test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

An end to the argument about faction-agnostic content

13

Comments

  • marty123#3757 marty123 Member Posts: 670 Arc User
    It’s in the early stages of forming the Galactic Union we see in the 28th century
  • baddmoonrizinbaddmoonrizin Member Posts: 10,247 Community Moderator
    That's enough.
    GrWzQke.png
    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
    ----> Contact Customer Support <----
    Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
    Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
    Want the latest information on Star Trek Online?
    Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
  • thevampinatorthevampinator Member Posts: 637 Arc User
    It would be intersting to see more explored in how the klingon empire and romulan republic join as members of the Federation.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    It would be intersting to see more explored in how the klingon empire and romulan republic join as members of the Federation.
    What isn't explored is what's going on inside the Empire to make this look like a good idea.
    Well we haven't gotten to that point in the story yet.
    Or more specifically, what isn't. Like why there's no domestic opposition and nobody's trying to fill those seats the Iconian emptied in the Klingon High Council.
    Almost certainly replaced within a day by whoever was next in line in their house.
    Clearly, the Empire is in bad shape and rotting from within. the lack of anyone having enough spine to say "I'm not part of Starfleet and I'm not a citizen of the Federation" indicates a significant loss of identity and will to live.
    that's not how it works when Orions are involved. Orions just sneakily swipe your stuff if they don't like you and only argue with you if they need to.
    As for the Republic, how much of a 'republic' is it when the only leader is D'Tan? Isn't that more or less like a Comrade Tito situation? or perhaps more like North Korea, aka the "People's Democratic Republic of North Korea". When are they going to hold elections for their democracy, or is the "Romulan Republic" merely a statelet supported by Mercenaries to the other two powers, prostituting its fighting men and women in exchange for aid packets? Will they ever again have more of an identity than refugees begging for help? Will they ever be more than an idealists' autocracy? Perpetual Clients? (of course, like the panamanian dictatorships of the 20th century, it's good because they're the Federation's clients.)
    Given that D'tan practically worships Spock... His long term plan is probably to join the Federation, and the Republic is a transitional phase while his people get used to working with the Feds.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • thevampinatorthevampinator Member Posts: 637 Arc User
    edited December 2018
    The Romulan Republic is more of a democratic state and as for why D'tan is in charge hes the founder. He might not have much of the decision making other the military and being the main ambassador for the republic. The republic also has a senate but its not an imperial senate like the romulan star empire. The Star Empire is extremely imperialistic in the way they don't care at all for their people beyond them following the leaderships orders leaderships miltary and laws least you end up getting disappeared in a way this is also how the Terran Empire operates.They are far more genocidal and will mass murder billions of people that goes against their ideology of tyranny and conquest and go against the terran empire dear leaders wishes; Given what Sela on purpose overlooked I'm sure she knew a lot about what the tal shiar were doing to their own people but didn't know about the iconians and warcrimes Hakeev committed that led to Hobus. She did know the talshiar were doing a lot of bad to their people the tal shiar and she openly supported it while denying it.

    Romulan star empire is an oppressive state, the Star Republic is not before the destruction of the romulan homeworld they oppressed their people with the tal shiar who would make people disappear most likely experimenting on them or killing them and their families never seeing them again just for having ideals like the federation has or against goes against star empire doctrine. Back in Archers time they were wanting to expand into the area where the federation would form, and their actions played a huge part into the reason why the federation exists. At this time the Romulans wanted to reunify or maybe reclaim Vulcan and expand the empire but their actions would be found out forcing the romulans to attack once they found out the four races were uniting against them tried to stop it but the coalition won the war and because they couldn't defeat the coalition they retreated into isolation till the time where they can strike and they might have been behind the T'Kvuma War seen in discovery.

    The Klingon Empire had a misguided views about the federation fearing it would take away their cultural identity and oppress them. Given the Romulan and Klingon Alliance seen later in tos I can imagine they have had a lot of influence within the Klingon empire at the time of discovery and maybe just maybe at the time of enterprise. The Klingons know about the augnments the only logical assumption where they could have gotten that information was from the Romulans as they had spies on vulcan. At the time the Klingons most likely didn't know the true motivations of the romulans they would not find that out till the events of khitomer strike.
    When the alliance is formed between the Klingon Empire and Federation the Romulans would sure not have been much happy about it and I believe it might be the main reason why they attacked Khitomer in a retaliatory strike of vengeance against the world as it represented the klingon and federation peace alliance threatening any future plans of taking over that area of space and reclaiming Vulcan. So I think the Romulans have been buying their time till the time they would be able to strike and completely destroy the federation.
    Post edited by thevampinator on
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    See, what y'all don't seem to understand, is that this is about the "Good" imperialism of the UFP. The whole 'galactic alliance' schtick is about how the Federation's civilizing the savages and making them conform. it's like 19th century pro-imperialist literature, but with ray guns and space-ships, where the only people who don't want to be absorbed/conquered are bad people who it's just fine to kill by the job lot because it's perfectly a-oh-kay to burn the village in order to save it from the evils of its own culture, traditions, and identity.

    and anyone who objects is obviously and objectively some combination of evil and crazy in the setting Cryptic has constructed.
    Except it's nothing like this because all the species within the Federation get to keep their planetary sovereignty from each other, keep cultural practices that the others don't necessarily approve of, and generally don't have to change anything about how they operate outside of a few high level rules like "no cash, no slavery, and we'll come to your aid if attacked".

    Hell, the Federation lets the Vulcans perform Kal-ie-fee, a literal fight to death, as part of their pon farr rituals. Same thing with Andorians and their Ushaan rituals. Klingons would totally get to keep all their crazy death fights, rite of successions, rite of ascensions, etc. etc.

    The Federation doesn't give two flips about it.
    Yeah, unless one party doesn't WANT to fight a duel to the death. Which, let's face it... is kinda the Klingon way. And like Ezri said, Klingons spend more time boasting about honor than living it. Getting stabbed to death by a drunken Klingon in a bar because he mistook you for someone else? THAT is the sort of practice that Klingons will have to stop if they joint he Federation. Actual duels to the death with oversight and arbitration are not.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • oldravenman3025oldravenman3025 Member Posts: 1,892 Arc User
    They really have done a really good job, and do have to thank them for it, for making rich storylines. But I think a lot of players would like to see exploration true exploration. New homebrewed species first contact like stuff. The galaxy is a very huge place, and there is a lot they can do with it. I think its high time we go back to the true purpose of Star Trek Exploration. Less Combat focus, they can still do combat but put it on a backburner. The Alliance and all the factions need time to recover a joint exploration mission effort to try and expand the alliances influence could be something they could work into the storyline.
    A Joint Alliance Five Year Mission, exploring systems in deep space and in the existing known space at the very edges.

    They tried that with Sunrise and the Lukari and Kentari, but the majority of players prefer the pew pew pew.

    That's the problem with suggestions for changes in direction (exploration), re-vamping PVP, adding new "full" factions, adding new faction episodes. Cryptic has tried all of that, and based on the money they made from it they know the minority that wants it won't spend enough to make it profitable.

    I probably sound like a broken record (an expression that finally makes sense to young people again :) ) but even though these are nice ideas and I support them in an ideal world, Cryptic doesn't live in that world. They have to focus on what the majority will pay for.


    The reason players prefer "pew,pew" over anything else is because "pew, pew" is where the resources are. And resource gathering (i.e. The Grind) is THE endgame, even for paying players. This game is built around the Asian model of grindfest MMOs (no surprise there, PWE is a Chinese company after all. And the Asian model is a proven and successful model). And there is little to no "RPG" element to it.

    Cryptic continued to throw us a few really tasty bones here and there over the years. But it's to the point where the business model and spreadsheets evidently demand a narrower focus and more bang for the buck. Hence, the loss of episodic and single player content, and more focus on PvE queues, gamble boxes, and enticements to grind with event after event, sale after sale. Money and metrics is the name of the game.

    It's been my understanding that Cryptic is running on a very small team right now, even for a tiny development studio. So, I think patrickngo may be right, for the most part. That might seem like a good idea, considering the narrower focus. But when you have a playerbase that is used to having their cake, and eating it too, you WILL get some ill-will and you WILL lose a few old timers who don't stop and consider WHY Cryptic/PWE are doing these things. Personally, I might not like it. But I do understand that sometimes things need to be made manageable (at least for the short term and to account for the needs of the company). Because I rather have the game continue to run and be active, instead of going the way of the dodo. It's just a matter of being patient, and keep giving feedback that shows the developers and suits that players are still interested in more in-depth content, when things pick back up.
  • roguealltrekroguealltrek Member Posts: 179 Arc User
    They really have done a really good job, and do have to thank them for it, for making rich storylines. But I think a lot of players would like to see exploration true exploration. New homebrewed species first contact like stuff. The galaxy is a very huge place, and there is a lot they can do with it. I think its high time we go back to the true purpose of Star Trek Exploration. Less Combat focus, they can still do combat but put it on a backburner. The Alliance and all the factions need time to recover a joint exploration mission effort to try and expand the alliances influence could be something they could work into the storyline.
    A Joint Alliance Five Year Mission, exploring systems in deep space and in the existing known space at the very edges.

    They tried that with Sunrise and the Lukari and Kentari, but the majority of players prefer the pew pew pew.

    That's the problem with suggestions for changes in direction (exploration), re-vamping PVP, adding new "full" factions, adding new faction episodes. Cryptic has tried all of that, and based on the money they made from it they know the minority that wants it won't spend enough to make it profitable.

    I probably sound like a broken record (an expression that finally makes sense to young people again :) ) but even though these are nice ideas and I support them in an ideal world, Cryptic doesn't live in that world. They have to focus on what the majority will pay for.


    The reason players prefer "pew,pew" over anything else is because "pew, pew" is where the resources are. And resource gathering (i.e. The Grind) is THE endgame, even for paying players. This game is built around the Asian model of grindfest MMOs (no surprise there, PWE is a Chinese company after all. And the Asian model is a proven and successful model). And there is little to no "RPG" element to it.

    Cryptic continued to throw us a few really tasty bones here and there over the years. But it's to the point where the business model and spreadsheets evidently demand a narrower focus and more bang for the buck. Hence, the loss of episodic and single player content, and more focus on PvE queues, gamble boxes, and enticements to grind with event after event, sale after sale. Money and metrics is the name of the game.

    It's been my understanding that Cryptic is running on a very small team right now, even for a tiny development studio. So, I think patrickngo may be right, for the most part. That might seem like a good idea, considering the narrower focus. But when you have a playerbase that is used to having their cake, and eating it too, you WILL get some ill-will and you WILL lose a few old timers who don't stop and consider WHY Cryptic/PWE are doing these things. Personally, I might not like it. But I do understand that sometimes things need to be made manageable (at least for the short term and to account for the needs of the company). Because I rather have the game continue to run and be active, instead of going the way of the dodo. It's just a matter of being patient, and keep giving feedback that shows the developers and suits that players are still interested in more in-depth content, when things pick back up.

    That is if you are under the impression that things will pick up. If no one pays to gamble by opening boxes and the latest event trinket fails to entice player population spikes then rather than picking up you could have a door closing.

    At some point the lack of something new to do will drive players to move on. Only so many events can happen before they are just a face lift to the same old thing. There is only so much of new ships needed before a player comes to the conclusion they no longer need more to do the same thing in.

    Adding the few extra lines to a text box giving a nod to what the player is doing what they have with them who they are can make a little bit of content go a long way. Making one new mission for the alliance is one new mission. Make a mission that responds to the differences in a player adds several new missions as in what happens if i make a new player only this time its a Klingon or next a joined trill or a Vulcan. And each new one will need there lobi ships there lock box rewards and ect.

    Otherwise after you have had one play thru. The mission may as well say "hi im generic npc 1. Please rescue generic npc 2 from Random bad guy." Press f to continue.
    To be or not to be: B)
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    edited December 2018
    Adding the few extra lines to a text box giving a nod to what the player is doing what they have with them who they are can make a little bit of content go a long way. Making one new mission for the alliance is one new mission. Make a mission that responds to the differences in a player adds several new missions as in what happens if i make a new player only this time its a Klingon or next a joined trill or a Vulcan. And each new one will need there lobi ships there lock box rewards and ect.

    Otherwise after you have had one play thru. The mission may as well say "hi im generic npc 1. Please rescue generic npc 2 from Random bad guy." Press f to continue.
    Why should the NPCs waste time giving "nods" to the player's race when there are lives at stake? Who does that? It's like in hospital shows there's always an episode where some moron refuses treatment because the doctor is black or a woman or whatever. The audience is expected to think "what an idiot."

    While there will no doubt still be racists in the future, that kind of behavior shouldn't suddenly become standard just because the races are fictional.
  • mithrosnomoremithrosnomore Member Posts: 390 Arc User
    I did not read the entire thread so I may be repeating someone here, but this is my take...


    From a logistics standpoint, it's just easier to do things the way they are now.
    I mean, one story for everyone as opposed to three or four different stories, each (potentially) serving just a portion of the player base. They can use the mission-giver conversations and player responses to add a little faction flavoring.

    Sure, some players may split time more-or-less evenly between two, three, or four factions, but if I had to bet, I would put money on most players spending most of their time on a single character. I may be biased by personal experience here, but I truly believe it to be the case.

    But it also makes sense in the Trek Universe.


    When SW:TOR went with single stories for both factions there were two huge problems for me:
    1) As a player who's favorite classes were tech-user (trooper and BH were my two favorites), it stood out clearly that the stories were written for force-users and that tech-users were very much round pegs being forces into square holes.

    2) The entirety of Star Wars films, and the majority of every other media, revolved around a powerful evil force user leading their army against the heroes. Initially we saw this as Empire vs. Rebellion, then The Sith versus the Republic in the "prequel"s, and now a Reborn Empire against the "Resistance" in the current films.

    When you suddenly make a singular story and force the factions together, you very much gut what makes Star Wars Star Wars.

    =============

    Trek, however, is not like that. Never has been. TOS was not all Federation versus Klingons. There were episodes, certainly, but other episodes had other aliens causing trouble, while still others had the crew trying to discover a cure for a disease, encountering ancient technologies, or even dealing with internal issues.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,867 Arc User
    edited December 2018
    patrickngo wrote: »
    what they can give you, is another mindless grind for trinkets, these days on a timer with forced cut-scenes, that you do on an endless loop, where everything happens exactly the same as if you were a stereotypical Federation Starfleet Captain-because that's literally the most they're able to handle, time-deadlines are so tight, that nobody even has the spare time to part-time work something like the KDF tutorials that were added two weeks after Legacy of Romulus went live.

    Patrick, it sounds like you're suffering from MMO burnout when you're complaining about simple RPG mechanics and cut scenes. Perhaps take a break or find a new creative angle? Belittling others by saying that they just don't get it is pretty much the nadir in any reasonable exchange.

    I could just as well say to you that you do not understand the most basic principle in trek (ie. that cooperation is an innate part of sentient existence and isn't just restricted to one particular faction. See. the mutual understandings that are reached on a weekly basis. The FED's only "special" in this respect by making it a conscious part of their mission statement, but everyone has the capacity to be like them which is just to say "being able to rationally solve problems." Ie. that the Klingons and Romulans acting like FED in 2409 is a direct logical extension of the format of the IP and anything else would be patently artificial [ie. freezing these entities in molds that were appropriate in TOS, TNG, ect. to setup reconciliatory payoff in order to provide the least challenging fanservice possible, ignoring world building implications of said payoff in order to play off the emotions of an audience caught in interstitial moments of drama.])

    But that doesn't really get us anywhere because you not appreciating an argument is self-evident. Noting it doesn't support said argument, it only describes it. Thus, you have to move on in providing evidence and reasons to rationalize a viewpoint. Ex. that the multifaction nature of STO is directly complimentary (in simple descriptive terms) to the core ethos of trek described above. It works well regardless of whether or not you personally chose to believe in its rationalizations. Where it falls off is in not maintaining a personally desired view of the KDF which (to be purely descriptive) is anachronistic to the STO time period as following the restricted moments which have defined your expectations (thus, working against the world-building movements of the IP, as well as simple narrative flow.) Ie. that Cryptic's earliest attempts to include the KDF were critically flawed, thus ensuring that simple efficiency won out (if it's important enough, you make the time as the studio once did while they were pursing the FED/KDF/ROM as separate entities playing to classic stereotypes born from moments in the series. What they have now, in simple Darwinian terms, is best because it is more competitive both in terms of simple efficiency AND narrative worldbuilding. Cryptic has the ability to vary dialog more per faction, and even this easy alternative [capable of playing up faction differences through writing] hasn't gained ground because it's not as appropriate as providing a generalized viewpoint in respect of Trek's themes as well as its wiki pages.)

    Feasibility is an important consideration, but the generalized viewpoint is also an asset which has not been replaced even by alternatives within the same cost limit that could play more to your expectations for how the ROM and KDF should be (ie. writing choices). It simply isn't as compelling (generally) to play KDF/DOM/ROM characters that are locked to their characterizations from transitory moments of drama in old episodes, leading up to reconciliation that we're playing through the broad consequences of now. This is what a post-TNG Star Trek game should be (in Darwinian terms.)
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • mithrosnomoremithrosnomore Member Posts: 390 Arc User
    Stupid forum ate my post.

    Anyway, what I had said was I didn't read the entire thread so I may be repeating someone, but here's my take...

    In SW:TOR I thought that going to a single story was a mess on two fronts.

    The first issue was force users versus tech users. The story was clearly aimed at force users and forcing tech users into them was weak. They were forcing round pegs into square holes all over the place and it didn't do their story any favors.

    The second was the nature of what we have seen in terms of Star Wars itself; The first three films had the Empire fighting the Rebellion. The prequels came along and had a Sith Lord trying to undermine the Republic. Then we have the current films and the Reborn Empire is fighting the Resistance.

    This general dynamic is not limited to the films, either. Cartoons, comics, and novels have all heavily featured that same dynamic. That same "Empire versus Republic/Rebellion/Resistance" thing in some form or another.


    Star Trek was never like that.

    Sure the Klingons were the most frequently seen enemy in TOS, but they were still only in a handful of episodes. Most of the episodes had the crew dealing with things that had nothing to do with Klingons or even Romulans.

    By the time TNG rolled around the Klingons were not even really enemies of the Federation.

    So yeah, in Star Trek this is sort of where everything was going.

    The fact that it makes logistical sense in the real world is a bonus.

    I would wager that most players spend the majority of their time playing a single faction if not a single toon, so it can be difficult to justify spending money creating content that many players may never see.

    Bringing the factions together in the game, in some ways if not every way, allows the developers to focus on more and better* content for everyone.



    * I recently replayed a couple of missions and wondered why my Captain was such an idiot (did you realize that the entire temporal war arc was entirely the fault of your Captain talking too much and disregarding operational security?), but not every writing effort will be a home run, just as not every mission or new ship or what have you might be everyone's cup of tea.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,867 Arc User
    edited December 2018
    * I recently replayed a couple of missions and wondered why my Captain was such an idiot (did you realize that the entire temporal war arc was entirely the fault of your Captain talking too much and disregarding operational security?), but not every writing effort will be a home run, just as not every mission or new ship or what have you might be everyone's cup of tea.

    Assuming of course that writing has to play your character as infallible at all times. ;)

    I personally liked this angle of the Temporal Cold War as being facilitated by small moments at a critical time in history (ie. the Iconian War) which gave antagonists deep personal motivations and portrayed the as less than perfect in very human terms. As players, we're left to consider the reasons why we're on our side more than if the situation was reversed (as it usually is in easy sci-fi drama) and where I'd fault the writing there is in not playing up this angle through the arc in compliment to its setup (ex. have a mission where someone tries to recruit the player to Noye's side with an argument based on the apparent lack of personal stakes and motivations summarized to "stop the bad guys" [though I would pull a twist and given the player a temporal moment like Noye's had, with the player ultimately rejecting the decision the villain had made. Ie. don't change the setup here. Run with it!])
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • roguealltrekroguealltrek Member Posts: 179 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    Adding the few extra lines to a text box giving a nod to what the player is doing what they have with them who they are can make a little bit of content go a long way. Making one new mission for the alliance is one new mission. Make a mission that responds to the differences in a player adds several new missions as in what happens if i make a new player only this time its a Klingon or next a joined trill or a Vulcan. And each new one will need there lobi ships there lock box rewards and ect.

    Otherwise after you have had one play thru. The mission may as well say "hi im generic npc 1. Please rescue generic npc 2 from Random bad guy." Press f to continue.
    Why should the NPCs waste time giving "nods" to the player's race when there are lives at stake? Who does that? It's like in hospital shows there's always an episode where some moron refuses treatment because the doctor is black or a woman or whatever. The audience is expected to think "what an idiot."

    While there will no doubt still be racists in the future, that kind of behavior shouldn't suddenly become standard just because the races are fictional.

    Racist? How in the world did you come up with it being racist to acknowledge a culture and its differences in star trek to be racist. I mean is that all you managed to get out of my post?

    Every mission in this game will always start at one place for everyone, and end at the same place for everyone.
    That is not ever going to change all i was pointing out was the possibility that placing in a few different lines in missions would better serve the game. As opposed to rails and no change what so ever.

    Every player in this game is either federation or kilingon there is 2 possible tags to vary a text. Each faction has 3 types of players Tac Eng and sci. there is 3 more to base a change on. And there is only so many playable races in the game. The faction the race and the profession are all hard coded to a player it is not a out of this world ideal to provide some changes based on this.

    And for any one screaming cryptic cant do this to little a time table, and cant put in the effort, and not cost effective. Create 2 discovery players one of a vulcan and one of any other race and play the start of the game with them. There are differences with in the missions. They amount to no changing in the approved story and you start and end at the same place as everyone but the experience is different, and that difference is what can count.

    Or maybe i'm just a simpleton and according to this person a raciest over the ideal of acknowledging a cultural difference. You can still have your faction agnostic missions and retain diversity at the same time but i'm just blowing smoke up your skirts it would seam.
    To be or not to be: B)
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    Adding the few extra lines to a text box giving a nod to what the player is doing what they have with them who they are can make a little bit of content go a long way. Making one new mission for the alliance is one new mission. Make a mission that responds to the differences in a player adds several new missions as in what happens if i make a new player only this time its a Klingon or next a joined trill or a Vulcan. And each new one will need there lobi ships there lock box rewards and ect.

    Otherwise after you have had one play thru. The mission may as well say "hi im generic npc 1. Please rescue generic npc 2 from Random bad guy." Press f to continue.
    Why should the NPCs waste time giving "nods" to the player's race when there are lives at stake? Who does that? It's like in hospital shows there's always an episode where some moron refuses treatment because the doctor is black or a woman or whatever. The audience is expected to think "what an idiot."

    While there will no doubt still be racists in the future, that kind of behavior shouldn't suddenly become standard just because the races are fictional.

    Racist? How in the world did you come up with it being racist to acknowledge a culture and its differences in star trek to be racist. I mean is that all you managed to get out of my post?
    You didn't answer the question. Why should "generic NPC 1" acknowledge the player's race (or indeed any other personal attribute) before asking them to rescue "generic NPC 2?"
This discussion has been closed.