I'm sure at some point one of your beer-drinking, salt of the earth, hard-working buddies must have warned you to never fall in love with a stripper, right? Trek has always been a product to be sold. Always. They let fan culture think it's something more than that because this makes fan culture a reliable source of money.
I wish I could play from work though. Man it'd be great. Sadly I have to focus all of my slacking off on surfing the web on my iPhone that I saved up a few months to buy after I paid my taxes. I really envy you, you hardworking pillar of society, you.
I don't have any beer swilling buddies, stripper banging buddies, like you obviously do. Mine are college-educated, hard-working professionals. But thanks for trying to, completely incorrectly, stereotype a Summa TRIBBLE Laud graduate healthcare professional, simply by the term "hardworking". And I guess the point of my post totally flew over your head as well. The point was NOT to allow STO to become another endless coin slot.
I'll tell you what, when YOU work hard enough for 20 years to build a company up from scratch, then you MIGHT have the VERY SMALL perk of getting a few minutes, here and there; between clients, phone calls, and patients, to run an IOR from your office desktop. If it took you a few MONTHS to earn enough for an iPhone, then you should be looking up to me as pillar of society. Your frail attempt at sarcasm is pathetic.
I don't have any beer swilling buddies, stripper banging buddies, like you obviously do. Mine are college-educated, hard-working professionals. But thanks for trying to, completely incorrectly, stereotype a Summa TRIBBLE Laud graduate healthcare professional, simply by the term "hardworking". And I guess the point of my post totally flew over your head as well. The point was NOT to allow STO to become another endless coin slot.
I'll tell you what, when YOU work hard enough for 20 years to build a company up from scratch, then you MIGHT have the VERY SMALL perk of getting a few minutes, here and there; between clients, phone calls, and patients, to run an IOR from your office desktop. If it took you a few MONTHS to earn enough for an iPhone, then you should be looking up to me as pillar of society. Your frail attempt at sarcasm is pathetic.
This would seem to be irrelevant to the purpose of this thread, isn't it? Would you two kindly cease and desist? Thank you.
Either way, it is the removal of the IOR(D) mission which compels me to post my first comment on these forums: one way or another, the outright removal was a mistake.
I enjoy the long, story-based foundry missions, and have never played a loot-grinding one, but I also used the IOR(D) missions as a way to supplement my daily dilithium input. I feel less motivated to hunt one down and play it, however good it may be. Some reward must exist, and energy credits or items that can be sold for them is not the solution. I know no solution. I didn't think the old system was broken.
I don't have any beer swilling buddies, stripper banging buddies
Reading your posts I suggest getting some buddies of any sort before the aneurysm takes you out.
Also, did you know that I'm actually a dog and I time traveled to punch Hitler in the face? You can't confirm that and that's the beauty of the internet.
Anyway... I'm admittedly slightly insulted at your assumptions. But that's overshadowed by how amazed I am at your ability mix your culture-warrior rage and your nerd rage. Most of the other players blamed the Shadowy Cabal of Foundry Authors but you decided to go all "49%".
This would seem to be irrelevant to the purpose of this thread, isn't it? Would you two kindly cease and desist? Thank you.
Either way, it is the removal of the IOR(D) mission which compels me to post my first comment on these forums: one way or another, the outright removal was a mistake.
I enjoy the long, story-based foundry missions, and have never played a loot-grinding one, but I also used the IOR(D) missions as a way to supplement my daily dilithium input. I feel less motivated to hunt one down and play it, however good it may be. Some reward must exist, and energy credits or items that can be sold for them is not the solution. I know no solution. I didn't think the old system was broken.
You still get dilithium. It just scales based on how long the mission is now.
Just wondering, if time is short have you tried focusing what time you have to upgrading your duty officers and maxing out the commendation levels so you can trade the extra CXP for fleet marks? There are usually enough 20h to 1 day+ length missions within a sector block or three that you can just set them once a day and spend what remaining time you have doing what you wish. It's not as fast as doing the IOR but it can still net you a decent chunk of Marks every week.
I really wish they'd get doff mission assignments added into the the Gateway. It would make it easier for the casual players to make more CXP and therefore Fleet Marks.
Exactly: this right here is in fact the most efficient way for a person who works full time to grind fleet marks--and it was always that way for me even before the Foundry rewards changes. It's like an AFK mission, except that's how it was actually intended to be, by design.
If anyone needs tips on how to max your CXP or how, after you're maxed, to use your DOFFs to maximize fleet marks, they need only ask me.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Holly: They're still there. The grind missions are still there, Dave.
Lister: "EZ Monies"?
Holly: Still there, Dave!
Lister: Not "LOL EC"?
Holly: Gordon Bennett! Yes, "LOL EC"! All of them. They're all there, Dave!
Lister: "ROFLstomp 4 Cash"?
Holly: It's there, Dave. All the grind missions are there. All. There. Dave.
Lister: Wait. Are you trying to tell me all the grind missions are still there?
Holly: Should've never let him out of the Academy in the first place....
I prefer story over anything. I find that a nice gritty story is better than grinding for ecs.
Edit: nice red dwarf reference
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
Let's face it, people don't do the IOR mission to experience great foundry missions. People do it to get dilithium and fleet marks.
Um, well I play them for the story and the dil and fm are just a nice little reward to put in place of the rewards that you'd get for story missions. To be honest, I feel that when sweeping generalisations are made, they have to be countered.
On with my point; I, personally, am against the idea of removing IOR because when you complete a story mission you usually get a nice little reward, when you do foundry missions you don't and I feel that this discourages people from playing them unless there is a reward, dil and fm serve this purpose nicely. On the other hand, I do feel that grinders are kind of abusing the system a little and on the other other hand I feel that Cryptic have a tendancy to whine about anything that doesn't work EXACTLY (insert TRIBBLE salute here) the way they want it to. I mean really Cryptic, why the need to disrupt our enjoyment of the foundry when most of us have the ability to figure out how a scroll bar works, scroll past the grinders and find something we're interested in?
Is it because there are people who only use dil to buy zen instead of real money? C'mon, people, you're a large company, making money hand over fist, some of us have to be sparing with our money, we're like pelicans, which ever way we turn we have an enormous bill in front of us and you're taking away our fish. Please, just give us back the one thing that actually makes up for the lack of reward at the end of the foundry missions and we'll say no more about it. -.-
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I'm not THAT difficult to please, I just have a very low tolerance threshold for stupid BS! - George Carlin.
Hey that's right "hawkman". I should just work, work, work, all the time. I mean somebody has to pay those taxes for the people who have all that GIANT TIME SINK on their hands.
Maybe because I LOVE Star Trek. Maybe because I've watched every series and movie the genre's ever put out. Maybe because it is one of the few pleasures this hardworking man has in his life. What an absolutely asinine response!!!!
My point is that the genre of game is one that is time consuming to play in general. If you're playing the game because you like Star Trek, that's great. Like the other guys said, try focusing more of Doff misisons to get CxP for the turnins. It's a pretty easy way to get CxP without spending hours doign stuff.
Curses! Oh well, I guess I will have to play like an imperial age republican or a roman and just use go-betweens and people I respect to get my foundry wishes to come true.
That... that or sacrifice a goat myself. But cleanup is a haste and my neighbors keep thinking I'm dumping human bodies. Such a bother.
So, anyone figured out what the dilithium to time scale is?
Could be hard to do, since (I think) it's based on average playtime rather than your own personal time in the mission. (And if there's any way to see that average as a specific number, I'm curious.) Although my guess, based on some missions I've done, is somewhere around 500 dilithium/15 minutes, scaling smoothly (but maybe not linearly).
One thing I want to ask is, where's this idea that foundry authors wanted marks removed coming from? Wouldn't having them as a scaling reward too be more valuable for people who wanted their missions to get played? (Loot drops, I saw people wanting those removed, but that seemed to be about the impact on the EC economy most of the time.)
Could be hard to do, since (I think) it's based on average playtime rather than your own personal time in the mission. (And if there's any way to see that average as a specific number, I'm curious.) Although my guess, based on some missions I've done, is somewhere around 500 dilithium/15 minutes, scaling smoothly (but maybe not linearly).
One thing I want to ask is, where's this idea that foundry authors wanted marks removed coming from? Wouldn't having them as a scaling reward too be more valuable for people who wanted their missions to get played? (Loot drops, I saw people wanting those removed, but that seemed to be about the impact on the EC economy most of the time.)
-Morgan.
Yeah, it was only mentioned once or twice as a possibility, but not something people were campaigning for....
I for one will not be doing foundry missions anymore it doesnt reward me for my time similar to other missions. Foundry authors should be careful what you wish for because you don't what the cryptic Genie will give you, and yes, I've been following the demands by the story authors demanding change and spamming the devs.
I've been silent for pretty much all of this thread, but I've been keeping up with it whenever I have the time. Here's my two cents on it:
1) There is nothing wrong with short combat missions. People like to test out their BOff layout or skills/tactics/etc. These missions should not be labeled as "grinders", as the term itself implies to play the mission with no benefit other than to get loot.
2) I'm not even going to go into the improved UI subject since it's been restated time and again. Honestly, if the devs are able to measure average playtime in order to gauge suitability for IOR, why not just categorize the missions as:
Short (less than 30 min), Medium (30 min to 1 hour), or Long (1 hour+)?
We already know the system is in place via IOR requirements, it would be automatic categorization to prevent confusion/mislabeling.
3) I do not like the "Story" and "Combat" categorizations, since there are many missions ( including some of the best that are out now) that have both in equal amounts. Leave that to the description box we get when authoring (which hopefully in time we won't have to waste some of that space by providing a mission starting point).
4) Anyone that is pointing fingers at the authors for why the recent changes are happening really need to use some common sense. Many players have written countless posts/emails/requests/tweets and the like over multiple issues in the game.. including the Foundry. Guess what? Some of them have been answered, many of them have not.
The dev team would not make any changes based off of player demands just because their tweet box gets bombarded, especially if it goes against what their intent is for the game.
And finally,
This has been a discussion that was hashed out almost two years ago in this thread
I will point out an excerpt from the final paragraph:
We want the Foundry to be used for users to create missions. Set a scenario, create the world anew for yourself. The tool was not created to allow players to level up easier, to have a quicker way to gather Accolades, or similar. If your mission sets this as a goal in any form, we may take action. Please do not create missions that are geared towards boosting of any kind.
What I take from this? If you want to use the Foundry to max out your fleet, it's wrong. If you want to walk away for 15 minutes and have a sandwich while your BOffs get you loot, it's wrong. If you want to mash buttons on many waves of helpless mobs so you can get rich and inflate the economy... it's wrong. It's been wrong in every MMO I've played, and it's still wrong here.
There is no argument that can be provided to encourage this type of play. What needs to be fixed is the time sink/economy. There are always going to be exploiters, but with the state of the way things are, I can see why so many feel they don't have a choice but to accept them as a part of advancement.
But if the devs intended us to afk grind fleet marks and large amounts of EC/dil, I would think they would have just put them in all of the DOff missions.
I for one will not be doing foundry missions anymore.
I seriously doubt you're the only one.
Two reasons, the IOR wrappers untimely demise has taken away a major incentive to play the foundry.
Secondly, and probably unfairly in most cases, the blame for that demise is not being solely aimed at Cryptic. A few, a tiny minority in fact, of foundry authors lobbied hard for the changes without apparent regard for anyone else in the player base. The arrogance of that is something of a boomerang.
This has been a discussion that was hashed out almost two years ago in this thread
I will point out an excerpt from the final paragraph:
What I take from this? If you want to use the Foundry to max out your fleet, it's wrong. If you want to walk away for 15 minutes and have a sandwich while your BOffs get you loot, it's wrong. If you want to mash buttons on many waves of helpless mobs so you can get rich and inflate the economy... it's wrong. It's been wrong in every MMO I've played, and it's still wrong here.
Thank you very much for posting this, and especially for going to the trouble to locate that old post. Apart from any more recent statement contradicting it, it's pretty clear what Cryptic's intention is for the Foundry. Much as I'd like to understand what ROI they're expecting out of it, this is probably the best statement we'll ever get.
That said, I believe there is value in constructing Foundry missions meant for testing builds, etc. But it's not the primary reason for the Foundry's existence.
So, for the purposes of this thread, the question is what kinds of rewards are appropriate for the Foundry? And how should they be rewarded?
There are four kinds of rewards in this game that we see in other content:
1. Per-mission "loot": Basically, skill points and expertise along with a choice of some generic item reward at mission completion.
2. Kill drops: Self-explanatory; even the Foundry can reward this.
3. Reputation: Missions that grant some amount of Reputation Marks which can be used to advance in a Reputation system.
4. Special rewards: Special items that are directly related to the mission.
I'd like to focus on #3 and #4.
A Foundry Reputation system would be grounded in the idea that a Story contributes to character development. So the rewards for this kind of thing should have something to do with character development. What that means is open for us to explore.
And a reward that's directly tied in to the actual mission you completed is not only something we'd all like to see, but it's one of the "stretch" goals in the Foundry roadmap. How could an Author customize the completion reward for a mission in a way that is not exploitive or too limited to bother with?
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
3. Reputation: Missions that grant some amount of Reputation Marks which can be used to advance in a Reputation system.
4. Special rewards: Special items that are directly related to the mission.
*snip
I'd very much like to see a Reputation system for the Foundry, but I believe it should have a set of rules that apply to it. For instance, you shouldn't be rewarded for playing the same mission repeatedly. The Foundry should be all about exploring something new, and you should be playing an assortment of missions to qualify for the rewards of it. Otherwise we just exacerbate the same problems with exploiting the system.
As far as rewards go for the Foundry it should be Dilithium. After all you need dilithium to access the Foundry (Aka to unlock foundry slots), but honestly I feel that if someone is going to take the time to play my missions and actually read the story at hand, they should be rewarded for their effort. Perhaps some Blue or even Purple drop, but it should be rare to get these. Here again this could be exploited very heavily.
After reading a massively articale, I saw a reference to ships/target's not firing back et al things. This thread seemed like a decent place to bring the article up and give feedback. Here's a link:
The issue I have, is the Foundry is a potentionally good place to create a testing ground for builds as well as isolated variables for testing game play mechanics. A Foundry mission designed for this purpose doesn't need to have a wrapper reward, but it would be something I'd still like to have the possibility of using.
For example, a sample set of various targets w/different base defensive ratings as well as resistance ratings could be used for testing a build's offense. There'd be no reason to have deal w/stuff shooting back.
Likewise a range of various targets shooting w/various weapon types @ various ranges w/various ACC levels could be used to test defenses.
Similar ranges could be set up for testing the effectiveness of science layouts, and counters/mitigations for Science abilities w/in a build.
I realize the ability to customize NPC effects in such a way are likely not a part of the Foundry, but it would be nice if it would be someday and such "missions" wouldn't be banned.
I understand that people not only exploited things for the daily wrapper, but also loot (and contraband). But, then put in an option for a mission to not drop loot and have no loot to be gotten from Orion Slaver pets.
[Zone] Dack@****: cowards can't take a fed 1 on 1 crinckley cowards Hahahaha you smell like flowers
Random Quote from Kerrat
"Sumlobus@****: your mums eat Iced Targ Poo"
C&H Fed banter
Just to expand on the Special Reward idea for a bit...
To define -- A Special Reward is an Author-selected item rewarded for completing a Foundry mission, preferably one that is directly related to the mission itself.
First, I think that Foundry Special Rewards might need to wait until after a Crafting overhaul. Special Rewards would work better with items specifically crafted to fit the story.
The alternative would be to offer Authors a kind of 'store' with a large selection of pre-made items to choose from. Which would be better than nothing, but not nearly as good as a crafted item.
Special Rewards could be directly dependent upon the Author's crafting skill, which would be an incentive for Authors to participate in that system. Basically, the Author would have to craft the reward (along with the normal costs of crafting) in order to make it available.
Or, with a 'store' system, the available set of items could be limited based upon the enemies used in the mission. For example: one set of items for Romulans, one set of items for KDF, one for Borg, etc.
It would be pretty cool if you could place the reward inside the mission itself so you can use the item inside the mission..
Imagine a special, placeable mission objective type, a variant of "Interact With Object" called "Claim Special Reward". In order to claim the reward, you have to interact with an object (the kind of object you interact with would be customizable, just like we can do now).
To reduce the potential for exploit, this objective could only be used once per mission, must be the last objective on a map, and can't be placed on the first map. If you place "Special Reward" on a ground map, it has to be ground equipment. If placed on a space map, the reward has to be space equipment. The mission should contain at least one kill objective. There could (and should) be limits on value, scaled according to the minimum level requirement of the mission.
And of course, the item rewarded has to be bound to character on pickup.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Just to expand on the Special Reward idea for a bit...
To define -- A Special Reward is an Author-selected item rewarded for completing a Foundry mission, preferably one that is directly related to the mission itself.
First, I think that Foundry Special Rewards might need to wait until after a Crafting overhaul. Special Rewards would work better with items specifically crafted to fit the story.
The alternative would be to offer Authors a kind of 'store' with a large selection of pre-made items to choose from. Which would be better than nothing, but not nearly as good as a crafted item.
Special Rewards could be directly dependent upon the Author's crafting skill, which would be an incentive for Authors to participate in that system. Basically, the Author would have to craft the reward (along with the normal costs of crafting) in order to make it available.
Or, with a 'store' system, the available set of items could be limited based upon the enemies used in the mission. For example: one set of items for Romulans, one set of items for KDF, one for Borg, etc.
It would be pretty cool if you could place the reward inside the mission itself so you can use the item inside the mission..
Imagine a special, placeable mission objective type, a variant of "Interact With Object" called "Claim Special Reward". In order to claim the reward, you have to interact with an object (the kind of object you interact with would be customizable, just like we can do now).
To reduce the potential for exploit, this objective could only be used once per mission, must be the last objective on a map, and can't be placed on the first map. If you place "Special Reward" on a ground map, it has to be ground equipment. If placed on a space map, the reward has to be space equipment. The mission should contain at least one kill objective. There could (and should) be limits on value, scaled according to the minimum level requirement of the mission.
And of course, the item rewarded has to be bound to character on pickup.
Very interesting idea, although I know that there are some missions out there that tell a story, but have no physical combat to them, so how would you award these folks?
I think time also should be a factor, and if you have played the mission previously. I think epic rewards should only be granted on the first play, and similar to the in game replay option, second, third etc plays be rewarded slightly less.
Also participation should be a factor, but I don't know if there is a medium to gauge exactly what the player is or isn't doing. What is to stop someone from making a mission with a simple objective, granting some epic reward, and farming it?
I'd very much like to see a Reputation system for the Foundry, but I believe it should have a set of rules that apply to it. For instance, you shouldn't be rewarded for playing the same mission repeatedly. The Foundry should be all about exploring something new, and you should be playing an assortment of missions to qualify for the rewards of it. Otherwise we just exacerbate the same problems with exploiting the system.
I dunno... although I might agree in principle, requiring the game to keep track of every Foundry mission I've ever played on each character I have might be asking too much of the database.
One thought is that since Cryptic is talking about using the Foundry as part of an expanded Exploration system, that Foundry Reputation should focus on an Exploration theme that also emphasizes character development somehow.
Supposing for the moment that Foundry Reputation will apply to Authors as well as Players, what kinds of projects, project inputs, and rewards would be appropriate?
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Very interesting idea, although I know that there are some missions out there that tell a story, but have no physical combat to them, so how would you award these folks?
I think time also should be a factor, and if you have played the mission previously. I think epic rewards should only be granted on the first play, and similar to the in game replay option, second, third etc plays be rewarded slightly less.
Also participation should be a factor, but I don't know if there is a medium to gauge exactly what the player is or isn't doing. What is to stop someone from making a mission with a simple objective, granting some epic reward, and farming it?
Well, unfortunately I can't think of a good way to limit exploitation without requiring at least one combat encounter. I'm not sure that a no-combat mission really ought to have an "epic reward". I believe it wouldn't be that hard to justify one combat encounter in many stories.
Again, I'm not really sure that we can reasonably ask the game to keep track of every Foundry mission we've ever played, so I don't see how one-time rewards can work on that basis.
It might be more reasonable to make "epic rewards" not only bound, but unique. Something you can only claim once per character and never again. There would be the problem of different Authors selecting the same "epic reward" for their mission, but if there was the option to offer an alternate, generic item instead that might not be so bad.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
I dunno... although I might agree in principle, requiring the game to keep track of every Foundry mission I've ever played on each character I have might be asking too much of the database.
Doesn't it already? Unless it's stored client-side, it'd have to for the way the icon changes colors for missions you've played before. And the server would have to store more per-character information than that for the rating system to work the way it does anyway.
Doesn't it already? Unless it's stored client-side, it'd have to for the way the icon changes colors for missions you've played before. And the server would have to store more per-character information than that for the rating system to work the way it does anyway.
-Morgan.
I think you could in that respect. I pretty sure Morgan is right, it does at least keep track of if you have played the mission before or not, because of the rating system. If the check could be made prior to completing the mission, or at the time of reward claim it could work.
Comments
I don't have any beer swilling buddies, stripper banging buddies, like you obviously do. Mine are college-educated, hard-working professionals. But thanks for trying to, completely incorrectly, stereotype a Summa TRIBBLE Laud graduate healthcare professional, simply by the term "hardworking". And I guess the point of my post totally flew over your head as well. The point was NOT to allow STO to become another endless coin slot.
I'll tell you what, when YOU work hard enough for 20 years to build a company up from scratch, then you MIGHT have the VERY SMALL perk of getting a few minutes, here and there; between clients, phone calls, and patients, to run an IOR from your office desktop. If it took you a few MONTHS to earn enough for an iPhone, then you should be looking up to me as pillar of society. Your frail attempt at sarcasm is pathetic.
This would seem to be irrelevant to the purpose of this thread, isn't it? Would you two kindly cease and desist? Thank you.
Either way, it is the removal of the IOR(D) mission which compels me to post my first comment on these forums: one way or another, the outright removal was a mistake.
I enjoy the long, story-based foundry missions, and have never played a loot-grinding one, but I also used the IOR(D) missions as a way to supplement my daily dilithium input. I feel less motivated to hunt one down and play it, however good it may be. Some reward must exist, and energy credits or items that can be sold for them is not the solution. I know no solution. I didn't think the old system was broken.
Reading your posts I suggest getting some buddies of any sort before the aneurysm takes you out.
Also, did you know that I'm actually a dog and I time traveled to punch Hitler in the face? You can't confirm that and that's the beauty of the internet.
Anyway... I'm admittedly slightly insulted at your assumptions. But that's overshadowed by how amazed I am at your ability mix your culture-warrior rage and your nerd rage. Most of the other players blamed the Shadowy Cabal of Foundry Authors but you decided to go all "49%".
*slow clap*
You still get dilithium. It just scales based on how long the mission is now.
Foundry Mission Database
Check out my Foundry missions:
Standalone - The Great Escape - The Galaxy's Fair - Purity I: Of Denial - Return to Oblivion
Untitled Series - Duritanium Man - The Improbable Bulk - Commander Rihan
Exactly: this right here is in fact the most efficient way for a person who works full time to grind fleet marks--and it was always that way for me even before the Foundry rewards changes. It's like an AFK mission, except that's how it was actually intended to be, by design.
If anyone needs tips on how to max your CXP or how, after you're maxed, to use your DOFFs to maximize fleet marks, they need only ask me.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I prefer story over anything. I find that a nice gritty story is better than grinding for ecs.
Edit: nice red dwarf reference
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
Ah. I was a little confused when I didn't see the mission. Thank you for telling me.
Nouveau riche LTS member
Um, well I play them for the story and the dil and fm are just a nice little reward to put in place of the rewards that you'd get for story missions. To be honest, I feel that when sweeping generalisations are made, they have to be countered.
On with my point; I, personally, am against the idea of removing IOR because when you complete a story mission you usually get a nice little reward, when you do foundry missions you don't and I feel that this discourages people from playing them unless there is a reward, dil and fm serve this purpose nicely. On the other hand, I do feel that grinders are kind of abusing the system a little and on the other other hand I feel that Cryptic have a tendancy to whine about anything that doesn't work EXACTLY (insert TRIBBLE salute here) the way they want it to. I mean really Cryptic, why the need to disrupt our enjoyment of the foundry when most of us have the ability to figure out how a scroll bar works, scroll past the grinders and find something we're interested in?
Is it because there are people who only use dil to buy zen instead of real money? C'mon, people, you're a large company, making money hand over fist, some of us have to be sparing with our money, we're like pelicans, which ever way we turn we have an enormous bill in front of us and you're taking away our fish. Please, just give us back the one thing that actually makes up for the lack of reward at the end of the foundry missions and we'll say no more about it. -.-
I'm not THAT difficult to please, I just have a very low tolerance threshold for stupid BS! - George Carlin.
My character Tsin'xing
Wait?! We've got a Shadowy Cabal? Why didn't I get the memo?! I want to be part of the super secret STO Foundry Shadow Government!
You're not invited sorry. Only those with a direct line to Cryptic devs are included
Foundry Mission Database
Check out my Foundry missions:
Standalone - The Great Escape - The Galaxy's Fair - Purity I: Of Denial - Return to Oblivion
Untitled Series - Duritanium Man - The Improbable Bulk - Commander Rihan
WOOOHOOO!!!!:cool:
That... that or sacrifice a goat myself. But cleanup is a haste and my neighbors keep thinking I'm dumping human bodies. Such a bother.
Could be hard to do, since (I think) it's based on average playtime rather than your own personal time in the mission. (And if there's any way to see that average as a specific number, I'm curious.) Although my guess, based on some missions I've done, is somewhere around 500 dilithium/15 minutes, scaling smoothly (but maybe not linearly).
One thing I want to ask is, where's this idea that foundry authors wanted marks removed coming from? Wouldn't having them as a scaling reward too be more valuable for people who wanted their missions to get played? (Loot drops, I saw people wanting those removed, but that seemed to be about the impact on the EC economy most of the time.)
-Morgan.
Personally, I dislike the mark removal.
My character Tsin'xing
whichexplains why brandon's twitter account is a very enlightening read.
1) There is nothing wrong with short combat missions. People like to test out their BOff layout or skills/tactics/etc. These missions should not be labeled as "grinders", as the term itself implies to play the mission with no benefit other than to get loot.
2) I'm not even going to go into the improved UI subject since it's been restated time and again. Honestly, if the devs are able to measure average playtime in order to gauge suitability for IOR, why not just categorize the missions as:
Short (less than 30 min), Medium (30 min to 1 hour), or Long (1 hour+)?
We already know the system is in place via IOR requirements, it would be automatic categorization to prevent confusion/mislabeling.
3) I do not like the "Story" and "Combat" categorizations, since there are many missions ( including some of the best that are out now) that have both in equal amounts. Leave that to the description box we get when authoring (which hopefully in time we won't have to waste some of that space by providing a mission starting point).
4) Anyone that is pointing fingers at the authors for why the recent changes are happening really need to use some common sense. Many players have written countless posts/emails/requests/tweets and the like over multiple issues in the game.. including the Foundry. Guess what? Some of them have been answered, many of them have not.
The dev team would not make any changes based off of player demands just because their tweet box gets bombarded, especially if it goes against what their intent is for the game.
And finally,
This has been a discussion that was hashed out almost two years ago in this thread
I will point out an excerpt from the final paragraph:
What I take from this? If you want to use the Foundry to max out your fleet, it's wrong. If you want to walk away for 15 minutes and have a sandwich while your BOffs get you loot, it's wrong. If you want to mash buttons on many waves of helpless mobs so you can get rich and inflate the economy... it's wrong. It's been wrong in every MMO I've played, and it's still wrong here.
There is no argument that can be provided to encourage this type of play. What needs to be fixed is the time sink/economy. There are always going to be exploiters, but with the state of the way things are, I can see why so many feel they don't have a choice but to accept them as a part of advancement.
But if the devs intended us to afk grind fleet marks and large amounts of EC/dil, I would think they would have just put them in all of the DOff missions.
by @Skydawn - member of Starbase UGC
I seriously doubt you're the only one.
Two reasons, the IOR wrappers untimely demise has taken away a major incentive to play the foundry.
Secondly, and probably unfairly in most cases, the blame for that demise is not being solely aimed at Cryptic. A few, a tiny minority in fact, of foundry authors lobbied hard for the changes without apparent regard for anyone else in the player base. The arrogance of that is something of a boomerang.
Thank you very much for posting this, and especially for going to the trouble to locate that old post. Apart from any more recent statement contradicting it, it's pretty clear what Cryptic's intention is for the Foundry. Much as I'd like to understand what ROI they're expecting out of it, this is probably the best statement we'll ever get.
That said, I believe there is value in constructing Foundry missions meant for testing builds, etc. But it's not the primary reason for the Foundry's existence.
So, for the purposes of this thread, the question is what kinds of rewards are appropriate for the Foundry? And how should they be rewarded?
There are four kinds of rewards in this game that we see in other content:
1. Per-mission "loot": Basically, skill points and expertise along with a choice of some generic item reward at mission completion.
2. Kill drops: Self-explanatory; even the Foundry can reward this.
3. Reputation: Missions that grant some amount of Reputation Marks which can be used to advance in a Reputation system.
4. Special rewards: Special items that are directly related to the mission.
I'd like to focus on #3 and #4.
A Foundry Reputation system would be grounded in the idea that a Story contributes to character development. So the rewards for this kind of thing should have something to do with character development. What that means is open for us to explore.
And a reward that's directly tied in to the actual mission you completed is not only something we'd all like to see, but it's one of the "stretch" goals in the Foundry roadmap. How could an Author customize the completion reward for a mission in a way that is not exploitive or too limited to bother with?
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
I'd very much like to see a Reputation system for the Foundry, but I believe it should have a set of rules that apply to it. For instance, you shouldn't be rewarded for playing the same mission repeatedly. The Foundry should be all about exploring something new, and you should be playing an assortment of missions to qualify for the rewards of it. Otherwise we just exacerbate the same problems with exploiting the system.
As far as rewards go for the Foundry it should be Dilithium. After all you need dilithium to access the Foundry (Aka to unlock foundry slots), but honestly I feel that if someone is going to take the time to play my missions and actually read the story at hand, they should be rewarded for their effort. Perhaps some Blue or even Purple drop, but it should be rare to get these. Here again this could be exploited very heavily.
http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/02/18/captains-log-star-trek-onlines-foundry-foibles/
The issue I have, is the Foundry is a potentionally good place to create a testing ground for builds as well as isolated variables for testing game play mechanics. A Foundry mission designed for this purpose doesn't need to have a wrapper reward, but it would be something I'd still like to have the possibility of using.
For example, a sample set of various targets w/different base defensive ratings as well as resistance ratings could be used for testing a build's offense. There'd be no reason to have deal w/stuff shooting back.
Likewise a range of various targets shooting w/various weapon types @ various ranges w/various ACC levels could be used to test defenses.
Similar ranges could be set up for testing the effectiveness of science layouts, and counters/mitigations for Science abilities w/in a build.
I realize the ability to customize NPC effects in such a way are likely not a part of the Foundry, but it would be nice if it would be someday and such "missions" wouldn't be banned.
I understand that people not only exploited things for the daily wrapper, but also loot (and contraband). But, then put in an option for a mission to not drop loot and have no loot to be gotten from Orion Slaver pets.
Random Quote from Kerrat
"Sumlobus@****: your mums eat Iced Targ Poo"
C&H Fed banter
To define -- A Special Reward is an Author-selected item rewarded for completing a Foundry mission, preferably one that is directly related to the mission itself.
First, I think that Foundry Special Rewards might need to wait until after a Crafting overhaul. Special Rewards would work better with items specifically crafted to fit the story.
The alternative would be to offer Authors a kind of 'store' with a large selection of pre-made items to choose from. Which would be better than nothing, but not nearly as good as a crafted item.
Special Rewards could be directly dependent upon the Author's crafting skill, which would be an incentive for Authors to participate in that system. Basically, the Author would have to craft the reward (along with the normal costs of crafting) in order to make it available.
Or, with a 'store' system, the available set of items could be limited based upon the enemies used in the mission. For example: one set of items for Romulans, one set of items for KDF, one for Borg, etc.
It would be pretty cool if you could place the reward inside the mission itself so you can use the item inside the mission..
Imagine a special, placeable mission objective type, a variant of "Interact With Object" called "Claim Special Reward". In order to claim the reward, you have to interact with an object (the kind of object you interact with would be customizable, just like we can do now).
To reduce the potential for exploit, this objective could only be used once per mission, must be the last objective on a map, and can't be placed on the first map. If you place "Special Reward" on a ground map, it has to be ground equipment. If placed on a space map, the reward has to be space equipment. The mission should contain at least one kill objective. There could (and should) be limits on value, scaled according to the minimum level requirement of the mission.
And of course, the item rewarded has to be bound to character on pickup.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Very interesting idea, although I know that there are some missions out there that tell a story, but have no physical combat to them, so how would you award these folks?
I think time also should be a factor, and if you have played the mission previously. I think epic rewards should only be granted on the first play, and similar to the in game replay option, second, third etc plays be rewarded slightly less.
Also participation should be a factor, but I don't know if there is a medium to gauge exactly what the player is or isn't doing. What is to stop someone from making a mission with a simple objective, granting some epic reward, and farming it?
I dunno... although I might agree in principle, requiring the game to keep track of every Foundry mission I've ever played on each character I have might be asking too much of the database.
One thought is that since Cryptic is talking about using the Foundry as part of an expanded Exploration system, that Foundry Reputation should focus on an Exploration theme that also emphasizes character development somehow.
Supposing for the moment that Foundry Reputation will apply to Authors as well as Players, what kinds of projects, project inputs, and rewards would be appropriate?
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Well, unfortunately I can't think of a good way to limit exploitation without requiring at least one combat encounter. I'm not sure that a no-combat mission really ought to have an "epic reward". I believe it wouldn't be that hard to justify one combat encounter in many stories.
Again, I'm not really sure that we can reasonably ask the game to keep track of every Foundry mission we've ever played, so I don't see how one-time rewards can work on that basis.
It might be more reasonable to make "epic rewards" not only bound, but unique. Something you can only claim once per character and never again. There would be the problem of different Authors selecting the same "epic reward" for their mission, but if there was the option to offer an alternate, generic item instead that might not be so bad.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Doesn't it already? Unless it's stored client-side, it'd have to for the way the icon changes colors for missions you've played before. And the server would have to store more per-character information than that for the rating system to work the way it does anyway.
-Morgan.
I think you could in that respect. I pretty sure Morgan is right, it does at least keep track of if you have played the mission before or not, because of the rating system. If the check could be made prior to completing the mission, or at the time of reward claim it could work.
My character Tsin'xing