SHRAPNEL
Early Access Feedback Survey Report
March 2026 — 147 Responses
147 Responses Launch window 7.5/10 Overall Score Mean · Median 8 3.93/5 Combat Feel Positive lean 3.69/5 Match Pace Lowest rated
Valdacha Intel: Your reports were clear, consistent, and actionable.
We reviewed the feedback as a development team and deployed targeted fixes. This is the cycle: you report, we correct, you validate in the Sacrifice Zone.
Technical / Performance and Matchmaking
You reported instability, long waits, and performance degradation across matches.
Dev response: We fixed an issue that caused shaders to compile multiple times, reducing performance for all players in a match. This issue also affected matchmaking times. Movement Felt Off
You reported inconsistent movement flow, snagging, and interruptions in traversal.
Dev response: We are actively improving vaulting and mantling. We also made multiple level collision adjustments to reduce movement snags across the environment.
Gunfights Felt Inconsistent
You reported engagements that felt unpredictable and variable ttk.
Dev response: Overall in-match performance improvements should make gunfights feel more predictable. Weapons have also been tuned to improve balance.
Squads & Friends Play
You reported: Squad play and coordinated team matchmaking are needed.
Dev response: Squad and team matchmaking were already on our roadmap. Based on your feedback, we fast-tracked them in the priority order and moved the implementation forward.
Ability & Grenade Tuning
You reported: Shield strength and grenades feeling inconsistent.
Dev response: We resolved shield and grenade reliability issues and tuned shield durability and cooldown to stabilize match pacing. 1. Overview
147 survey responses collected during the Shrapnel Early Access launch window, March 2026. Data confirmed consistent across two independent file exports.
Metric
Score
Note
Overall experience (1–10)
7.5
Mean 7.5 · Median 8
Objective clarity (1–5)
4.3
Loadout clarity (1–5)
4.3
Combat feel (1–5)
3.9
Fairness (1–5)
3.9
Match pace (1–5)
3.7
Lowest rated
Players rated their overall experience on a 1–10 scale. 72% of responses land at 7 or above. The mode rating was 10 (35 respondents). Objective and loadout clarity both score above 4.25, confirming the core loop communicates well. Match pace at 3.69/5 is the clear outlier — open-text responses cite slow early game before 300 Sigma is available on the map.
2. Frustrations & Enjoyment
Respondents selected all applicable items from each list. Multiple selections allowed per respondent.
2.1 Frustrating Moments
Frustrating moment
Count
% of resp.
Technical / performance issues
59
40%
Movement felt off
56
38%
Gunfights felt inconsistent
48
33%
Confusing objectives
42
29%
Matchmaking issues
41
28%
Ability balance
38
26%
Dying too fast
32
22%
Hard to find action
29
20%
Matches felt too long
28
19%
Hard to understand UI/HUD
20
14%
Other
13
9%
2.2 What Players Enjoyed Most
Enjoyed most
Count
% of resp.
Gunplay
66
45%
Operators / Abilities
54
37%
Map Design
50
34%
Atmosphere / World
50
34%
Stealing enemy Sigma
48
33%
Objective / Mode
47
32%
Team play
46
31%
Progression / Rewards
39
27%
Movement
42
29%
Other
7
5%
3. Player Profile
3.1 Matches Played
Matches played
Respondents
1–5 matches
36 (25%)
5–10 matches
33 (23%)
10–20 matches
37 (25%)
20+ matches
37 (25%)
3.2 Preferred Playstyle
Playstyle
Count
% of resp.
Aggressor — pushes the fight at key objective locations
52
35%
Collector — focuses on collecting and depositing Sigma
42
29%
Hunter — tracks and eliminates other players
28
19%
Defender — defends collected Sigma at their Team's grav sync
21
14%
3.3 Ability Preference
Ability
Count
% of resp.
Skip Space (Swan)
73
50%
Kinetic Pulse (Index)
70
48%
Near-even split — no dominant ability. Qualitative responses suggest Skip Space (Swan) is preferred by Aggressors while Kinetic Pulse (Index) skews toward Collectors and Defenders.
3.4 Favorite Weapon
Weapon
Count
% of resp.
Assault Rifle — Mr84 Special
60
41%
SMG — Type 50
41
28%
Shotgun — CSG5 Doorbreaker
31
21%
Revolver — Type 42
10
7%
4. Feature Priorities & Player Background
4.1 Most Anticipated Upcoming Features
Upcoming feature
Votes
% of resp.
New Weapon
49
33%
Team Matchmaking
48
33%
New Operator
28
19%
Voice Chat
21
14%
New Weapon and Team Matchmaking are essentially tied. Both reflect the same underlying gap: content depth and social play are the primary retention concerns among current players.
4.2 Other Shooters Played
Other shooters played
Count
% of resp.
COD
63
43%
Battlefield 6
62
42%
Other
58
39%
Apex Legends
49
33%
Valorant
38
26%
The Finals
28
19%
Marathon
19
13%
The respondent pool skews toward experienced FPS players. COD and Battlefield are the most common concurrent titles, indicating a playerbase familiar with high-fidelity competitive shooters.
5. Qualitative Highlights
Themes surfaced from open-text responses that go beyond the quantitative data.
Theme
Detail
Server lag masking gameplay
Many players rating movement or gunfights negatively are experiencing high-ping de-sync. EU and AU players report 200+ ms latency — fixing servers will organically lift several other scores.
Grenade visibility gap
Multiple players request directional on-screen indicators for incoming grenades. Described as "unpredictable in a bad way."
Enemy contrast insufficient
Hard to spot enemies against the environment despite red nametags. A faint silhouette or contrast boost is a common request.
Skip Space dominance in 4v4
Swan's fast-flanking ability frustrates players in small lobbies. Some request phased zone unlocks to limit early-game flanking.
Early game feels slow
Matches feel pointless before 300 Sigma is available. A ramp-up mechanic or earlier objective pressure is suggested.
Team communication gaps
10-second respawn window not used for coordination. Players want in-match voice chat or pre-round communication.