I have played many, many MMORPGs and all of them can be played (almost) completely solo. Ok, they can be attempted completely solo is a better way to put it. When the next mission in the series is designed to be very difficult for five players, trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else, but you can try it solo. Been a while since I played WoW but even there, the last time I played, you could even attempt a dungeon alone.
The multiplayer in MMO does not, and has not ever, meant that the game requires multiple players teamed up and playing together. In fact, the earliest MMOs didn't even have an option for team play, you could get some friends to work together to take on a difficult task but only the one(s) needing that task got any credit for anything, and it wasn't a team in a game sense, just a group of people in the same area who happened to be fighting the same mob at the same time (an if someone other than the person needing it actually landed the killing blow, you had to come back and try again). Multi-player is just a short form of saying multiple players and is nothing more than a way of designating a game where multiple players are all playing the same game at the same time and can interact with each other within the game. It is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team.
I have played many, many MMORPGs and all of them can be played (almost) completely solo. Ok, they can be attempted completely solo is a better way to put it. When the next mission in the series is designed to be very difficult for five players, trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else, but you can try it solo. Been a while since I played WoW but even there, the last time I played, you could even attempt a dungeon alone.
The multiplayer in MMO does not, and has not ever, meant that the game requires multiple players teamed up and playing together. In fact, the earliest MMOs didn't even have an option for team play, you could get some friends to work together to take on a difficult task but only the one(s) needing that task got any credit for anything, and it wasn't a team in a game sense, just a group of people in the same area who happened to be fighting the same mob at the same time (an if someone other than the person needing it actually landed the killing blow, you had to come back and try again). Multi-player is just a short form of saying multiple players and is nothing more than a way of designating a game where multiple players are all playing the same game at the same time and can interact with each other within the game. It is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team.
isn't your first paragraph contradicting the second one?
"is designed to be very difficult for five players, trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else, but you can try it solo."
is really the opposite of
"Multi-player is just a short form of saying multiple players and is nothing more than a way of designating a game where multiple players are all playing the same game at the same time and can interact with each other within the game. It is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team."
top part says it is vital to have a group cooperating to complete content and the lower part says it is just optional.
Also, don't know how you quested in WoW, but 90% of the quests are solo quests and only have a multiplayer option...like STO, and any other MMORPG.
Don't know why everybody has to come up now with their own definition of what an MMO is, you were very creative and named a game to support your argument that existed before the term existed, I assume it was Ultima Online. Which later on had grouping anyway and there weren't really "quests" to begin with.
I have played many, many MMORPGs and all of them can be played (almost) completely solo. Ok, they can be attempted completely solo is a better way to put it. When the next mission in the series is designed to be very difficult for five players, trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else, but you can try it solo. Been a while since I played WoW but even there, the last time I played, you could even attempt a dungeon alone.
Right. That's the proper way to encourage cooperation, by providing challenges that are too great for players to overcome alone. Players can try things alone but won't necessarily get far, so they go back and try again with a few buddies.
As opposed to the Cryptic way, where you need X players to start something, but when the mission is actually going you find its often trivially easy to do alone, sometimes even completely auto-win. And the inevitable thought is, "why did I have to wait in queue for 30 minutes for this?"
To say nothing of actually requiring 5 players just to talk to an administrative NPC.
Yes, you should be able to start a fleet with just one player...as long as it came with a disclaimer you had to accept, saying the fleet holdings are designed for large groups and you're not allowed to complain it's "too expensive" to do it alone.
Do you realize how many storage fleets this would produce?
Yes, you should be able to start a fleet with just one player...
why? what would be the reasoning for it? "player demand" certainly isn't one, since you can have a solo fleet anyway already.
it definately goes against the MMO aspect of this MMORPG. the question is: "does a (build in) solo fleet feature make any sense in an MMORPG?" if your answer to that is "yes" you are besically asking for a single player Star Trek themed RPG...that is in fact a nice idea for a game, but it ain't what STO is, or is supposed to be.
Why not? What purpose does it serve to require players to jump through hoops to create a fleet?
Because this is an MMORPG, that is supposed to be enjoyed and played with other people? And a fleet is by its very definition an effort of many people coming together to do something a single person can't do or isn't suppoed to do? And giving an easy option to create a "fleet" (not really a fleet then) would completely contradict the very idea of an MMORPG?
I mean it really can't be too hard to comprehend that if you give single player options for EVERYTHING in the game, the game is no longer an MMORPG.
Asking for a single player fleet option in STO is like asking for a trailer hook on your lamborghini. You can probably have one, but you are not at all supposed to tow something with it.
just sayin though, you answered my question with a question (to avoid to give a comprehensive reason for your opinion, I assume) that was already answered in the other 2 sentences I wrote below my question.
As you're putting it as a question, I'll give my perspective accordingly: No, it's not a multiplayer game. It's a game which allows for cooperative play, and offers enticements to that end to create said community feel (fleets) But IMO it's not a multiplayer game, because the storyline content is all single player. There's not one levelling mission which requires cooperative play. Some, such as on Kobalistan, are definitely easier with other players partnering up, but they're not an essential requirement to playing the mission, and the mission isn't loaded as an instance for those two (or more) players.
On a personal level, I'm not really one for PvP, but I can understand how some may want to test/show off their build against another player rather than an AI-Controlled NPC. In that regard, I think PvP should be better balanced, and available to all players on all levels, but only on a level-appropriate matching, and I think that would be enjoyable (for some). Same with the queues. That's not storyline-mandated stuff, but Endgame shenanigans.
They went with the MMORPG format, because it fits the concept, but rather than saying it is a multi-player game, I would say that it is a game with multiple players playing simultaneously, rather than cooperatively, and IMO, it is the in-game level of cooperation which defines something as 'multiplayer' or not, not just the title which can be applied to it
Fair enough, the story is actually single player driven, though not exclusive to single player. But your last paragraph is literally just semantics.
"I would say that it is a game with multiple players playing simultaneously"
With that definition for a multiplayer game with single player options, there literally would not be a single MMO(RPG) out there that isn't that way. Every MMORPG has parts that are doable as a single player (or even intended to be done solo), they are still without a question MMORPGs and follow basic gameplay rules of an MMORPG. In other words, your definition does not exclude STO out of a list of MMORPGs, your definitions fits them all anyway.
Absolutely it's a matter of semantics What I'm saying, is that STO is a single player game (as evidenced by the mission content) which allows for cooperative play, either at particular times, or in specific Endgame content, rather than being a multiplayer game which requires cooperative play on all missions.
The term MMORPG can fit, but only as a loose catch-all for the general type of game, rather than a true description of the content
Again, name another MMORPG that has NO content that is doable alone. Your definition, which I called semantics, applies to each and every game out there labeled an MMORPG. There simply is no MMORPG that absoultely requires you to do each and every aspekt of the game, especially story, in a group.
I don't need to name another game, because we're not twlking about other gwmes, we're talking about this game. (I also don't play any other such games, so I can't speak from experience, and won't just pull names out my aft-shuttlebay to satisfy a misleading question.
As I said in my edit, it's the difference between 'multiplayer' and 'multiple players'. STO has multiple players, of a game which the mission content is all single-player, but has some instances allowing cooperative play. IMO, a multiplayer game, would require several players to be partnering up on missions all the time, as in, you and I decide to play Stop The Signal together in a private instance. That's multiplayer. Where if you happen to see Kek running round Kobalistan blasting on fools, so decide to follow him (because Ellie Flores has a nice aft-shuttlebay) and it makes the level easier for us both to complete, that's multiple players.
I guess it depends on one's understanding of what an MMORPG is, and how the industry would actually define the term to mean Personally, I understand it to mean multiplayer requirements, rather than just multiple players. Then again, I'm not a big gamer, so I may be misunderstanding the term, in which case, feel free to take my opinion with a pinch of salt
I guess not needing to name examples is quite convenient in debates...your opinion is above facts after all when you can make such convincing arguments and not at all use semantic maneuvers like: "the difference between 'multiplayer' and 'multiple players'", (/sarcasm)
"I guess it depends on one's understanding of what an MMORPG is..." yes, so you may not know it, but words have meanings attached to them, so people can communicate and understand each other.
"so I may be misunderstanding the term" ... obviously
Actually, you're both wrong. MMORPG stands for Many Men Online Role Playing Girls. :P Okay, LOL, as you were.
Kek is All Man; even the Borg are unable to resist his Masculine Charm
Thinking about it, only 3 of my 10 playable characters are female, although on the whole, my boffs have tended to be female
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
My last sentence says it all. Nothing in what I said is a contradiction.
saying: "trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else" is basically the opposite to saying: "It (multiplayer) is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team."
first you say it is fruitless to do it alone, because it is designed to be too hard for one person alone...in other words: designed for multiplayer. Then you say it is not a designation that it must be played in a team...
But if it is desgined to be too hard for single player, it is by default a multiplayer mission, which means it is designed as a multiplayer mission, which means the term "multiplayer" very much means that it shouldn't be done alone.
first you aknowledge that game design specifically for groups exists (multiplayer) and should exist, then you say that it isn't an indicator that something is specifically made for a group of people. That very much is a contradiction.
I have played many, many MMORPGs and all of them can be played (almost) completely solo. Ok, they can be attempted completely solo is a better way to put it. When the next mission in the series is designed to be very difficult for five players, trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else, but you can try it solo. Been a while since I played WoW but even there, the last time I played, you could even attempt a dungeon alone.
Right. That's the proper way to encourage cooperation, by providing challenges that are too great for players to overcome alone. Players can try things alone but won't necessarily get far, so they go back and try again with a few buddies.
As opposed to the Cryptic way, where you need X players to start something, but when the mission is actually going you find its often trivially easy to do alone, sometimes even completely auto-win. And the inevitable thought is, "why did I have to wait in queue for 30 minutes for this?"
To say nothing of actually requiring 5 players just to talk to an administrative NPC.
ahh, the fact that you can't come up with an answer to that speaks volumes. You think ISA was also a 59 second matter? You do realize that there was a whole new tier of ships and 10 new levels inbetween? Also, the fail mechanic got removed because of player QQing 24/7 about the difficulty. ISA is basically the equivalent of going into Black Temple raid with your Lvl 100 death knight in WoW. It is not suppoed to be a challenge anymore, unless you are really underpowered.
The streams of tears and forum posts about how difficult certain missions were, if they actually implemented a way to do most group content alone, would destroy the internetz, 4 realz. Imagine a bunch of new players trying even somethig like ISA alone.
It is really mind boggling how people play a MMORPG with such an aversion to multiplayer content.
My last sentence says it all. Nothing in what I said is a contradiction.
saying: "trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else" is basically the opposite to saying: "It (multiplayer) is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team."
first you say it is fruitless to do it alone, because it is designed to be too hard for one person alone...in other words: designed for multiplayer. Then you say it is not a designation that it must be played in a team...
But if it is desgined to be too hard for single player, it is by default a multiplayer mission, which means it is designed as a multiplayer mission, which means the term "multiplayer" very much means that it shouldn't be done alone.
first you aknowledge that game design specifically for groups exists (multiplayer) and should exist, then you say that it isn't an indicator that something is specifically made for a group of people. That very much is a contradiction.
I have played many, many MMORPGs and all of them can be played (almost) completely solo. Ok, they can be attempted completely solo is a better way to put it. When the next mission in the series is designed to be very difficult for five players, trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else, but you can try it solo. Been a while since I played WoW but even there, the last time I played, you could even attempt a dungeon alone.
Right. That's the proper way to encourage cooperation, by providing challenges that are too great for players to overcome alone. Players can try things alone but won't necessarily get far, so they go back and try again with a few buddies.
As opposed to the Cryptic way, where you need X players to start something, but when the mission is actually going you find its often trivially easy to do alone, sometimes even completely auto-win. And the inevitable thought is, "why did I have to wait in queue for 30 minutes for this?"
To say nothing of actually requiring 5 players just to talk to an administrative NPC.
ahh, the fact that you can't come up with an answer to that speaks volumes. You think ISA was also a 59 second matter? You do realize that there was a whole new tier of ships and 10 new levels inbetween? Also, the fail mechanic got removed because of player QQing 24/7 about the difficulty. ISA is basically the equivalent of going into Black Temple raid with your Lvl 100 death knight in WoW. It is not suppoed to be a challenge anymore, unless you are really underpowered.
The streams of tears and forum posts about how difficult certain missions were, if they actually implemented a way to do most group content alone, would destroy the internetz, 4 realz. Imagine a bunch of new players trying even somethig like ISA alone.
It is really mind boggling how people play a MMORPG with such an aversion to multiplayer content.
Complex statement.
I'd hazard a guess that most of the players, play the game 'because it's Star Trek', not because they wanted to get their MMORPG on
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
My last sentence says it all. Nothing in what I said is a contradiction.
saying: "trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else" is basically the opposite to saying: "It (multiplayer) is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team."
first you say it is fruitless to do it alone, because it is designed to be too hard for one person alone...in other words: designed for multiplayer. Then you say it is not a designation that it must be played in a team...
But if it is desgined to be too hard for single player, it is by default a multiplayer mission, which means it is designed as a multiplayer mission, which means the term "multiplayer" very much means that it shouldn't be done alone.
first you aknowledge that game design specifically for groups exists (multiplayer) and should exist, then you say that it isn't an indicator that something is specifically made for a group of people. That very much is a contradiction.
I have played many, many MMORPGs and all of them can be played (almost) completely solo. Ok, they can be attempted completely solo is a better way to put it. When the next mission in the series is designed to be very difficult for five players, trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else, but you can try it solo. Been a while since I played WoW but even there, the last time I played, you could even attempt a dungeon alone.
Right. That's the proper way to encourage cooperation, by providing challenges that are too great for players to overcome alone. Players can try things alone but won't necessarily get far, so they go back and try again with a few buddies.
As opposed to the Cryptic way, where you need X players to start something, but when the mission is actually going you find its often trivially easy to do alone, sometimes even completely auto-win. And the inevitable thought is, "why did I have to wait in queue for 30 minutes for this?"
To say nothing of actually requiring 5 players just to talk to an administrative NPC.
ahh, the fact that you can't come up with an answer to that speaks volumes. You think ISA was also a 59 second matter? You do realize that there was a whole new tier of ships and 10 new levels inbetween? Also, the fail mechanic got removed because of player QQing 24/7 about the difficulty. ISA is basically the equivalent of going into Black Temple raid with your Lvl 100 death knight in WoW. It is not suppoed to be a challenge anymore, unless you are really underpowered.
The streams of tears and forum posts about how difficult certain missions were, if they actually implemented a way to do most group content alone, would destroy the internetz, 4 realz. Imagine a bunch of new players trying even somethig like ISA alone.
It is really mind boggling how people play a MMORPG with such an aversion to multiplayer content.
You've long since stopped making any sense whatsoever, I've got better things to do.
Dranuur Colony is one reason why Solo Fleets are a very, very bad idea.
Wonder if any of those who want to go solo ever checked tribble for themselves and find out whats coming and that it will be virtually impossible for anyone doing a solo fleet anymore? sorry NOT fleets but Cryptic will make the solo fleets an extinct species...
Yeah...probably most have not started testing in Tribble. The new holding will indeed wipe out any sort of solo fleets...check it out before it is too late.
Dranuur Colony is one reason why Solo Fleets are a very, very bad idea.
Wonder if any of those who want to go solo ever checked tribble for themselves and find out whats coming and that it will be virtually impossible for anyone doing a solo fleet anymore? sorry NOT fleets but Cryptic will make the solo fleets an extinct species...
Yeah...probably most have not started testing in Tribble. The new holding will indeed wipe out any sort of solo fleets...check it out before it is too late.
I doubt many solo fleets were ever created with the intention of finishing holdings. And certainly, unless they were spending truckloads of real money to buy everything, any that were would have failed even with just the starbase.
All they really need is tier 1 to unlock provisions in the track(s) they want items from, then get invites on public service. If they even want fleet gear at all.
All they really need is tier 1 to unlock provisions in the track(s) they want items from, then get invites on public service. If they even want fleet gear at all.
True.
"Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
There are a few things I'd also like to point out about this. I've been playing online MMO's since right around the year two thousand. The main thing I have noticed in all of them, is that Fleets/Companies/Guilds, or whatever you want to call them, have the opposite effect that what they were intended to do. They remove the social function from the game. It's happened in every game I've played. By example, I started playing STO in 2012 when it went free to play, this before fleet holdings. At this time it did not matter what social zone you went to ESD, SF Academy, Drozana, Qo'nos, KDF Academy, DS9, Risa, or even Nimbus. The chats were always active and full of people. Now, only ESD is the most active chat. This is because of fleets, and people joining the "social" aspect of the game. Which only serves to form chat groups. This is reminiscent of high school and the "cligues" you'd find there. Groups of people that only hang out with each other, because the agree on most things. Which this is the social way of being, anti-social. This is what fleets become, the "social" way to be anti-social.
"It's easy to be social, when you surround yourself with those that agree with you. However, it comes with the sacrifice of intellect. There is no need for thought, as there is no challenge to it." - Me
Or
"On Earth there is no poverty, no crime, and no war. You look out the window and you see Paradise. Well, it's easy to be a saint in Paradise but the Maquis do not live in Paradise." - Benjamin Sisko
I've managed to get my FED Starbase up to Tier 3. Concentrated on getting the Dilithium Mine to Tier 3 first for all the project discounts. Working on finishing up Tier 3 for my Embassy. Most everything else is at least Tier 1. KDF is slower going, though: Tier 2 Starbase, I believe. Just got the Dilithium Mine to Tier 3.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
There are a few things I'd also like to point out about this. I've been playing online MMO's since right around the year two thousand. The main thing I have noticed in all of them, is that Fleets/Companies/Guilds, or whatever you want to call them, have the opposite effect that what they were intended to do. They remove the social function from the game. It's happened in every game I've played. By example, I started playing STO in 2012 when it went free to play, this before fleet holdings. At this time it did not matter what social zone you went to ESD, SF Academy, Drozana, Qo'nos, KDF Academy, DS9, Risa, or even Nimbus. The chats were always active and full of people. Now, only ESD is the most active chat. This is because of fleets, and people joining the "social" aspect of the game. Which only serves to form chat groups. This is reminiscent of high school and the "cligues" you'd find there. Groups of people that only hang out with each other, because the agree on most things. Which this is the social way of being, anti-social. This is what fleets become, the "social" way to be anti-social.
"It's easy to be social, when you surround yourself with those that agree with you. However, it comes with the sacrifice of intellect. There is no need for thought, as there is no challenge to it." - Me
Or
"On Earth there is no poverty, no crime, and no war. You look out the window and you see Paradise. Well, it's easy to be a saint in Paradise but the Maquis do not live in Paradise." - Benjamin Sisko
Paradise requires no thought.
Man I've seen the basic zone chat from before I joined a fleet, it's a really annoying cesspool. Whenver I forget to turn it off I regret it. After joining a fleet I feel like I can talk and listen again. Maybe the zone chatsucks because only people that suck remain there but I'd say escaping that nonsense while still talking to several people is worth more than any ingame mechanic the fleet could offer
There are a few things I'd also like to point out about this. I've been playing online MMO's since right around the year two thousand. The main thing I have noticed in all of them, is that Fleets/Companies/Guilds, or whatever you want to call them, have the opposite effect that what they were intended to do. They remove the social function from the game. It's happened in every game I've played. By example, I started playing STO in 2012 when it went free to play, this before fleet holdings. At this time it did not matter what social zone you went to ESD, SF Academy, Drozana, Qo'nos, KDF Academy, DS9, Risa, or even Nimbus. The chats were always active and full of people. Now, only ESD is the most active chat. This is because of fleets, and people joining the "social" aspect of the game. Which only serves to form chat groups. This is reminiscent of high school and the "cligues" you'd find there. Groups of people that only hang out with each other, because the agree on most things. Which this is the social way of being, anti-social. This is what fleets become, the "social" way to be anti-social.
"It's easy to be social, when you surround yourself with those that agree with you. However, it comes with the sacrifice of intellect. There is no need for thought, as there is no challenge to it." - Me
Or
"On Earth there is no poverty, no crime, and no war. You look out the window and you see Paradise. Well, it's easy to be a saint in Paradise but the Maquis do not live in Paradise." - Benjamin Sisko
Paradise requires no thought.
Man I've seen the basic zone chat from before I joined a fleet, it's a really annoying cesspool. Whenver I forget to turn it off I regret it. After joining a fleet I feel like I can talk and listen again. Maybe the zone chatsucks because only people that suck remain there but I'd say escaping that nonsense while still talking to several people is worth more than any ingame mechanic the fleet could offer
Yes, this is always something you have to deal with. Escaping isn't dealing with it. It's running away from it. I keep zone chat on at all times, though I may have chat minimized at times, depending on what I'm doing. But, keeping it on, I've caught a few thousand, or so, good conversations. Ones that have challenged me and made me go investigate the topic. It also has the added benefit of allowing me to catch the occasional question from other players.
And this right now is also only prevalent in the active chats. Which are mainly ESD and the Beta Quadrant. But, it's a simple task to overlook such things with the ignore feature, or with a mind strong enough to ignore it, without the need for that feature.
Comments
The multiplayer in MMO does not, and has not ever, meant that the game requires multiple players teamed up and playing together. In fact, the earliest MMOs didn't even have an option for team play, you could get some friends to work together to take on a difficult task but only the one(s) needing that task got any credit for anything, and it wasn't a team in a game sense, just a group of people in the same area who happened to be fighting the same mob at the same time (an if someone other than the person needing it actually landed the killing blow, you had to come back and try again). Multi-player is just a short form of saying multiple players and is nothing more than a way of designating a game where multiple players are all playing the same game at the same time and can interact with each other within the game. It is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team.
isn't your first paragraph contradicting the second one?
"is designed to be very difficult for five players, trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else, but you can try it solo."
is really the opposite of
"Multi-player is just a short form of saying multiple players and is nothing more than a way of designating a game where multiple players are all playing the same game at the same time and can interact with each other within the game. It is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team."
top part says it is vital to have a group cooperating to complete content and the lower part says it is just optional.
Also, don't know how you quested in WoW, but 90% of the quests are solo quests and only have a multiplayer option...like STO, and any other MMORPG.
Don't know why everybody has to come up now with their own definition of what an MMO is, you were very creative and named a game to support your argument that existed before the term existed, I assume it was Ultima Online. Which later on had grouping anyway and there weren't really "quests" to begin with.
As opposed to the Cryptic way, where you need X players to start something, but when the mission is actually going you find its often trivially easy to do alone, sometimes even completely auto-win. And the inevitable thought is, "why did I have to wait in queue for 30 minutes for this?"
To say nothing of actually requiring 5 players just to talk to an administrative NPC.
Kek is All Man; even the Borg are unable to resist his Masculine Charm
Thinking about it, only 3 of my 10 playable characters are female, although on the whole, my boffs have tended to be female
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
saying: "trying to do it alone is more an exercise in frustration than anything else" is basically the opposite to saying: "It (multiplayer) is not a designation that a game must be played by two or more players in a team."
first you say it is fruitless to do it alone, because it is designed to be too hard for one person alone...in other words: designed for multiplayer. Then you say it is not a designation that it must be played in a team...
But if it is desgined to be too hard for single player, it is by default a multiplayer mission, which means it is designed as a multiplayer mission, which means the term "multiplayer" very much means that it shouldn't be done alone.
first you aknowledge that game design specifically for groups exists (multiplayer) and should exist, then you say that it isn't an indicator that something is specifically made for a group of people. That very much is a contradiction.
ahh, the fact that you can't come up with an answer to that speaks volumes. You think ISA was also a 59 second matter? You do realize that there was a whole new tier of ships and 10 new levels inbetween? Also, the fail mechanic got removed because of player QQing 24/7 about the difficulty. ISA is basically the equivalent of going into Black Temple raid with your Lvl 100 death knight in WoW. It is not suppoed to be a challenge anymore, unless you are really underpowered.
The streams of tears and forum posts about how difficult certain missions were, if they actually implemented a way to do most group content alone, would destroy the internetz, 4 realz. Imagine a bunch of new players trying even somethig like ISA alone.
It is really mind boggling how people play a MMORPG with such an aversion to multiplayer content.
I'd hazard a guess that most of the players, play the game 'because it's Star Trek', not because they wanted to get their MMORPG on
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Yeah...probably most have not started testing in Tribble. The new holding will indeed wipe out any sort of solo fleets...check it out before it is too late.
Original STO beta tester.
All they really need is tier 1 to unlock provisions in the track(s) they want items from, then get invites on public service. If they even want fleet gear at all.
True.
False, as heck. At least for my Fleet (probably, false to say about my entire Armada).
My fleet: half way done with Tier 4 of the Starbase, halfway done with Tier 3 of K-13 (out of laziness on my part) and every other holding completed.
It is not money...it is perseverance and a big dose of cra-cra. LOL!
True.
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
"It's easy to be social, when you surround yourself with those that agree with you. However, it comes with the sacrifice of intellect. There is no need for thought, as there is no challenge to it." - Me
Or
"On Earth there is no poverty, no crime, and no war. You look out the window and you see Paradise. Well, it's easy to be a saint in Paradise but the Maquis do not live in Paradise." - Benjamin Sisko
Paradise requires no thought.
That's honestly pretty impressive. But you know, tier 5 of the starbase costs more than all the previous tiers combined. So, good luck.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Man I've seen the basic zone chat from before I joined a fleet, it's a really annoying cesspool. Whenver I forget to turn it off I regret it. After joining a fleet I feel like I can talk and listen again. Maybe the zone chatsucks because only people that suck remain there but I'd say escaping that nonsense while still talking to several people is worth more than any ingame mechanic the fleet could offer
Yes, this is always something you have to deal with. Escaping isn't dealing with it. It's running away from it. I keep zone chat on at all times, though I may have chat minimized at times, depending on what I'm doing. But, keeping it on, I've caught a few thousand, or so, good conversations. Ones that have challenged me and made me go investigate the topic. It also has the added benefit of allowing me to catch the occasional question from other players.
And this right now is also only prevalent in the active chats. Which are mainly ESD and the Beta Quadrant. But, it's a simple task to overlook such things with the ignore feature, or with a mind strong enough to ignore it, without the need for that feature.