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.
Not necessarily... there's more than one way to track who rated what. It could be the record is kept on the Foundry side and not on the Account side.
(In other words, rather than checking what missions you played, the ratings system might check the mission to see who played it...)
Which is to say, they can probably still do that check but they might have to do it in a different way that might not be trivial.
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
First things first... I can't believe I read the whole thread...
Some observations:
The cool thing about the Star Trek is a huge universe with stories just beyond the horizon. That to me is the purpose of the foundry to fill in the gaps from the Episodes in game. (Please Cryptic may we have more? )
When there was the IOR 30min timer it was great I could do a full story mission, earn some dil and some FM and have fun.
I enjoy the story aspect of this game, however, I seriously get annoyed having to grind and do various fleet mark runs that don't earn nearly as many FM or any dil, just to help my fleet try and keep up with the large amounts required to advance.
This now cuts into my time playing the Foundry missions.
This is a game and games are supposed to be fun.
The current dilithium scaling is fine, you get what you earn. So why can't fleet marks be scaled the same way with these and put back in.
I still think the timed based solution for the rewards for the missions spent is the best way to go. Something that scales like the mission rewards do. Average length 15min: 466 DL & 15 FMs, 30min 944 DL 30 FM, 1h+ 1440DL 50FM. Just like those missions in game with the average expected times and investment reward (whatever those numbrers actually are).
Other than that, I just wish the search were more friendly to find quality missions (so I don't have to tab out to the forums to find them).
First things first... I can't believe I read the whole thread...
.
Damn, son! You did read all of that! That quote of mine was buried!
I am pleased that again I was vindicated for saying the time incremented rewards were coming, but had hoped the FMs would stay in there.
I guess all that is left for us now is to hope and rely on the fixes and alterations Cryptic makes to the way FMs are rewarded in the coming months. While I am hopeful, my feelings are also tempered with fear.
Sadly, I have to assume that when Dan Stahl says Fleet Marks should not be awarded via the Foundry and never should have been and never will be again, he's serious enough about it that it's highly unlikely.
The saddest part of all to me is overlooking the idea that the Foundry can be a source of group play missions as well as solo play missions.
As I've said previously, we could benefit in numerous ways from being able to categorize missions into solo play and group play. There are different dynamics involved and they appeal to players in different ways. There are also likely to be subtle or not-so-subtle differences between missions designed for a group and missions designed to be played by one person.
Group missions, for example, can suffer from being too dialogue intensive. First of all, if the dialogue objectives are clicked through by one player, most likely the others don't get a chance to read it. Dialogue in STO is not very team-friendly in most respects. So missions need to be designed a little bit differently so that dialogue is either minimal or less subject to being lost.
Group missions are also by definition more suited for active objectives like interacting with multiple objects and combat, so that everybody on the team has something to do.
Group missions are therefore likely to be rated differently than missions designed for solo play. And I'm not sure that it's out-of-bounds that they ought to reward differently.
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
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?
Carrying forward the idea of a Foundry Reputation, how it might work and what it might reward...
I'm going to assume for the moment that Cryptic isn't going to want to change the paradigm much, or at least as little as possible.
So there will be some kind of "Marks" to earn, some form of "Projects" to complete, and a combination of abilities and items to be unlocked.
One basic question I have is whether this will be Player-focused or Author-focused? A Dual-focused system would be ideal, but probably hard to balance for both. I think it needs to benefit both, but I don't envy Cryptic figuring out the details.
Thinking about a Player-focused Foundry Rep, the following things might be true:
Marks rewarded for completing a (qualifying) Foundry mission
Marks rewarded for rating a Foundry mission (One time reward per mission?)
The Projects would likely be Exploration-themed and so the inputs would likely be as well.
The abilities and items unlocked should relate to PvE and to the Foundry or Exploration in particular. One possibility is passive bonuses to rewards for playing Foundry content. Or unlocking combat pets. Etc.
On the other hand, an Author-focused Foundry Rep would likely play differently:
Marks rewarded on an Account-wide basis* for Missions Rated, which might scale according to the rating.
Marks rewarded for testing a Foundry mission (but this might be exploitable).
The Projects could be simply "Promoting Your Mission" and would take only Marks as inputs since that's the only thing an Author can really accumulate.
The unlocks could relate specifically to creating mission content and could include things like bonus Foundry slots and other Account-wide unlocks*.
*Since Foundry access and creation is on an Account basis and not on a Per-Character basis, it doesn't make much sense to reward a single character on the Author's account.
Now these are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but you can see how the mechanics of it are likely to be somewhat different based on the focus of the system.
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
Comments
Not necessarily... there's more than one way to track who rated what. It could be the record is kept on the Foundry side and not on the Account side.
(In other words, rather than checking what missions you played, the ratings system might check the mission to see who played it...)
Which is to say, they can probably still do that check but they might have to do it in a different way that might not be trivial.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Some observations:
The cool thing about the Star Trek is a huge universe with stories just beyond the horizon. That to me is the purpose of the foundry to fill in the gaps from the Episodes in game. (Please Cryptic may we have more?
When there was the IOR 30min timer it was great I could do a full story mission, earn some dil and some FM and have fun.
I enjoy the story aspect of this game, however, I seriously get annoyed having to grind and do various fleet mark runs that don't earn nearly as many FM or any dil, just to help my fleet try and keep up with the large amounts required to advance.
This now cuts into my time playing the Foundry missions.
This is a game and games are supposed to be fun.
The current dilithium scaling is fine, you get what you earn. So why can't fleet marks be scaled the same way with these and put back in.
Other than that, I just wish the search were more friendly to find quality missions (so I don't have to tab out to the forums to find them).
I'm pretty sure they change back to white after a week or two. (Similar to links on your web browser when you clean the cache etc).
Damn, son! You did read all of that! That quote of mine was buried!
I am pleased that again I was vindicated for saying the time incremented rewards were coming, but had hoped the FMs would stay in there.
I guess all that is left for us now is to hope and rely on the fixes and alterations Cryptic makes to the way FMs are rewarded in the coming months. While I am hopeful, my feelings are also tempered with fear.
The saddest part of all to me is overlooking the idea that the Foundry can be a source of group play missions as well as solo play missions.
As I've said previously, we could benefit in numerous ways from being able to categorize missions into solo play and group play. There are different dynamics involved and they appeal to players in different ways. There are also likely to be subtle or not-so-subtle differences between missions designed for a group and missions designed to be played by one person.
Group missions, for example, can suffer from being too dialogue intensive. First of all, if the dialogue objectives are clicked through by one player, most likely the others don't get a chance to read it. Dialogue in STO is not very team-friendly in most respects. So missions need to be designed a little bit differently so that dialogue is either minimal or less subject to being lost.
Group missions are also by definition more suited for active objectives like interacting with multiple objects and combat, so that everybody on the team has something to do.
Group missions are therefore likely to be rated differently than missions designed for solo play. And I'm not sure that it's out-of-bounds that they ought to reward differently.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Carrying forward the idea of a Foundry Reputation, how it might work and what it might reward...
I'm going to assume for the moment that Cryptic isn't going to want to change the paradigm much, or at least as little as possible.
So there will be some kind of "Marks" to earn, some form of "Projects" to complete, and a combination of abilities and items to be unlocked.
One basic question I have is whether this will be Player-focused or Author-focused? A Dual-focused system would be ideal, but probably hard to balance for both. I think it needs to benefit both, but I don't envy Cryptic figuring out the details.
Thinking about a Player-focused Foundry Rep, the following things might be true:
On the other hand, an Author-focused Foundry Rep would likely play differently:
*Since Foundry access and creation is on an Account basis and not on a Per-Character basis, it doesn't make much sense to reward a single character on the Author's account.
Now these are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but you can see how the mechanics of it are likely to be somewhat different based on the focus of the system.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek