Only thing I see is a subset called the Rebel Horde not liking these changes. Everyone else seems to be onboard with most of the changes.
1 Like
With bases i’m thinking of lowering it to say 4, and then if still they generate large amounts of lag then to 1. Otherwise nearly everything is going to be class 1 which just limits creative thinking and PVP options. 
Best regards
Wise.
1 Like
bases of class 1 is way too small to be usefull.
1 Like
And why is that? Because we have been successful? Our tactics are working to prevent our base on GG from being overrun, so let’s change it to make it easier? All the other changes I listed above, were under the same circumstances.
Coincidence?
1 Like
Only because of lag.
3 Likes
@Upgrade @TacoIsland @ShankingGiraffe @SwissSteel1 and all the others…
NOTHING is set to stone yet and if I see people leaving now or mass recycle panic I can only shake my head.
So the summary for now gathering a lot of feedback.
What is going on at Friday 13th July?
-
Planets WON’T be wiped or put to lower Classes! This is a major thing, which requires wipes we are not ready to do yet. However for the next season I am considering to only have 1 PvE and PvP Class 5 planet with special missions / purpose. The rest will be 2, few Class 3. Donator planets Class 2.
-
My proposed new PvE Limits didn’t get much negative wind. So I’m going for them. While this means the HQ planets can have private structures now, my hope is that the global limits will prevent ruining them.
The Global Limits however are a major cut and I am seeking for more feedback about them now - don’t underestimate them and if you don’t know how they work, please ask.
PvP got massive feedback as expected. The change from my proposed limits so far looks like:
-
Hotspot Planets: Base Class limit of max. 3 (instead of 1) — taking still under consideration that most PvP bases are built near each other, stacking up their defense capabilities. (for the next season I am also open for more BAse block limit suggestions)
-
CV Block limit to 150 (instead of 100) — giving them a bit more health for high gravity planets
-
Hotspot Orbits: CV Class of 5 (instead of 1) — if Class 5 is a bit smoother than Class 7 it is maybe worth it.
-
Hotspot Planets + rest: 5 Faction HVs allowed (instead of 3) — 5 means that 5 alliances can battle on one planet. Increasing this to 10 for example will only allow ~2 alliances to battle at the same time on one planet (because of 25 Alliance HV limits). The problem with HVs are, they are mostly used as stationary defense system / Base additions. Limits should create decisions here for you…
-
Hotspot Orbits: max. 10 Faction and 20 Alliance CVs (instead of 2 and 5) — I don’t want to limit PvP, only abusive parking.
Is this fine for you as a first limit iteration? Or still too much?
Critical at the moment and in urgent need is the PvE overpopulation. (ships already get wiped in Strayom for no reason)
My PvP observations (except some other issues) just showing that BIG bases and lot of useless parked HVs near them needs to change.
6 Likes
Go for it!
1 Like
Can you disable minigun and cannon turrets from firing in space? If so, I would recommend doing that to cut down on lag (if they contribute to it.)
1 Like
Thanks for your feedback. It’s not meant to force players to buy them, just highlighting here more decisions.
You see I adjusted the HV limits but the main motivation behind limiting them is often comments such “and what about my miner”? etc.
Mining in its nature is PvE (player vs environment), not PvP. Hence Miners have no right to be on a PvP planet in first place in my opinion.
It is a temporary act to bring HV Miners to GG for example.
1 Like
Sure they contribute to lag, like everything else too.
I can disallow them but since it is a global thing, some PvE players won’t like that. If they have to kill SpaceDrones with rockets, they become poor fast. Only legit way would be reducing the ROF.
1 Like
Good idea I thought about before HWS 8 as well… only problem is it creates an additional playfield which is heavy for hardware CPU.
Supergates, Stargates… every time you put them in PvE people just park near them. Afraid to make any step more than needed.
Ideally we would have Tax Zones near them, not the whole playfield.
But since they are invisible and the greeting message is ignored often, the hate would be there again I guess.
3 Likes
These changes are great for the most part. I’m concerned about the CV class size restriction in hot spots mainly due to having purchased a garage ship for the purpose of pvp in those hotspots, and now I won’t be able to use it. So I have a 30mil credit paperweight that I’ll end up recycling if this change goes through. I’d love to see this change happen but I’d much rather see it happen at the start of a new season rather than mid season.
Everything else looks great though (and I’d like to see planet wipes of the class 5 to drop to 3 but I understand why you wouldn’t do that)
If you do implement the class 5 cv limits in hotspot areas, would there be any way for those of us who bought recently to receive some form of compensation?
2 Likes
For hotspot orbit like BH maybe we can make it specifically so FAction CV can be something like max 15 or even 20. Simply so if Factions are at full strength '(which is rare i know) then no-one will be limited from entering.
Everything else looks AMAAAAZING. Good work Rexxus!
1 Like
Nice, now I can cover all 6 sides of my warp sled 
1 Like
System with claim device and distance between bases doesnt work. This big base on GG - too many bases builded each within other, blocks inside blocks. And with activated claim device. Please, look at it attentively.
2 Likes
Main enemy in this game - lags and fps because of bad network code and bad optimization. Some people intended down own internet speed for obtaining benefits due to this. It’s not like a normal game. Just awful.
1 Like
My opinion is that the rules that change during the game are shit. 1. What I want to say Rex we are not cannon fodder and do not have to entertain anyone. 2. 10 bases at one point is such a joke? 3. Who invented this? 4. One base bears 42 turrets. multiply by 9 and post 378 turrets and you still want that we do not look for some tricks? And I do not really understand why our faction of the RED is constantly checked for something? Why do not they check who we attack (ACM GMT AAA? This allyan has many shortcomings and every time they get away with everything. Just now I’m talking about the situation about which Rex wrote to you in a personal killing board and the system of guilt. I did not wait for the answer. The situation with the hover sad story, too the faction of the GMC ACM used this hover back in the version of alpha 6.7.8 in all seasons, what a verdict they took out just now a very long time has passed.
My suggestion is 1. leave 5 bases for the alliance but but that they 350 meters from each other. 2. To forbid to divide large factions into small 3. OP as it is. 4 is not some prime time even there is no sense to enter it again, someone will use it.
2 Likes
I understand the issue of performance. and I think that should be priority number 1. No performance, no game.
For the limitations…
I would go down from (where it is 5) to 2 (not 1). It could just be me, structures may have multiple functions and it is hard to combine all the functions into 1 structure. Example, I have a transport SV (to haul resources and let me fly in PvE space) and a fighter SV (for PvP). Same with CV. Transport/living version, vs PvP fighting version. you may want a spawning platform, etc.
Also I am trying to understand how this all works, but Let’s say I can only have one on planet, I could have a transport SV on planet, that would let me fly into orbit where I have my fighter SV. But if limits are also 1 in orbit, I cannot be there with 2 SVs at the same time. with 2 you can be a lot more flexible…
1 Like
Hey Loopsyi, glad to see you are on the forums 
I just wantto clear up some things for you
I’m not sure what this means but i think PVP in general is very fun and we in GMC/AAA/ACM enjoy fighting you guys I enjoyed fighting you in that Mauruder over on your spawn pad earlier. It was a fun fight.
It’s better this way as before it was 3 each so we ended up with about 15 bases from 5 different factions still in very smart positions and very close so easy to defend. Now without the RED/GREEN barriers it is harder to defend a base as you can be attacked from all directions. Our base was planned to deal with that situation
Once again though the base is made to cover all points so you’ll never have all turrets firing at you at the same time (Not unless you charge in with an SV into the middle, then you’ll have most (still not all) turrets firing at you.
We have been checked multiple times and have lost ships when they have been found to be breaking rules. We make no excuses for that, they shouldnt have been spawned in the first place and we (i can only speak for GMC) have been using our ‘matilda’ design for most seasons so we’re in a pretty good position anyways, we haven’t used the old ‘sad story’ style design for a while.
I promise you this is not true my good Sir We have had several conversations with Rexxus regarding multiple issues he has bought to us, but we always try to respond positively (sometimes we can be defensive) and correct any problems as soon as we are messaged by Rexxus.
I don’t remember a single GMC ‘sad story’ design from 7 or 8. 6 it was used, and multiple times it was checked and claimed to be fine, now recently the rule seems to have changed or become more strict/enforced and i’m perfectly happy with that, it makes fighting fairer and easier for both sides
I think we should see how 5 bases do without a minimum distance first, let’s not go too far It’ll be fun to see how we build a smaller star fort
Agreed!
Agreed! :))
Not sure what you mean by this one.
Anyways best regards Loopsyi, and a big shoutout to Russia for hosting an OUTSTANDING world-cup also! 
Best regards
Wise
1 Like
Dragon Teeth are legit base defenses; I don’t know who in their right mind would think otherwise.
I think the ones complaining are the ones who find it easier for a law change rather then getting off their lazy behinds and taking it by force like their supposed to.
The ones asking for a ban on dragon teeth remind me of some crooked lobbyist asking for a law change for special ‘corrupt treatment’ rather then competing fairly in the free market.
4 Likes