test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

[PC] Peril over Pahvo!

12346

Comments

  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 5,924 Arc User
    ltminns wrote: »
    Whose talking about exploiting?
    >Intentionally avoiding most of the game's content in order to make use of a rare situation where things spawn forever in order to gain either EXP, or some other resources, far faster then you would in a typical situation in the game.
    >Whose talking about exploiting
    Literally anyone who suggests EXP should be turned on in horde mode situations. It being an exploit is why MMOs clamp down on it.
    ltminns wrote: »
    Really, someone would throw hundreds of ships away for one target?
    Who says they actually are? STO is a video game, and has video game mechanics. Gameplay =/= lore.
  • shadowfang240shadowfang240 Member Posts: 31,628 Arc User
    edited March 31
    how big was the dominion alliance fleet that attacked DS9 again? moreover, how big was the AQA fleet sent to retake DS9? and that's just star trek - hundreds of ships against one target is COMMON in sci-fi​​
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!

    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."

    How Game Devs SHOULD be interacted with:
    http://askagamedev.tumblr.com/post/157238832062/i-remember-your-52080-rule-and-it-was-an-awesome

    "Curiosity is bad! It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed...and more importantly, it makes you poor!"

    "Beware of dog. Or possibly, enhanced, psycho-addicted, cybernetically-enhanced nightstalker death-dealing dog from hell."
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.

    Stand with Star Trek: The Animated Series content for STO! #TASforSTO
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 9,095 Arc User
    Cherry picking again? Not a Lore issue, it is a stupid mechanic issue. They don't know what to do so they invent or use something out in left field and then have to neuter it in other ways.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!
    Judge Dan Haywood
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 5,924 Arc User
    edited March 31
    ltminns wrote: »
    Cherry picking again? Not a Lore issue, it is a stupid mechanic issue. They don't know what to do so they invent or use something out in left field and then have to neuter it in other ways.
    It's not a stupid mechanic, its actually a fairly good one. Many people like being able to face down tons of enemies in a horde situation.

    That doesn't mean there aren't obvious ways to exploit said mechanic, and that devs shouldn't take measures to stop said exploitation.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,546 Arc User
    edited March 31
    Who says they actually are? STO is a video game, and has video game mechanics. Gameplay =/= lore.

    Actually games work best when gameplay and lore compliment each other. Sometimes compromises are necessary but such should be taken as a fallback rather than a general rule to minimize criticisms (because regardless of how much handwaving a developer may invoke through "it's a game" the fact is there's a literal presentation which at the very least isn't acting in service of a story telling experience. The basic point there being: the TFO doesn't work as well as it could if either gameplay or story were changed to avoid the unleveraged disconnect between them [STO probably best opting for the latter. Ie. writing scenarios with greater imperative or with different villains or villain ship types which promote hording tactics. See as a counterpoint: the Hur'Q TFO's and battlezone in ViL.] If such is [hyperbolically] absolutely impossible then other scenarios which better compliment faction tactics should be selected instead [exhibiting lore through gameplay to augment the story telling. Ie. make the game function better.])
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 5,924 Arc User
    edited March 31
    Actually games work best when gameplay and lore compliment each other.
    Generally no. Gameplay is fundamentally limited by technology, while lore can be whatever you want since its just information. Making gameplay and lore compliment each other requires neutering your lore to fit the limits of gameplay which just creates a more bland and uninspired game world to play in.
    the fact is there's a literal presentation
    Except there is no literal presentation in video games, there is only an abstracted presentation. Just like in any fantasy or sci-fi universe TV show/movie, the visuals of said TV show/game are not meant to be taken at a literal face value, since they are always limited by the technology, budget, and imagination, that the producers/developers at the time have access to at the time. One should only ever take what they see as a rough approximation, and always expect it to look different in some future installment of the series as the various factors of budget, technology, and imagination, change. This applies doubly to games, where the need for fun gameplay overrides the need for lore accurate gameplay.
    The basic point there being: the TFO doesn't work as well as it could if either gameplay or story were changed to avoid the unleveraged disconnect between them [STO probably best opting for the latter. Ie. writing scenarios with greater imperative or with different villains or villain ship types which promote hording tactics. See as a counterpoint: the Hur'Q TFO's and battlezone in ViL.] If such is [hyperbolically] absolutely impossible then other scenarios which better compliment faction tactics should be selected instead [exhibiting lore through gameplay to augment the story telling. Ie. make the game function better.])
    Except it does make sense that the Terrans or Klingons would send this many ships to Pahvo, given its ability to be turned into a plant sized super-weapon akin to the Deathstar(you know, the whole reason we stopped Killy in the story missions, and the Terrans in the other Pahvo TFO)
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 9,095 Arc User
    If it's a good one and people love it, why would they they make it not do what it's supposed to do - give XP? Patrols give a varying amount of XP per ship destroyed depending on the type of ship (you know what they are supposed to do because that's what Starship Mastery is about). They also give (Argala) about 5K XP for Patrol completion.

    For TFOs they either have to give a small amount (but some) of XP per ship destroyed or a larger amount of XP for TFO completion, preferably both.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!
    Judge Dan Haywood
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 5,924 Arc User
    ltminns wrote: »
    If it's a good one and people love it, why would they they make it not do what it's supposed to do - give XP?
    Because its easily exploitable, and would allow you to level faster compared to other content, which would be bad game design if they allowed it. Same reason pretty much every other MMO I can think of does the same.
    ltminns wrote: »
    Patrols give a varying amount of XP per ship destroyed depending on the type of ship (you know what they are supposed to do because that's what Starship Mastery is about). They also give (Argala) about 5K XP for Patrol completion.
    And Patrols generally have some sort of lockout timer on them. The Argala Patrol farming works via an exploit as well. Cryptic should really change the way patrol timers are done so it triggers regardless of if you complete the patrol or not, maybe by tying it to entering the patrol in the first place, but not having the timer actually start until you leave the map? Not sure what the best way to close that loophole would be.
  • protoneousprotoneous Member Posts: 1,035 Arc User
    The Argala Patrol farming works via an exploit as well. Cryptic should really change the way patrol timers are done so it triggers regardless of if you complete the patrol or not, maybe by tying it to entering the patrol in the first place, but not having the timer actually start until you leave the map? Not sure what the best way to close that loophole would be.
    'Loophole / exploit' ? We must be living on different planets...
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 5,924 Arc User
    protoneous wrote: »
    'Loophole / exploit' ? We must be living on different planets...
    Playing the patrol, then leaving before you turn it in, order to get it to reset so you can play it again without having to wait for the 30 minute cooldown is an exploit. Period.

  • protoneousprotoneous Member Posts: 1,035 Arc User
    protoneous wrote: »
    'Loophole / exploit' ? We must be living on different planets...
    Playing the patrol, then leaving before you turn it in, order to get it to reset so you can play it again without having to wait for the 30 minute cooldown is an exploit. Period.
    Confirmed: we actually are living on different planets.
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 9,095 Arc User
    Well, when a Featured TFO is not Featured it is subject to the 30 Minute Lockout. If this leaving and reentering was deemed to be an exploit by Cryptic they would have banned people and fixed it by now. People have been talking about it for years.

    By the way, for Mastery, I finish a Patrol and do other things and let the timer reset. The last ship I was in, a Walker, it took me over 3 weeks to finish up to Tier V.

    Besides which, in the case of Argala, each round has about 5 ships that give between some 39 and 179 XP each. For simplicities sake, let's say 4 small and 1 large ship per round so 335 XP per round. For the ~5200 XP you get for Patrol completion you'd have to run almost 16 waves, or 4 incomplete runs. Doesn't seem a very efficient way of doing things to me.

    I think that this reset is not consistent. The other night I had Destroy Destructible Torpedoes for a Hard Endeavor. I did Carraya, went into Undine BZ, and Carraya again. The problem is the Republic Ships destroy the Torps too, and they DON'T count. On the second run in Carraya, I left after 4 rounds looking to find another Patrol in the Wiki. No others had Romulans. Went back in and it was still at 4/5. I ended with 18/19 Torpedoes for the night (a fail) and had to quit.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!
    Judge Dan Haywood
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,546 Arc User
    edited April 1
    Actually games work best when gameplay and lore compliment each other.
    Generally no. Gameplay is fundamentally limited by technology, while lore can be whatever you want since its just information. Making gameplay and lore compliment each other requires neutering your lore to fit the limits of gameplay which just creates a more bland and uninspired game world to play in.

    It is one of the most fundamental principles of design that one uses gameplay in ways which are complimentary to lore (ie. setting) to create an interactive experience which in some way immerses the player (per feeling) into what they're doing. The operative term you probably want to refer to is ludonarrative dissonance, you're suggesting games work best when it's total. TBH that narrows you down to the likes of Tetris. This is not a functional argument with respect to STO.

    Because of technical limitations one cannot replicate an immersive reality but this by no means whatsoever (per fallacy of the extreme, which is what your point comes down to) suggests that one cannot use different elements of a video game in ways which compliment one another. Take for an easily digestible example: combat in fantasy RPG's. Weapon choice is grounded in the available tools set by lore and so quite directly established elements of that lore without extensive lectures on why this pocket dimension happened to arrive at the mid-medieval period. Complex worldbuilding dynamics are simply conveyed through how the game works and this extends through all aspects of gameplay design. Take for example: ships in STO. They do not command like "real" starships (though that would hardly be immersive to the experience of Star Trek in other media...) but their presence in the game is used to help communicate points of lore, ie. the setting. See also. weapons, shields and combat (integrated with lore while optimized for gameplay.) When done well gameplay and story work together to build the perceived experience of the video game.

    What you state as a requirement simply seems disconnected from practices in the industry and the game we're playing now (which references lore to inform gameplay design. Remember what you said about "bland and uninspired.") I think you're simply trying to set a standard for all elements being isolated unto themselves and thus problems of integration have no place in discussion (a non-entity can't be criticized.)
    Except there is no literal presentation in video games.
    Simple correction here: the literal presentation of a video game is what is literally depicted by that game. Ie. what it directly entails. Video games themselves aren't literal but one can examine the presentation (within conceits and mechanics) and its direct effects. Ex. if a ship is seen to explode, one can infer that it has exploded. How it explodes isn't real but that state change can be inferred by what you see on screen.

    STO doesn't exist in a convenient miasma where any given action can be taken to mean whatever you want it to per convenience. See. below.
    Except it does make sense that the Terrans or Klingons would send this many ships to Pahvo, given its ability to be turned into a plant sized super-weapon akin to the Deathstar(you know, the whole reason we stopped Killy in the story missions, and the Terrans in the other Pahvo TFO)

    Except that it was very directly established by specific plot points in the Mirror of Discovery episodes that neither side was able to do this. The Terrans were unsuccessful in sending reinforcements to Pahvo (at least without taking massive losses) and the Klingon attack force consisted of those ships in the region which were accidentally transported by the original incident. They didn't have the capability to dimension hop themselves. This is important because it provided the mechanics to resolve the episode.

    The TFO's doubled back on that to continue the fighting but that at once overcomplicates and simplifies the scenario to a simple invasion. Cutting the exposition RE. Klingon origin and Terran troubles with spore drive would have arrived at the intended destination more simply. In this, the game is not using its lore effectively. It can be improved. Now lets look at the mechanics. The simplified wave structure depicts quite directly that while the Terran Empire and DSC Klingons have opted to send more ships (somehow with ease enough to supply the number) they're doing so through isolated waves aimed squarely at the most defensible position at the system. They have opted to overcome 25th century technical superiority in the same way that was demonstrated not to work in the original encounter. This doesn't demonstrate the tactics for which both sides are said to possess (and exhibited in some fashion during the MoD episodes) and undermines the appreciation of lore/setting through gameplay (ie. an integral component of effective game design.)

    These are definitely gameplay conceits but taken to the extreme of not referencing story or setting beyond nominal elements. Ie. it's not very good. To make use of the scenario to its fullest a new queue would have been required. That wasn't possible though, so this is what we have. But one can still examine the dynamics for why Peril over Pahvo doesn't work as well as other TFO's (if you're willing to maintain that there's some basis to discussion, ie. the potential for comparative analysis) in spite of being the product of forced circumstances (though that's eschewing further critical analysis about how to make better content even under limited timelines.) See: learning. The lesson here is that reskinning a TFO which originally stated as a highly generalized invasion scenario doesn't make the most of its story telling potential when applied more specifically. It thereby presents a reduced gameplay experience to one where gameplay elements and lore were more in sync (ex. Battle at Binary.)

    Go figure.

    In future the problem can be addressed by choosing queues for reskins from STO's large library which present less of a narrative disconnect with gameplay. When Cryptic designs new queues they're typically very good at weaving setting (ie. lore) into the gameplay scenario.
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 5,924 Arc User
    edited April 1
    Gameplay is limited but by absolutely no means does this mean that it cannot compliment lore through effective design. See. EVERY GAME with immersive elements. They are not wholly consistent with an immersive reality (that's an extreme benchmark to use for discussion) but by aligning gameplay mechanics with the game's lore and setting they can do more with those mechanics than taking them as pure abstractions. Ie. use gameplay to inform story telling. This is very introductory to "good" gameplay design.
    One CAN compliment the lore via the gameplay, and, if it makes for good gameplay, then do it. But in a video game, gameplay comes before everything else. Be it graphics, sound, lore, etc. One should never attempt to sacrifice better gameplay to make the gameplay more fitting with the lore, one should only meld the two when necessarily appropriate. The gameplay shouldn't be designed to fit the lore as a necessity, or as a benchmark, but only when it makes for better gameplay.
    Simple correction here: the literal presentation of a video game is what is literally depicted by that game. Ie. what it directly entails. Video games themselves aren't literal but one can examine the presentation (within conceits and mechanics) and its direct effects. Ex. if a ship is seen to explode, one can infer that it has exploded. STO doesn't exist in a convenient miasma where any given action can be taken to mean whatever you want it to per convenience.
    And this has little to do with anything about the debate at all.
    Except that it was very directly established by specific plot points in the Mirror of Discovery episodes that neither side was able to do this. The Terrans were unsuccessful in sending reinforcements to Pahvo (at least without taking massive losses) and the Klingon attack force consisted of those ships in the region which were accidentally transported by the original incident. They didn't have the capability to dimension hop themselves. This is important because it provided the mechanics to resolve the episode.

    The TFO's doubled back on that to continue the fighting but that at once overcomplicates and simplifies the scenario to a simple invasion with unnecessary technical limitations (overcoming which was simply accomplished using a hand-wave.) In this the game is not using its lore effectively but then adding the mechanics the simplified wave structure would directly suggest that while the Terran Empire and DSC Klingons have opted to send more ships they're doing so through isolated waves aimed squarely at the most defensible position at the system. This doesn't demonstrate the tactics for which both sides are said to possess and undermines the appreciation of lore/setting through gameplay.
    Except Mirror of Discovery only has us kicking Killy out. As we see in the second mission of Mirror of Discovery, her actions opened portals to the past, and the Mirror Universe, and fragments of a very large ship, aka the Charon, began falling through. These pieces, post mission, crashed on the planet, and the Terrans still in them are now attempting to take over Pahvo to turn it into a base like Killy was, leading to "Pahvo Dissension". Likewise, these same portals to the past, and the Mirror Universe, are how these Klingon and Terran forces are coming into Pahvo during the TFO. This is a direct continuation of plot points established in the episode itself that you seemed to miss despite them beating you over the head with them.

    Your second paragraph shows your inability to separate good gameplay from presentation and lore. No, it doesn't make sense that all the shield generators would be in one small spot, nor that the Klingons or Terrans would only attack that one spot, which happens to be the most defensible. However, the only other alternatives would create gameplay situations that would make the TFO impossible. Be it by either
    -Forcing the 5 players to spread across the three generators, which are more realistically spread around the planet evenly. This would create a gameplay situation that would be basically unsustainable unless everyone at all three generators was a massive DPS focus.
    -Making each generator equally spread around the planet, and trying to queue up a whole team of 5 for each one. This would mean needing to get 15 people for the TFO, which means it would never be filled, and it would mean your reward is based on the effectiveness of a team you have no part of, and can't even go assist if they need it(due to them being so far away)
    Any way to rework the TFO into a more lgocial situation would make it unplayable, hence, gameplay takes precedence over logic, and, generally speaking, no one takes what they see in-game at wholly face value, and can understand there is a separation between what we see in the TFO, and what is actually happening in the scenario.

    Also, these sorts of tactics are exactly what we see in Star Trek. Just look at "Operation Return" from Deep Space 9. Was it some complex plan full of trickery and subterfuge? Na, it was just "send a lot of ships". Even the Terran Rebellion's plan in DS9 was basically just "steal plans for better ships, build said ships, destroy the Klingon-Cardassian Alliance with said ships". Terran history is almost entirely comprised of "we won by just shooting them with everything we had!". Even Klingons, a species with cloaking tech, barely uses it for anything, and generally de-cloaked BEFORE the battle just so they can win via a straight slug match. Mostly species in Trek use little to not real tactics beyond "send a bunch of ships!"
    To make use of the scenario to its fullest a new queue would have to be designed. The lesson here is that reskinning a TFO which originally stated as a highly generalized invasion scenario doesn't make the most of its story telling potential when applied more specifically and thereby presents a reduced gameplay experience to one where gameplay elements and lore were more in sync, go figure.
    Not really. The gameplay and story points in both the original Dranuur Gauntlet, and the Peril over Pahvo, work equally as well in both situations because it is the same story, and the means by which the enemy attacks, and the best way to defend the planet, would still be the same in both situations. At least in the best way for a game to depict such an attack.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,546 Arc User
    edited April 1
    One CAN compliment the lore via the gameplay, and, if it makes for good gameplay, then do it. But in a video game, gameplay comes before everything else. Be it graphics, sound, lore, etc. One should never attempt to sacrifice better gameplay to make the gameplay more fitting with the lore, one should only meld the two when necessarily appropriate. The gameplay shouldn't be designed to fit the lore as a necessity, or as a benchmark, but only when it makes for better gameplay.
    Let me stop you here for a moment, this is a very personal belief (counter to what you just said but let's roll with it) and one wide of the thread. There are times where designers might (and indeed do) sacrifice elements of gameplay for the sake of immersion (ie. internal world building and lore.)

    The original issue isn't that Peril Over Pahvo might has sacrifice some element of its gameplay for the sake of lore, it's that gameplay and lore are disconnected. Ie. that there are hordes of terran/Klingon ships which for all intents and purposes are presenting an arbitrary combat challenge to nominally fit within the Pahvo invasion scenario.

    There are better ways of handling this in writing, in gameplay, or both.

    Except Mirror of Discovery only has us kicking Killy out. As we see in the second mission of Mirror of Discovery, her actions opened portals to the past, and the Mirror Universe, and fragments of a very large ship, aka the Charon, began falling through. These pieces, post mission, crashed on the planet, and the Terrans still in them are now attempting to take over Pahvo to turn it into a base like Killy was, leading to "Pahvo Dissension". Likewise, these same portals to the past, and the Mirror Universe, are how these Klingon and Terran forces are coming into Pahvo during the TFO. This is a direct continuation of plot points established in the episode itself that you seemed to miss despite them beating you over the head with them.
    The Styx dreadnaught cruisers (you see one crashed in the background of the ground queue) were Killy's reinforcements but she was ultimately unsuccessful in replicating with them what Discovery was able to do (see. specific writing regarding that ship and its function.) This explains why despite holding onto Pahvo her reinforcements were greatly limited and focused planet-side (leaving the residual Klingon armada to be the major threat in space.)

    The first Pahvo queue fit within that remit (hey, we missed some down there!) but the second works by mechanics which run counter to what was established by the episodes. It took the additional conceit of residual weakness in space/time that allowed Terrans and Klingons (who had only been incidentally dragged through Killy's anomaly before, note their absence with the ground queue) to come back for an arbitrary space-born invasion scenario. Considering that this queue wasn't listed on the roadmap, it's reasonable to speculate that the original writing plan did not include Peril over Pahvo and it was the need to fill time in the calendar that spurred Cryptic to repurpose another queue for a fight where one didn't need to be. Enter doubling back on the premise, limiting reskin (not even the lighting was changed), and the story/gameplay disconnect.

    The necessary compromises to get this queue out as a reskin resulted in direct drawbacks, described variously and here in terms of the integration of core elements. As it turns out, Cryptic does better when they have more time (though there's ways they can better economize in future, if need be.)
    Your second paragraph shows your inability to separate good gameplay from presentation and lore. No, it doesn't make sense that all the shield generators would be in one small spot, nor that the Klingons or Terrans would only attack that one spot, which happens to be the most defensible. However, the only other alternatives would create gameplay situations that would make the TFO impossible.

    Alternatives such as flipping the invasion scenario to a fortified Terran/Klingon beachhead some distance away from the planet which we 1. take (see. first combat encounter) and then 2. defend while science teams disable the generators allowing for reinforcements to hop dimensions. This was just off the top of my head and would have only required moving the scenario forward, flipping the assets of the defense targets to ships, and playing with a few portal FX. The hordes would also fit under the category of desperation which could be referenced (and made use of for tone and context) in character dialog. It would have also allowed on some innovation over Dranuur Gauntlet by changing attack angles between waves (front and back would be viable routes of attack.)

    You're talking in extremes of convenience and I don't think that's likely to produce productive discourse.
    Not really. The gameplay and story points in both the original Dranuur Gauntlet, and the Peril over Pahvo, work equally as well in both situations because it is the same story, and the means by which the enemy attacks, and the best way to defend the planet, would still be the same in both situations. At least in the best way for a game to depict such an attack.

    They function the same because each is presenting a faction-agnostic combat encounter. They don't work well though per the benchmark set by other queues (see. complimenting gameplay with lore.) For example: Undine Assault, the Swarm, and Defense of Starbase One (Note your words: "best way." Demonstrably from STO itself, there are viable alternatives to Dranuur's particular planetary defense scenarios.)
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 5,924 Arc User
    edited April 1
    The original issue isn't that Peril Over Pahvo might has sacrifice some element of its gameplay for the sake of lore, it's that gameplay and lore are disconnected. Ie. that there are hordes of terran/Klingon ships which for all intents and purposes are presenting an arbitrary combat challenge to nominally fit within the Pahvo invasion scenario.
    Except, as pointed out, it isn't, and this was set up in the Mirror of Discovery episodes, which you seemingly didn't play, or just don't understand, based on the following response to the thing I quoted below.
    The Styx dreadnaught cruisers (you see one crashed in the background of the ground queue) were Killy's reinforcements but she was ultimately unsuccessful in replicating with them what Discovery was able to do (see. specific writing regarding that ship and its function.) This explains why despite holding onto Pahvo her reinforcements were greatly limited and focused planet-side (leaving the residual Klingon armada to be the major threat in space.)
    This is 100% incorrect. Cryptic themselves even mentioned it in the livestreams. What Killy was trying to summon was the ISS Charon, not a Styx. The thing that crashed on Pavho was pieces of THE SINGULAR ISS Charon after it was blown up by Discovery in S1. You don't even know the very fundamentals of what you are talking about(once again it seems)

    This ties into what they said back when they first announced the Age of Discovery content, that they got the rights to use an unmade story for Pahvo from the TV shows in STO. And there are no Styx in Discovery. You can even tell that its parts of the ISS Charon by the fact you can see the Charon's back warp nacelle super structure, which the Syx don't have, during the missions.
    Alternatives such as flipping the invasion scenario to a fortified Terran/Klingon beachhead some distance away from the planet which we 1. take (see. first combat encounter) and then 2. defend while science teams disable the generators allowing for reinforcements to hop dimensions. This was just off the top of my head and would have only required moving the scenario forward, flipping the assets of the defense targets to ships, and playing with a few portal FX. The hordes would also fit under the category of desperation which could be referenced (and made use of for tone and context) in character dialog. It would have also allowed on some innovation over Dranuur Gauntlet by changing attack angles between waves (front and back would be viable routes of attack.)

    You're talking in extremes of convenience and I don't think that's likely to produce productive discourse.
    The entire scenario you present makes no sense. Even Mirror Leeta was only able to establish a fortified holding in our universe by using an Orb to cross dimensions. Where would the Disco era Terrans, or the Klingons, get such a power source to drag something to Pahvo? Let alone the time or resources to build one from scrath near Phavo without the Alliance noticing, especially when they were already patrolling the area after Killy's little stunt?
    They function the same because each is presenting a faction-agnostic combat encounter. They don't work well though per the benchmark set by other queues (see. complimenting gameplay with lore.) For example: Undine Assault, the Swarm, and Defense of Starbase One (Note your words: "best way." Demonstrably from STO itself, there are viable alternatives to Dranuur's particular planetary defense scenarios.)
    Except Defense of Starbase One works in the exact same narrative manner as Peril over Pahvo, and makes just as much sense as the other.... what on bloody Earth are you even going on about?
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 9,095 Arc User
    You seem to enjoy arguing with everyone about anything and everything. I made a point that this TFO stinks for Starship Mastery and you turn it into an Exploitopalooza discussion.

    There is NOTHING you can conjur up to convince me that a 15 or so Minute slugfest should net you about 10% of Mastery on TIER I DURING A DOUBLE XP WEEKEND. PERIOD.

    They seem to not be able to do or consider things consistently. If the number of ships and their 'quality' is important to leveling Mastery, then the number of ships and 'quality' should be important. This shouldn't be a Papa, Moma, or Baby Bear situation.

    If the number of ships is low, as in Crystalline, you don't get much Mastery out of it. If you have a sh*t-ton of ships, as we have here, then you should get much. A target is a target; adjust the XP if you need to some lesser level, but you'd better be giving XP for killing a ship because that's what it's suppose to do. Otherwise, you've incompetently set the thing up to begin with.

    Look at what has been going on with the Endeavors. Constant adjustments. Oh, Kill Herald Ships, oops only Raiders count. Go through 'Delta Flight' for the Kill Herald Ship Endeavor and NONE count. Allied Benham Crusier Tetryon damage counts for your Endeavor, but Allied Republic Warships killing destructible Torpedoes does not. Kill Anthropods on Nimbus III and they count, kill them on New Romulus and they don't, or vice versa.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!
    Judge Dan Haywood
  • totenmettotenmet Member Posts: 554 Arc User
    protoneous wrote: »
    'Loophole / exploit' ? We must be living on different planets...
    Playing the patrol, then leaving before you turn it in, order to get it to reset so you can play it again without having to wait for the 30 minute cooldown is an exploit. Period.

    If you call that an exploit then buying booster packs (XP, etc) in that perspective are definitely exploits. Because people can level faster etc.

    Do you now understand the no-sense in your remarks, or still not?

    Repeatedly patrolling Argola is not an exploit, period!
    You dont get the marks when aborting, just the xp you rightfully earned.
  • tomilaktomilak Member Posts: 382 Arc User
    edited April 2
    The constant 14 day grind once a month is becoming a major problem, grind grind grind. :( not good for players who cant do this EVERY month. I will be soooo happy when wednesday is over.
    Change these to 7 days - They would be far more tolorable!.
    Post edited by tomilak on
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 5,924 Arc User
    ltminns wrote: »
    There is NOTHING you can conjur up to convince me that a 15 or so Minute slugfest should net you about 10% of Mastery on TIER I DURING A DOUBLE XP WEEKEND. PERIOD.
    Then you simply refuse to understand basic game mechanics that are fairly common across multiple genres of games.
  • baddmoonrizinbaddmoonrizin Member Posts: 5,875 Community Moderator
    The XP thing is being looked at.
    GrWzQke.png
    Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator
    Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of PWE/Cryptic
    Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of PWE/Cryptic
    Contact Customer Support --> https://support.arcgames.com
    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
  • baddmoonrizinbaddmoonrizin Member Posts: 5,875 Community Moderator
    The XP thing is being looked at.
    GrWzQke.png
    Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator
    Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of PWE/Cryptic
    Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of PWE/Cryptic
    Contact Customer Support --> https://support.arcgames.com
    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
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,546 Arc User
    edited April 1
    Except Defense of Starbase One works in the exact same narrative manner as Peril over Pahvo, and makes just as much sense as the other.... what on bloody Earth are you even going on about?

    If you can't keep things to a civil tone there's really not point in carrying on with attempted discussion. You may not agree with the criticisms of this TFO but arguing for an ever-shifting negation of those criticisms, their underlying perspective, and their principles is not productive.

    I went back to the blogs, I did err with the Cheron (never considered that they'd try linking the two events, mission dialog I simply assumed was referring to the Styx as being massive.) That said this only changes the ship type (Charon v. Styx), NOT the mechanics of the original writing (Pahvo Dissent is still an encounter dealing with planet-side remnants). Note that...

    "The entire scenario you present makes no sense. Even Mirror Leeta was only able to establish a fortified holding in our universe by using an Orb to cross dimensions. Where would the Disco era Terrans, or the Klingons, get such a power source to drag something to Pahvo?"

    ...would also invalidate Peril over Pahvo. Per the blog:
    The planet Pahvo has been a flashpoint of late, particularly after a recent trans-dimensional temporal event. Forces from the year 2256 (and two universes) have found their way to Pahvo through spatial aftershocks, and are hell-bent on conquering the enigmatic world.

    These fleets have found a way back to Pahvo despite the resolution and limitations found in previous episodes. A new mechanic (spatial aftershocks) have been invoked to justify this combat encounter. As an aside, any mechanism that would let the Terrans or Klingons exploit this power would fit the needs of my hypothetical alternative queue just fine (which you lept at for the sake of reflexive contradiction but I'll let that exchange speak for itself.) This presents an immediate disconnect between story telling and gameplay (see. doubling back for an arbitrary combat scenario which is a literal reskin of a separate encounter to fill a hole in a schedule which may not have been originally planned for) which you say either doesn't exist or isn't important (whatever lets you stamp down on folks and minimize their concerns most easily.)

    PS. Saying that Defense of Starbase One is the same narrative manner is quite frankly incorrect. The defense objectives have different functions in each queue, different distributions, different cadence, different modes of enemy deployment, and different strategies which work together to cause these queues to not only play quite differently to each other (fundamentally) but also tell different stories through those mechanics (a point for synergistic gameplay/lore integration in the case of DoSO.) One is holding the line in a siege by displaced (ie. context-less) forces while the other is defending an evacuation in the style of a realized combat encounter, emphasizing priorities between factions (very different contexts within the umbrella of a defense scenario. Perhaps by overgeneralizing you can wash out these differences but such is counter to critical analysis.)
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,546 Arc User
    edited April 1
    *Forum glitch (gateway timeout error), double post*
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • jennycolvinjennycolvin Member Posts: 36 Arc User
    The XP thing is being looked at.

    Thank you for the info! Let's hope the fix will come in time for the next featured stf.
    While I may agree that it shouldn't give you a massive amount of XP per kills, it's also totally unfair to give none.​​
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 6,805 Arc User
    I'm just glad i'm only 1 day off from the reward.
    These 14- day featured TFO are draining. Let it run for two weeks and 7 tickets or 3 weeks/10 tickets.

    Running a TFO across all levels 14 times with the many afk-er "time efficient" players and leveling players is simply not a fun ride.
    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • theboxisredtheboxisred Member Posts: 248 Arc User
    I now actively hate this queue. I want to find the software and punch it into paralysis.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 8,539 Arc User
    Except it does make sense that the Terrans or Klingons would send this many ships to Pahvo, given its ability to be turned into a plant sized super-weapon akin to the Deathstar(you know, the whole reason we stopped Killy in the story missions, and the Terrans in the other Pahvo TFO)
    Even with Cryptic giving the Disco Terrans/klingons a way to enter the 25th century at will, it makes absolutely no sense for them to pointlessly waste their ships against a prepared 25th century defense force that hilariously outguns them.

    And then there's the temporal repercussions of the scenario. As long as it was just Killy who got here by accident and presumably never makes it back to the 23rd century to tell anyone, all is good. But if the Disco Terrans and klingons know about Pahvo, why don't they go take it over in their own time when nobody's there to guard it, instead of mounting an attack in the future that's about as effective as the Pirates of the Caribbean taking on a modern carrier group?
  • tomilaktomilak Member Posts: 382 Arc User
    Also make a note, as noted in the original series and on discovery, every time one of us went to their alternate reality our counterparts came here. so every time they send a ship to us the counterparts in our reality get shifted to their reality unless they found a way to counteract this effect.
Sign In or Register to comment.