spawn point getting no protection from cap ships

 

Perhaps some of us have been playing so long they forget what it was like to have that experience, you know before we knew what railguns were and what they did or how evasion works and that some laser cannons were just shy of useless.

 

Instead of getting upset about redundant threads from newer players, I would hope people would see them instead more as a sign of hope as there are still new players showing enough interest to post at all.

[Greezt]

I feel like we are discussing different threads. OP does not state that he had a negative experience with GSF. He states that he hates the game for the fact that it's not a space sim. You're defensing him for being a new player who has had difficulties with his matchups or something, but that's not the case he's making. He is not interested in GSF as it currently is.

 

That's all there is to it, really. Any argument about how hard new players have it, how premades make it tough, how the learning curve is steep -- all of these do not belong in this thread. They are utterly irrelevant.

[SeCKSEgai]

I feel like we are discussing different threads. OP does not state that he had a negative experience with GSF. He states that he hates the game for the fact that it's not a space sim. You're defensing him for being a new player who has had difficulties with his matchups or something, but that's not the case he's making. He is not interested in GSF as it currently is.

 

That's all there is to it, really. Any argument about how hard new players have it, how premades make it tough, how the learning curve is steep -- all of these do not belong in this thread. They are utterly irrelevant.

 

If he wasn't interested he wouldn't have posted at all.

 

I have no desire to defend him, but to use him as an example of how this already small community can put on blinders and fail to read between the lines.

 

I mean I think I've made it clear that I don't expect the devs to make any major changes to GSF given that I'm irritated that a bug from 3.0 exists in 5.0 and that stuff I had purchased was removed from GSF (cosmetics, pilots). In my mind I wasn't giving a second thought about his overzealous desire for GSF to be a dedicated space sim - they can't fix a bug from 3.0?!

 

In my mind where he talks about doing it just for the xp that's him stating he doesn't enjoy the mode. However where you're seeing that his complaint is that GSF is not the game he wants it to be, I instead see that as him being dissatisfied with what he's experiences so far and him stating what he thinks would have made it better.

 

If they haven't fixed a 3.0 bug, why would you even consider that his complaint would garner dev attention like they'd change GSF magically because he stated things that would have made the experience better for him.

 

Maybe the OP is being purely literal and that he hates the mode simply because it doesn't conform to his ideal. I see the complaint as him having the same experience I did when I first started, the main difference was he lashed out on the forums where I managed to learn the mode in-depth before forming my opinions/suggestions.

 

I would go out on a limb and say if he had enjoyed his GSF experience he would have never posted the thread in the first place and enjoy GSF without a flight stick for what it is and do a bit more than fly around randomly.

 

THAT is what I've been trying to say (in a lot more words).

[caederon]

If he wasn't interested he wouldn't have posted at all

....

I would go out on a limb and say if he had enjoyed his GSF experience he would have never posted the thread in the first place and enjoy GSF without a flight stick for what it is and do a bit more than fly around randomly.

Wayback Machine.... ENGAGE.

 

Put on your Peril-sensitive Sunglasses and join me on a trip back in time to the OP's first posting of his thoughts about GSF, on 9/26/2015:

#1 Enable Joystick/HOTAS/Rudder Peddle/Track IR support. As is the control scheme for galactic Starfighter is probably the worst decision in gaming history. Seriously whomever came up with that idea should be fired immediately because he or she has no clue as to what gamers want.

It burns... it BURNS.....

#2 Enable cockpit view. Playing a game where your flying aircraft from a third person point of view does the exact same thing as no joystick support. It removes the immersion factor. Look at any great flight sim in the history of gaming and your not going to find any timeless classic that are third person.

Make it stop, please...

#3 Offer varying levels of difficulty including a hard core sim mode. Look at the greatest combat flight sim game ever made Microproses Falcon 5.

AAAAAAgh....

If Galactic Starfighter was a high fidelity space combat sim you would attract a large core of flight combat sim players who would play it for years.

AAAAAAAGHHH.....

In closing the decision to roll out Galactic Starfighters as it currently is was possibly the worst decision in gaming history.

*attempts to meditate to shut out the pain*

Fix it by making it a space combat sim with joystick/HOTAS/rudder peddle/Track IR support, there is already an excellent model to base it off of, the GREATEST space combat sim ever made X-wing VS Tie Fighter. If someone is crying because they don't have a joystick.....GOOD those are not the people you want to cater to. Flight/Combat sim players are your target market.

...

...

...

I would go out on a limb and say if he had enjoyed his GSF experience he would have never posted the thread in the first place and enjoy GSF without a flight stick for what it is and do a bit more than fly around randomly.

You might want to have the tensile strength of that limb checked out.

 

- Despon

[SeCKSEgai]

I mean really it boils down to me seeing his complaints and seeing what I believe to be the source of his dissatisfaction where you're looking directly at what he says and not perceiving an underlying reason. If he enjoyed it do you really think he would have complained at all?

[caederon]

I mean really it boils down to me seeing his complaints and seeing what I believe to be the source of his dissatisfaction where you're looking directly at what he says and not perceiving an underlying reason. If he enjoyed it do you really think he would have complained at all?

There is no chance that the OP would ever enjoy GSF, because the game he wants isn't GSF. It is a wholly different game whose only similarity is that they take place in space and involve shooting to some degree. His 'interest' is in a hardcore Falcon-esque space flight simulator that features a cockpit view, full flightstick control, and PvE missions. He wants a completely different game. Trying to get GSF changed into a completely different game isn't going to happen. He should turn his energy towards petitioning whoever has the rights to make a Star Wars space simulator for today's audience. I don't think it could be clearer that what he wants isn't and never will be GSF.

 

The only 'underlying reason' is he's a fan of oldschool hardcore flight simulators and wants that experience.

 

Looking beyond this particular dude's issues, I wish people would stop trying to turn GSF into a game that it isn't. Suggest things that are relevant to the game that exists now which don't involve turning it into a different game. It isn't and never will be a simulator. It is not modeling spaceflight, it isn't applying realistic behaviors or physics to spaceships, it would be bizarre to try to play it in a cockpit view because it's not designed for any of those purposes. Why is this so difficult to accept?

 

There are games out there that will satisfy different needs for different people. It is ok to go play them and not hassle people who like the sort of gameplay GSF presents.

 

Also, I guess we're going for the record of 'who can keep a thread calling the game a hot pile of garbage at the top of the forum for the longest period of time.'

 

- Despon

[SeCKSEgai]

 

Looking beyond this particular dude's issues, I wish people would stop trying to turn GSF into a game that it isn't. Suggest things that are relevant to the game that exists now which don't involve turning it into a different game. It isn't and never will be a simulator. It is not modeling spaceflight, it isn't applying realistic behaviors or physics to spaceships, it would be bizarre to try to play it in a cockpit view because it's not designed for any of those purposes. Why is this so difficult to accept?

- Despon

 

It's really not - every pilot that develops competency knows what to expect out of it and its limitations.

 

New people with experiences of other games are bound to desire those elements in another game. But really, I don't think you have to worry about people trying to change the game, and you shouldn't worry so much about the opinion of someone that makes outlandish requests =p

[AlrikFassbauer]

 

When I was new, no matter how hard I tried I was not truly contributing despite the effort. My performance then was hardly different than that of someone flying around and shooting at random things.

 

Same here.

 

"Random" becauuse as soon as I was shooting, that damn scout was far away gone, then. I hit the next object with my lasers, because that scout was not there in front of me anymore.

Plus what's called "evasion". Shooting becomes completely "random" for a Newbie if the other one has strong evasion and the Newbies does never hit what he or she originally intended to hit. All lasers go into nowhere.

 

Plus, it got even worse : I felt as if I was non-.contributing, because people decided that I was not going to have any kills and took all of my tries into kills for themselves. That was a very effective way of showing me "we don't want you here".

 

One example I still remember was that I was pursueing someone for a really long time, gave my very best, got his (or her) health down - and what happened ? A scout took that little health away, showing me very effectively the message of "you are just garbage, I can take your whole efford away in no time and with much, much much much less effort than you do. You don't belong here."

 

That was was a turning point for me. I decided not to be the mouth-feeder for aces.

 

I was fairly excited to relive my tie fighter experience only to

-find myself shooting at people within range taking little to no damage

-blowing up having no idea what happened

-wailing on turrets to barely scratch them before they destroy my ship

-missing frequently at targets within range while lined up with the reticule

-respawning only to be blown up right next to spawn point getting no protection from cap ships

 

Same here. I still do beliueve that this game would be more attractive if Newbies were given more rewarding flights.

I do not say "more rewards", but I insist in saying "more rewarding action".

I still do believe that people learn faster and better if they get rewards for learning, but that's an opinion often laughed at, both here and in the PvP forum.

To me, it appears as if a faction has taken over which beliueves that learning must include as few rewards as possible, and a high and strong learning curve must weed out the future bads from the future goods.

Edited August 19, 2017 by AlrikFassbauer

[caederon]

Plus, it got even worse : I felt as if I was non-.contributing, because people decided that I was not going to have any kills and took all of my tries into kills for themselves. That was a very effective way of showing me "we don't want you here".

 

One example I still remember was that I was pursueing someone for a really long time, gave my very best, got his (or her) health down - and what happened ? A scout took that little health away, showing me very effectively the message of "you are just garbage, I can take your whole efford away in no time and with much, much much much less effort than you do. You don't belong here."

It may have 'felt' as if you were not contributing in this situation, but in reality you were helping your team and were earning the same amount of requisition for the Assist you received in that engagement as you would have for the Kill.

 

The concept of 'kill stealing' is what you are describing, and in oldschool MMORPGs this was a real thing that had a quantifiable negative impact on a player's progression when their kills were 'stolen.' This is not a thing in GSF. In fact, this is correct gameplay.

 

Enemies in an MMORPG are often 'tagged' for one person when they engage them. There have been many permutations of this across the history of the genre. This is not how GSF works. In GSF, it is advantageous for enemies to be removed from play as soon as possible, and it is often a very bad idea to wait for someone else to finish off the job.

 

If you spot an enemy at low health...

• are they currently engaged with another player?
  
• If they are engaged, who is best poised to win that engagement?
  
• Are they a strong enough player that they require more than one pilot to deal with them?
  
• If they are engaged, who is best poised to win that engagement?
  

_

You are not privy to any of this information in GSF in a direct way. You cannot see the health of allied ships to know if they are going to lose in an engagement. You cannot see who is currently engaged with a particular enemy because there is no rigid structure defining who is and who is not engaged, or how long that engagement lasts, or what constitutes separating from engagement.

 

You can see who the enemy is currently targeting, but this does not tell you much, nor does it indicate that the enemy is engaged with that player in a significant way.

 

Here is what you do know at any given moment in GSF:

• An enemy is at low health
  
• You are or are not in a position to deal damage to them
  

_

If you are in a position to deal damage to an enemy with low health you absolutely should, in nearly every situation. There is no kill stealing. It may be frustrating to not get the kill, but you are gaining the same reward as the person who did, and your team has moved closer to victory because one more enemy is off the board. You are directly helping your team by applying damage to the enemy regardless of who is credited with a Kill vs. an Assist.

 

Here is a scoreboard from a match in which my line was:

 

0 Kills, 40 Assists, 110178 Damage, 1968 Ship Requisition earned

 

Were my Kills stolen? Did my lack of Kills hurt my team? Did I personally suffer any negative consequence for having zero kills in that match?

 

No, no, and no.

 

There is no 'kill stealing' in GSF. Even if this contradicts your feelings, the reality is that outside of very narrow circumstances, all effort that applies damage to an enemy helps your team. Players should attack any low-health enemy they see, within reason. Do not try to deduce who might 'own' that kill. The person who owns the kill is the one that lands the last shot. It is helping your team, and you are rewarded just as much if you have the Kill or the Assist.

 

- Despon

Edited August 19, 2017 by caederon

[Verain]

Like, hold on Despon. You are focusing on the logical part- the idea that maybe he doesn't know how kills and assists work. I want to focus on the strange emotional thing going on- some guy saw a low health target and killed it, which is correct play, and the resulting poster thinks it is somehow about him. That's like... bizarre.

[SeCKSEgai]

Like, hold on Despon. You are focusing on the logical part- the idea that maybe he doesn't know how kills and assists work. I want to focus on the strange emotional thing going on- some guy saw a low health target and killed it, which is correct play, and the resulting poster thinks it is somehow about him. That's like... bizarre.

 

As you improve you can see how even the little things play a bigger role in the grand scheme of things. Like even when I top the board, I can tell when my teammates had little to do with it versus everything to do with it.

 

Despon was explaining how someone with more knowledge would interpret the situation where as Alrik was explaining his feelings when he was a newer pilot. Verain comes in to follow with an insult.

 

I think someone's spent way too much time flying with the easy win group stroking the ego.

 

IF you want to actually start gaining more pilots than gsf bleeds you really should be more considerate of just how important the new pilot is, which includes their thoughts.

[phalczen]

I'm not going to belabor the point too much, again I seem to be bumping this hot pile of a thread. But, there are often posters who are quite obviously trolls. The feelings such a poster presents in a thread like this are similar to threads the person posts in any pvp thread, any thread about the difficulty of pick up groups for flashpoints, for operations, etc. The game gives a very clear message when a player is not contributing to the match. Ironically, the game says in red text, you are not contributing. Despon is clearly right to make sure that readers comprehend that there is no kill stealing in GSF and any damage you do on a red ship is valuable and useful. Some subtle trolls may choose to pretend to make such an experience a personal insult, but then, we should seek to educate those who would be misled by the troll, and then ensure we don't feed or otherwise defends the troll ... like I am feeding them right now.

 

Alrik is 100% correct that the game needs some type of flytext to explain why a perfectly executed shot was evaded. This is something for which we have all been asking for a very long time.

Edited August 20, 2017 by phalczen

[AlrikFassbauer]

Alrik is 100% correct that the game needs some type of flytext to explain why a perfectly executed shot was evaded. This is something for which we have all been asking for a very long time.

 

I agree to this. The game needs to be so much more informative.

 

My worst fear is to get a message "you are not contributing" becaue everybody has too much evasion, to put it rather extremely.

As a Newbie, it can be utterly frustrating not to get any kills.

 

Despon is clearly right to make sure that readers comprehend that there is no kill stealing in GSF and any damage you do on a red ship is valuable and useful.

 

Then tell that to the new pilots. Every bit of information is useful.

 

Besides, it depends on how someone defines "competitive play. PvP.

If someone believes in "the more kills I get, the better", then he or she is competitive, too.

If someone believes in "the more contributions, the better ... Well, that's contribution to a team effort, if there is a competition between 2 teams.

 

 

So much of the experience of veteran GSF pilots comes simply from research. So many things are not explained within the game. Evasion is just an example of that - of a thing researched, spread, and then taken as one "everybody knows this". It's like assuming that everybody knows the name Ulisses used towards Polyphemos.

 

Things are researched, spread - but Newbies need to find this information in the first place, since the game doesn't tell them this information. They need to research themselves - good thing is that veteran players are already presenting that to them. But it is still an experience gap, because Newbies not only need top research that, they also need to apply this won knowledge.

 

My own case is even worse : I always dismissed this "5 % evasion" (just as an example of wording) as "not interesting" because 5 % are o small.

And I believe it to be so small because of my Dyscalculia I simply cannot imagine any good coming from these tiny numbers. Even 20 % doesn't say much to me.

If I had a cake graphic showing me how big 20 % are on a cake, then I would be able to understand that better.

 

The only positive thing in that is that people with Dyscalculia are the vast minority. I fully expect everyone else here to be fully able to comprehend what 5 % are.

Edited August 20, 2017 by AlrikFassbauer

[Verain]

I agree to this. The game needs to be so much more informative.

 

I think the game could use more information. I think it needs flytext. Other changes I would like include: ship icons on maps could distinguish between ship types. Able to bind keys for "cycle through gunship", "cycle through scout", etc. Flytext on damage taken could distinguish by font or punctuation between railguns, mines/drones, ship blasters, lockon weapons. Flytext on dodging could say "dodge" (similar to the flytext we all agre on for when you aim at a ship and miss due to combat roll). Enemy ship arrow icons on HUD (showing you what direction the enemies are in if you turn, the one that currently distinguishes by target and non/target) could have a bit of a difference depending on class.

 

Like none of us are really in any disagreement on this, but those would all take dev work.

 

My worst fear is to get a message "you are not contributing" becaue everybody has too much evasion, to put it rather extremely.

 

This message should be cleared if you properly aim a shot and the combat roll misses on live.

It should also, but does not, clear if you shoot a missile and the target cancels the missile. In both cases you are clearly contributing- when you clicked the shot correctly, you contributed statistically to your team's success, and when you launched the missile you got a cooldown. I do have some problems with the non-contributing message, which tends to punish girl bombers on TDM, as it has no way to distinguish between someone sitting in a pipe and someone carefully LOSing enemies while maintaining a nest.

 

And I believe it to be so small because of my Dyscalculia I simply cannot imagine any good coming from these tiny numbers. Even 20 % doesn't say much to me.

If I had a cake graphic showing me how big 20 % are on a cake, then I would be able to understand that better.

 

My suggestion would be to sketch out these game numbers then, if you think getting a visual would really help. Alternatively, if you ask for some kind of visualization in any GSF math thread, I suspect you'll find people who will love drawing a graph.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Verain

[SeCKSEgai]

Roland, it is not necessary for us to tolerate toxicity simply to maintain a queue size. The game is hardly so desperate for pilots that we need to just accept griefing. Call outs are not allowed on the forums, but if someone makes a thread about how they deliberately sabotage games, I think it's fair game to shame that type of behavior, and use the available mechanisms in game to report the behavior of an individual person.

 

It's less of a tolerate, more an understanding. In 4.0 I saw a of griefing from upset pilots. One guy self-destructed over 30 times at least once against drak and essentially forced them into spawn camping to win the game. I haven't seen that once since coming back.

 

Now in comparison, in the time I've spent on tre I've been amazed at the frequency and more so consistency of pops. However, at the same time, their one sided matches are typically far worse than harby. In all that time, I've only seen one person rage in the time spent on TRE. He said to the team to learn to dps. I then explained I had started my character the day before and was still lacking in upgrades yet still managed to hit top 5 on the board somewhere. He eventually calmed down and apologize, explaining he was just so sick of losing so often. A few matches later we ate another loss and he gave up and went imp side, once again letting people know he was simply sick of losing.

 

Now on harby, I can't remember getting pop after pop, even in 4.0. It may be the most populated American server, but it seems pretty clear to me that the Euro's are a bit more willing to fly. That TRE Reiyn is now level 41, and her scout finally has armor pen. Her quarrel even topped the board. I definitely saw the latency impacting play, but wasn't so bad that it was too high a price to pay.

 

Some subtle trolls may choose to pretend to make such an experience a personal insult, but then, we should seek to educate those who would be misled by the troll, and then ensure we don't feed or otherwise defends the troll ... like I am feeding them right now.

 

The OP clearly was a bit rude and obnoxious - but I haven't seen a post from him in some time. Given that its mostly been a bit of debate between me, des, greetz and verain. As I've basically been using the OP as an example of just how poorly the new player experience can be, one can only assume that you're referring to me as the troll for offering the opposing view.

 

With as many alts as I have with fully maxed ships, it should be clear that I'm invested in GSF just as much as anyone here. My message hasn't differed since I originally left before 5.0 was released - that we need to improve the new player experience to bolster the dwindling GSF community, at least on harb.

Edited August 20, 2017 by SeCKSEgai