The thing is you people in small Fleets all want your contributions to count for more towards fleet holding progression then mine does. I don't see that as fair to me or others in my fleet. I work just as hard for my dil and FM and it should be worth the same amount as anyone elses regardless of fleet size. If it doesn't work this way I am penalized in that my individual contributions are worth less towards completing a project then yours would be.
No MMO works that way, some in fact even penalize guilds for not growing through maintenance fees that don't scale for smaller guilds, and also by restricting certain guild holdings until they reach a certain size. MMO means massivley multiplayer, that means you need lots of players, it doesn't mean micro multiplayer where you can stay in 5 man fleet and get everything handed to you.
Another assumptions on your part. I'm not in a small fleet. My fleet has 100+ people from all over the world. Some of the larger fleets are affected by this as well.
And I can see you have ignored pretty much the main part of my post, choice. I had a choice before. Now, I must grind because.
How the Devs see Star Trek, apparently:
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
The fleets I am in have been restriciting alts and are constantly booting inactive people to make room for more new people due to always being at the 500 man limit and wanting let new people share in having a developed starbase. Some people have an alt or 2 but most don't keep them in the Fleet to keep room open, we have to use custom chat channels and voice servers a lot because so many people are in the fleet but often not in the fleet on the character they are currently playing.
And? This is still not the norm for a lot of fleets.
Just because that is the rules your fleet does, doesn't mean every other "large" fleet does the same.
Still not sure where your coming from and what your "real" thoughts are.
So far it seem your own"metrics" are based solely on your own fleet and that is what you are portraying as facts.
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
I thought this thread was about removing the marks that effect everyone, big fleets and little?
What have I missed?
I was replying to a post saying it was mostly us from large fleets that don't mind the changes and it wasn't a large vs small fleet thing, and I pointed out that many of them have been asking for scaling down contribution requirements for small fleets in this thread and others and how Ithink its unfair.
And no removing FM for IOR does not hurt my fleet at all, nobody is complaining. We actually do stuff together as a fleet like 20 man Starbase defense and earn lots of fleet marks all the time. We spend more time complaining about not being able to all donate our marks then lack of marks.
The main problem with the removal of fleet marks in officer reports is that it was by far the most convenient way of earning them. Once you got a taste of something far better and efficient, you don't want to miss it.
At the same time this also means that pretty much all other ways were lackluster and overly grind'ish.
If Fleet Marks rewards for fleet actions were increased by 50% or so, there would've been at least a small compensation for the removal of the officer reports.
You know, if you're going to take something away, you should offer something in return, to appease your customers.
Fleet Marks will becoming common rewards for "Group Queued Gameplay" whereas Dilithium will be focused on more solo Mission Gameplay.
Could this mean that the Dilithium reward in STFs might be replaced by fleet marks? I'm asking specifically about STFs because they're a major source of Dilithium and would fall into "Group Queued Gameplay".
However I think even if that was the case a small amount of Dil. should be kept. Like 480 Dil. instead of 960.
To encourage grouped fleet activites (the opposite of officer reports), there could be a Fleet Mark bonus for a complete fleet-only team.
I guess I could live with that.
We appreciate that there is frustration about losing the Fleet Marks in the Foundry, but Fleet Marks were never intended for solo based gameplay.
Ok, if they were never intended for solo based gameplay, why were they put there (in the officer reports) in the first place?
This doesn't sounds very plausible. It seems more like you formulated this 'concept' just recently in the search for a working system. Or maybe there's another explanation. But I'm pretty sure it didn't happen by accident.
Isn't it entirely possible that the change is because "Large" fleets are using this method to get marks easy, hence why some are getting to the top tier faster than Cryptic would like?
This change effects large and small fleets. Not sure why some don't get this.
Either way, let them. Large or small. It's still sounds like a boring grind to me, so if they want to do it, let them.
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
I was replying to a post saying it was mostly us from large fleets that don't mind the changes and it wasn't a large vs small fleet thing, and I pointed out that many of them have been asking for scaling down contribution requirements for small fleets in this thread and others and how Ithink its unfair.
How is that unfair? Should the players in smaller fleets get less rewards for their work? Because currently they do, you keep ignoring the fact that members of small fleets have to do *more* for the same rewards. Ergo, the return on investment is far worse then in larger fleets, scaling down so the return on investment would be the same vs. larger fleets would *not* be unfair to you, it would be fair for those in smaller fleets...
Lost and Delirious... and Disenchanted too Apparently some forum posters have diplomatic immunity nowadays, where can I get mine?
I was replying to a post saying it was mostly us from large fleets that don't mind the changes and it wasn't a large vs small fleet thing, and I pointed out that many of them have been asking for scaling down contribution requirements for small fleets in this thread and others and how Ithink its unfair.
And no removing FM for IOR does not hurt my fleet at all, nobody is complaining. We actually do stuff together as a fleet like 20 man Starbase defense and earn lots of fleet marks all the time. We spend more time complaining about not being able to all donate our marks then lack of marks.
So how many in your fleet? Have you managed to get feedback from all of them? I take it "everyone" in your fleet is happy with this as you say?
Must be a very active, every player comes on and plays all the time since the removal yesterday type of fleet for you to know that "everyone" in your fleet is happy with the changes.
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
Another assumptions on your part. I'm not in a small fleet. My fleet has 100+ people from all over the world. Some of the larger fleets are affected by this as well.
And I can see you have ignored pretty much the main part of my post, choice. I had a choice before. Now, I must grind because.
Well I do agree we need more choices, I pointed out in earlier posts that get buried under the see of complaints that we do need more Fleet events. However I also agree with what the dev said that FM should be awarded for group content only, not something soloable like IOR.
What we need is a few more Fleet mark events for both space and ground, and also pvp versions of the existing ones with more marks to winner as to discourage people from AFKing.
Also FM should be added to the Fleet actions as well.
Isn't it entirely possible that the change is because "Large" fleets are using this method to get marks easy, hence why some are getting to the top tier faster than Cryptic would like?
This change effects large and small fleets. Not sure why some don't get this.
Either way, let them. Large or small. It's still sounds like a boring grind to me, so if they want to do it, let them.
yes some of us were doing it, but seeing as we can always get full groups for 20 man FM event it doesn't matter either way.
I was replying to a post saying it was mostly us from large fleets that don't mind the changes and it wasn't a large vs small fleet thing, and I pointed out that many of them have been asking for scaling down contribution requirements for small fleets in this thread and others and how Ithink its unfair.
And no removing FM for IOR does not hurt my fleet at all, nobody is complaining. We actually do stuff together as a fleet like 20 man Starbase defense and earn lots of fleet marks all the time. We spend more time complaining about not being able to all donate our marks then lack of marks.
Then if it is no issue for you why not start your own thread backing Cryptic, because as of right now we are going on 200 total pages of disent, and not much in favor.
How the Devs see Star Trek, apparently:
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
yes some of us were doing it, but seeing as we can always get full groups for 20 man FM event it doesn't matter either way.
Ahh, so not only conjecture about large fleets, but your own too?
So you don't really know how they think?
Straight from the mouth of one of the leaders of the CDF - "I tell you what, Haven't spent any money either - I'm a lousy freeloader" - Jonsills 17/12/2014
How is that unfair? Should the players in smaller fleets get less rewards for their work? Because currently they do, you keep ignoring the fact that members of small fleets have to do *more* for the same rewards. Ergo, the return on investment is far worse then in larger fleets, scaling down so the return on investment would be the same vs. larger fleets would *not* be unfair to you, it would be fair for those in smaller fleets...
If I have a million Dilithium or a 1000 fm on hand(which sometimes I do have even more of at times) and its enough to finish a project on my own, I should be able to contribute it and finish that project regardless if I am in a large or small fleet. If I was able to take those same resources and be able to use it to finish a project in a small fleet but if I donated the same amount in my fleet and the project didn't get finished due to some silly scaling requirement I would be very angry and so would many of my other fleet mates.
After the release of Season 7, we noticed that the amount of Fleet Marks players were earning per day started declining. As we expected, it was mostly due to the introduction of new content and the new Reputation system. Players were now spending less time in missions that granted Fleet Marks, and more time in missions that granted Dilithium and Rep Marks.
WHAT?!?!?!? You don't say?!?!?! :rolleyes:
Proably because the Romulan rep missions have crappy payout and are both HARD CAPPED and TIME GATED, so people are forced to grind those more than fleet mark missions. Things that could help alleviate the pressure?
1. REMOVE THE HARD CAPS from ROMULAN REP missions: Why are they there? It's simply an artifice to ****** progression.
2. HARD CAP or TIME LIMIT - NOT BOTH: I can't stress this more. It is unfair and entirely onerous.
3. Give a bump to REP missions so people can do the current fleet missions: This is self explanatory.
4. Add fleet marks to Other Fleet actions: (Breaking the Planet, etc etc)
People don't like being forced to play a particular way. Give them some freedom, and they won't complain as much.
Well I do agree we need more choices, I pointed out in earlier posts that get buried under the see of complaints that we do need more Fleet events. However I also agree with what the dev said that FM should be awarded for group content only, not something soloable like IOR.
What we need is a few more Fleet mark events for both space and ground, and also pvp versions of the existing ones with more marks to winner as to discourage people from AFKing.
Also FM should be added to the Fleet actions as well.
Welcome to the dark side....oh, sorry, wrong IP.
This is the same point many of us have been making. It's not the removal of FM from IOR thats the actual issue, its that removal without the new systems being in place.
The changes as they stand, massively, disproportionately affect small fleets.
Your big fleet will not be affected to the same degree.
Waiting months for a fix is simply not acceptable.
I also take great exception to your assertion that, without this change, your hard work is somehow being devalued.
Big fleets, by definition, get things done faster......nothing wrong with that at all, its as it should be.
However small fleets, even before this change, had to work harder to achieve the same results.
After this change, the difficulty has increased massively.
It is small fleets work that is being devalued, not big fleets.
And? This is still not the norm for a lot of fleets.
Just because that is the rules your fleet does, doesn't mean every other "large" fleet does the same.
Still not sure where your coming from and what your "real" thoughts are.
So far it seem your own"metrics" are based solely on your own fleet and that is what you are portraying as facts.
And how is his metrics any more or less valid then what you claim above in your response. Do you have the ability to datamine STO's fleet statistics? Probably not, would be my guess. He posting his Fleet situation; and you're countering with your guess.
In other words - how are his 'facts' any more or less valid then what you attempt to present as you 'facts' in your reply?
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Then if it is no issue for you why not start your own thread backing Cryptic, because as of right now we are going on 200 total pages of disent, and not much in favor.
This is not a complaint only thread if you read the title it says update on the changes to FM and Dil, and thus the thread is for any feedback and discussion on it, positive or negative.
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet does more PER MEMBER than the larger fleet.
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet spends more time in game PER MEMBER than the large fleet
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet is more potential profit than the large fleet
Simple logic says, design to the small fleet, and Cap fleet size at a much smaller number
The exploit, is the large fleet. Stop the exploit.
no matter how you spin it the fact is a small fleet does more per active member, meaning more potential for profit. The problem isn't the small fleet, its the fleets exploiting size to trivialize the efforts needed to get to the next tier.
5400 marks, 348K Dil for a T3 upgrade *(leaving out the consumables)
10 man fleet =540 marks per man, 34.8K dil per man
100 man fleet =54 marks per man 3.48 dil per man
Clearly the smaller fleet does more per member meaning more potential for profit, it takes them longer, they must be in the game more than the 100 man fleet, they're much more valuable than the 100 man fleet,
9 Fleet actions and 5 days of max Dil refine Vs 1 Fleet action, and one day of doff grind
If I have a million Dilithium or a 1000 fm on hand(which sometimes I do have even more of at times) and its enough to finish a project on my own, I should be able to contribute it and finish that project regardless if I am in a large or small fleet. If I was able to take those same resources and be able to use it to finish a project in a small fleet but if I donated the same amount in my fleet and the project didn't get finished due to some silly scaling requirement I would be very angry and so would many of my other fleet mates.
*Puts on Devil's Advocate hat*
Sure, but according to you your fleet has 500 people to cntribute. Really shouldn't be a problem to advance. Even my fleet at 100+ wouldn't have too big an issue.
Now for the smaller fleets, it would be a problem (and that may depend on the definition of "small fleet."
Cryptic says it's system was designed around a fleet of 25 people. Your fleet can get things done faster since it has 500. Your fleet is at an advantage because more people than what the system was designed for can contribute. Should the 25 man fleets continue to suffer becasue they are playing within the system?
And no I'm not asking for a nerf. I don't want to suffer the same wrath the Foundry authors did yesterday
How the Devs see Star Trek, apparently:
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
As far as the small fleet vs large fleet debate goes pricing for a project shouldn't matter large or small.
If a group of people went in to buy a gallon of milk, should they get charged more than the single person that goes in? Or would they get charged the same.
The prices/resources are set. If your in a 5 person fleet, you have to know your going to have to grind 2x as much as a 10 person fleet to finish the same project.
A scale/sliding system won't work because there are those that would abuse it. All you have to do is keep your numbers low until the base is finished, rotating members in and out. Then when its done bring everyone into the fold.
They should have set a larger minimum limit on starting a base. Like 15 or 20 people.
One way to help is introducing some sort of allies system where smaller fleets can band together for the larger fleet events.(Even though they s**k so bad.)
Cryptic should STOP replacing bad or malfunctioning designs out whenever they come up with a better design. From a design perspective, again, the new design is better and would have been a coherent design IF IT HAD LAUNCHED FIRST. Does that mean you don't tweak anything or change anything ever? No. Of course not.
But get outside of the design mentality. Think about what makes sense as a progression from where you are.
It's not a challenge unique to game design. It's present in just about every business environment.
If you come up with a better business model mid-stream, switching to it is a bad approach for the customer relationship. You find ways of tweaking the existing situation or phasing in that new business model.
STOP REPLACING WHAT YOU HAVE WITH BETTER ON-PAPER DESIGNS.
Cryptic needs to focus on marketing (the product development side: customer satisfaction development, in-house marketing), engagement, and transition management.
Frankly, I think you need a marketing person whose job is to provide the consumer experience perspective with veto power at all meetings. It's not a task that should be a split focus for Al, Dan, Jack, Zero, etc. Absolutely, you need everyone thinking about it but I think you need someone whose primary job is to study, develop, and think about the customer experience...
And they need to have veto power when this stuff is on the whiteboard. "Good design isn't everything if we can't plan a good rollout for it. A design is only as good as its rollout method." And they need to be able to veto iterative adjustments. So that when somebody says, "I'm not sure about this direction anymore" you have somebody who says, "No. We're not dropping this."
Until Cryptic can provide that, it's going to be one or more of these blowups every quarter like clockwork.
As far as the small fleet vs large fleet debate goes pricing for a project shouldn't matter large or small.
If a group of people went in to buy a gallon of milk, should they get charged more than the single person that goes in? Or would they get charged the same.
The prices/resources are set. If your in a 5 person fleet, you have to know your going to have to grind 2x as much as a 10 person fleet to finish the same project.
A scale/sliding system won't work because there are those that would abuse it. All you have to do is keep your numbers low until the base is finished, rotating members in and out. Then when its done bring everyone into the fold.
They should have set a larger minimum limit on starting a base. Like 15 or 20 people.
One way to help is introducing some sort of allies system where smaller fleets can band together for the larger fleet events.(Even though they s**k so bad.)
A limit may have helped avert some of the backlash. If your system is designed for a 25 man fleet, make it so you can't begin a Starbase until that number is met. Keep the resource requirements as they are so you can't ditch members to grind smaller requirements.
Maybe even have some type of system where you have squadrons as part of larger fleets; if you want to only play with a certain group of people, form a squadron and affiliate with a fleet. Of course, you would need rules as to what you can buy and what you can contribute, but it's a start.
How the Devs see Star Trek, apparently:
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
Anyway, I have to say as far as people in larger fleets not complaining. It could also be that many people in large fleets are not complaining because most of them rarely donate as it is. They may donate a little here and there just to reach the level where they are allowed to purchase items from the fleet base. Beyond that, they see no reason to donate. They figure with so many other people in the fleet that their lack of donating won't really matter. In a way, that's true. The reason why smaller fleets are up in arms about this is that with a smaller fleet, people are expected to contribute more. There is no getting lost in the shuffle of a big fleet there. If your fleet has just 10 members, each member is expected to pitch in and if they don't want to, maybe they do belong in a larger fleet where they can just sleep through most of the hard stuff, yet still reap the rewards. Some people have told me that they all have thresholds that people must reach before they are allowed to purchase fleet items. Some of them are as small as 50k in contributions. That is not very hard to reach. In fact, just from the fleet marks one of my characters has I can pass that number in just a few donations. Given that i can do that, what is my motivation to keep contributing? There is none because in all likelihood I would never ascend to a leadership role in a fleet with several hundred member. Heck, I have been in a fleet where I was top 5 in contributions, but I was never looked at for a leadership spot because I didn't know the right people.
If you really think about it, this sounds an awful lot like the corporate world. Most people that get the promotions and the better jobs often have an inside track. To me, that feels so wrong. It basically means that no matter how hard I work I will probably never get to the top because I am not friends with the right people. This is why many of us choose to remain small because it feels more like a family and less like Office Space.
By coming out and saying that they are purposely making it harder on smaller fleets is their way of telling us that Wal Mart is going to swallow your mom and pop business and there is nothing you can do about it. The saddest thing about all this is that we can do something about it, but "God" won't listen. They've made up their mind and they don't care who they anger. This is their way of saying "It's our way or the highway."
No, I am not who you think I am. I am someone different. I am instead a banana.
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet does more PER MEMBER than the larger fleet.
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet spends more time in game PER MEMBER than the large fleet
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet is more potential profit than the large fleet
Simple logic says, design to the small fleet, and Cap fleet size at a much smaller number
The exploit, is the large fleet. Stop the exploit.
no matter how you spin it the fact is a small fleet does more per active member, meaning more potential for profit. The problem isn't the small fleet, its the fleets exploiting size to trivialize the efforts needed to get to the next tier.
5400 marks, 348K Dil for a T3 upgrade *(leaving out the consumables)
10 man fleet =540 marks per man, 34.8K dil per man
100 man fleet =54 marks per man 3.48 dil per man
Clearly the smaller fleet does more per member meaning more potential for profit, it takes them longer, they must be in the game more than the 100 man fleet, they're much more valuable than the 100 man fleet,
9 Fleet actions and 5 days of max Dil refine Vs 1 Fleet action, and one day of doff grind
You are valuing the wrong group.
Stop the exploit, stop the large fleet.
where are your numbers for this simple math?
Do you even realize how many Fleet ships module sales my Fleet generates for cryptic compared to yours? Since we are able to advance our shipyard quickly, most people in my fleet own lots of fleet ships, and outsiders are sometimes able to make arrangements to join temporarily to get fleet ships. I myself own 9 fleet ships on my account, some people in my fleet own even more. You aren't likely to buy all the modules for that without unlocking high tier shipyard.
We don't need to use up all of our dil like you do either. So who do you think is grinding that dil out to sell to you on the dil exchange. Dil being put on exchange causes people to buy zen, that is also more sales for cryptic.
You fail to point out how just because each member of your small fleet has to indiviually work harder that is more profit for cryptic.
If anything your fleet is a drain on server resources compared to mine, the server has to use the same resources to generate an instance for your fleet holdings and mine, and has to use same resources to store that data. If everyone was in large fleets they might not even have to instance all our holdings and we could have persistent holdings like in other MMOs.
Maybe there should be a fleet maintenance fee to help discourage excessive fleet spam.
Do you even realize how many Fleet ships module sales my Fleet generates for cryptic compared to yours? Since we are able to advance our shipyard quickly, most people in my fleet own lots of fleet ships, and outsiders are sometimes able to make arrangements to join temporarily to get fleet ships. I myself own 9 fleet ships on my account, some people in my fleet own even more. You aren't likely to buy all the modules for that without unlocking high tier shipyard.
We don't need to use up all of our dil like you do either. So who do you think is grinding that dil out to sell to you on the dil exchange. Dil being put on exchange causes people to buy zen, that is also more sales for cryptic.
You fail to point out how just because each member of your small fleet has to indiviually work harder that is more profit for cryptic.
If anything your fleet is a drain on server resources compared to mine, the server has to use the same resources to generate an instance for your fleet holdings and mine, and has to use same resources to stare that data. If everyone was in large fleets they might not even have to instance all our holdings and we could have persistent holdings like in other MMOs.
Maybe there should be a fleet maintenance fee to help discourage excessive fleet spam.
..........
And here I thought I'd already seen the most arrogant, self-centered, elitist and delusional post of the day...
The debate about marks will continue, but I'm more concerned about how Cryptic handled this.
All I can see is that Cryptic decided to take marks away from Foundry, decided to let everyone know in the patch notes a day before the patch was to go live, and failed to include a suitable alternative for earning marks.
To me this is lazy. I actually agree that fleet marks should be out of Foundry and that the system was abused much like clickies for Dil. I do not agree that they rushed in and took it away with barely any notice, and not without another means to earn marks in place.
Comments
Another assumptions on your part. I'm not in a small fleet. My fleet has 100+ people from all over the world. Some of the larger fleets are affected by this as well.
And I can see you have ignored pretty much the main part of my post, choice. I had a choice before. Now, I must grind because.
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
And? This is still not the norm for a lot of fleets.
Just because that is the rules your fleet does, doesn't mean every other "large" fleet does the same.
Still not sure where your coming from and what your "real" thoughts are.
So far it seem your own"metrics" are based solely on your own fleet and that is what you are portraying as facts.
I was replying to a post saying it was mostly us from large fleets that don't mind the changes and it wasn't a large vs small fleet thing, and I pointed out that many of them have been asking for scaling down contribution requirements for small fleets in this thread and others and how Ithink its unfair.
And no removing FM for IOR does not hurt my fleet at all, nobody is complaining. We actually do stuff together as a fleet like 20 man Starbase defense and earn lots of fleet marks all the time. We spend more time complaining about not being able to all donate our marks then lack of marks.
The main problem with the removal of fleet marks in officer reports is that it was by far the most convenient way of earning them. Once you got a taste of something far better and efficient, you don't want to miss it.
At the same time this also means that pretty much all other ways were lackluster and overly grind'ish.
If Fleet Marks rewards for fleet actions were increased by 50% or so, there would've been at least a small compensation for the removal of the officer reports.
You know, if you're going to take something away, you should offer something in return, to appease your customers.
Could this mean that the Dilithium reward in STFs might be replaced by fleet marks? I'm asking specifically about STFs because they're a major source of Dilithium and would fall into "Group Queued Gameplay".
However I think even if that was the case a small amount of Dil. should be kept. Like 480 Dil. instead of 960.
To encourage grouped fleet activites (the opposite of officer reports), there could be a Fleet Mark bonus for a complete fleet-only team.
I guess I could live with that.
Ok, if they were never intended for solo based gameplay, why were they put there (in the officer reports) in the first place?
This doesn't sounds very plausible. It seems more like you formulated this 'concept' just recently in the search for a working system. Or maybe there's another explanation. But I'm pretty sure it didn't happen by accident.
This change effects large and small fleets. Not sure why some don't get this.
Either way, let them. Large or small. It's still sounds like a boring grind to me, so if they want to do it, let them.
How is that unfair? Should the players in smaller fleets get less rewards for their work? Because currently they do, you keep ignoring the fact that members of small fleets have to do *more* for the same rewards. Ergo, the return on investment is far worse then in larger fleets, scaling down so the return on investment would be the same vs. larger fleets would *not* be unfair to you, it would be fair for those in smaller fleets...
Apparently some forum posters have diplomatic immunity nowadays, where can I get mine? [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
So how many in your fleet? Have you managed to get feedback from all of them? I take it "everyone" in your fleet is happy with this as you say?
Must be a very active, every player comes on and plays all the time since the removal yesterday type of fleet for you to know that "everyone" in your fleet is happy with the changes.
Well I do agree we need more choices, I pointed out in earlier posts that get buried under the see of complaints that we do need more Fleet events. However I also agree with what the dev said that FM should be awarded for group content only, not something soloable like IOR.
What we need is a few more Fleet mark events for both space and ground, and also pvp versions of the existing ones with more marks to winner as to discourage people from AFKing.
Also FM should be added to the Fleet actions as well.
yes some of us were doing it, but seeing as we can always get full groups for 20 man FM event it doesn't matter either way.
Then if it is no issue for you why not start your own thread backing Cryptic, because as of right now we are going on 200 total pages of disent, and not much in favor.
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
Ahh, so not only conjecture about large fleets, but your own too?
So you don't really know how they think?
If I have a million Dilithium or a 1000 fm on hand(which sometimes I do have even more of at times) and its enough to finish a project on my own, I should be able to contribute it and finish that project regardless if I am in a large or small fleet. If I was able to take those same resources and be able to use it to finish a project in a small fleet but if I donated the same amount in my fleet and the project didn't get finished due to some silly scaling requirement I would be very angry and so would many of my other fleet mates.
WHAT?!?!?!? You don't say?!?!?! :rolleyes:
Proably because the Romulan rep missions have crappy payout and are both HARD CAPPED and TIME GATED, so people are forced to grind those more than fleet mark missions. Things that could help alleviate the pressure?
1. REMOVE THE HARD CAPS from ROMULAN REP missions: Why are they there? It's simply an artifice to ****** progression.
2. HARD CAP or TIME LIMIT - NOT BOTH: I can't stress this more. It is unfair and entirely onerous.
3. Give a bump to REP missions so people can do the current fleet missions: This is self explanatory.
4. Add fleet marks to Other Fleet actions: (Breaking the Planet, etc etc)
People don't like being forced to play a particular way. Give them some freedom, and they won't complain as much.
No one likes "Playing as intended".
-ABM
Welcome to the dark side....oh, sorry, wrong IP.
This is the same point many of us have been making. It's not the removal of FM from IOR thats the actual issue, its that removal without the new systems being in place.
The changes as they stand, massively, disproportionately affect small fleets.
Your big fleet will not be affected to the same degree.
Waiting months for a fix is simply not acceptable.
I also take great exception to your assertion that, without this change, your hard work is somehow being devalued.
Big fleets, by definition, get things done faster......nothing wrong with that at all, its as it should be.
However small fleets, even before this change, had to work harder to achieve the same results.
After this change, the difficulty has increased massively.
It is small fleets work that is being devalued, not big fleets.
On that point, you are simply in error.
what conjecture?
And how is his metrics any more or less valid then what you claim above in your response. Do you have the ability to datamine STO's fleet statistics? Probably not, would be my guess. He posting his Fleet situation; and you're countering with your guess.
In other words - how are his 'facts' any more or less valid then what you attempt to present as you 'facts' in your reply?
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
This is not a complaint only thread if you read the title it says update on the changes to FM and Dil, and thus the thread is for any feedback and discussion on it, positive or negative.
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet spends more time in game PER MEMBER than the large fleet
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet is more potential profit than the large fleet
Simple logic says, design to the small fleet, and Cap fleet size at a much smaller number
The exploit, is the large fleet. Stop the exploit.
no matter how you spin it the fact is a small fleet does more per active member, meaning more potential for profit. The problem isn't the small fleet, its the fleets exploiting size to trivialize the efforts needed to get to the next tier.
5400 marks, 348K Dil for a T3 upgrade *(leaving out the consumables)
10 man fleet =540 marks per man, 34.8K dil per man
100 man fleet =54 marks per man 3.48 dil per man
Clearly the smaller fleet does more per member meaning more potential for profit, it takes them longer, they must be in the game more than the 100 man fleet, they're much more valuable than the 100 man fleet,
9 Fleet actions and 5 days of max Dil refine Vs 1 Fleet action, and one day of doff grind
You are valuing the wrong group.
Stop the exploit, stop the large fleet.
*Puts on Devil's Advocate hat*
Sure, but according to you your fleet has 500 people to cntribute. Really shouldn't be a problem to advance. Even my fleet at 100+ wouldn't have too big an issue.
Now for the smaller fleets, it would be a problem (and that may depend on the definition of "small fleet."
Cryptic says it's system was designed around a fleet of 25 people. Your fleet can get things done faster since it has 500. Your fleet is at an advantage because more people than what the system was designed for can contribute. Should the 25 man fleets continue to suffer becasue they are playing within the system?
And no I'm not asking for a nerf. I don't want to suffer the same wrath the Foundry authors did yesterday
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
If a group of people went in to buy a gallon of milk, should they get charged more than the single person that goes in? Or would they get charged the same.
The prices/resources are set. If your in a 5 person fleet, you have to know your going to have to grind 2x as much as a 10 person fleet to finish the same project.
A scale/sliding system won't work because there are those that would abuse it. All you have to do is keep your numbers low until the base is finished, rotating members in and out. Then when its done bring everyone into the fold.
They should have set a larger minimum limit on starting a base. Like 15 or 20 people.
One way to help is introducing some sort of allies system where smaller fleets can band together for the larger fleet events.(Even though they s**k so bad.)
First, I want to reiterate what I said yesterday when I said that iterative, production oriented, and technology driven is the wrong approach.
Second, in case it got buried in there...
Cryptic should STOP replacing bad or malfunctioning designs out whenever they come up with a better design. From a design perspective, again, the new design is better and would have been a coherent design IF IT HAD LAUNCHED FIRST. Does that mean you don't tweak anything or change anything ever? No. Of course not.
But get outside of the design mentality. Think about what makes sense as a progression from where you are.
It's not a challenge unique to game design. It's present in just about every business environment.
If you come up with a better business model mid-stream, switching to it is a bad approach for the customer relationship. You find ways of tweaking the existing situation or phasing in that new business model.
STOP REPLACING WHAT YOU HAVE WITH BETTER ON-PAPER DESIGNS.
Cryptic needs to focus on marketing (the product development side: customer satisfaction development, in-house marketing), engagement, and transition management.
Frankly, I think you need a marketing person whose job is to provide the consumer experience perspective with veto power at all meetings. It's not a task that should be a split focus for Al, Dan, Jack, Zero, etc. Absolutely, you need everyone thinking about it but I think you need someone whose primary job is to study, develop, and think about the customer experience...
And they need to have veto power when this stuff is on the whiteboard. "Good design isn't everything if we can't plan a good rollout for it. A design is only as good as its rollout method." And they need to be able to veto iterative adjustments. So that when somebody says, "I'm not sure about this direction anymore" you have somebody who says, "No. We're not dropping this."
Until Cryptic can provide that, it's going to be one or more of these blowups every quarter like clockwork.
A limit may have helped avert some of the backlash. If your system is designed for a 25 man fleet, make it so you can't begin a Starbase until that number is met. Keep the resource requirements as they are so you can't ditch members to grind smaller requirements.
Maybe even have some type of system where you have squadrons as part of larger fleets; if you want to only play with a certain group of people, form a squadron and affiliate with a fleet. Of course, you would need rules as to what you can buy and what you can contribute, but it's a start.
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
Hundreds of posts later, almost universally panning the decision.
Its time to give us an answer.
Will you be sorting this sorry debacle out very quickly...or will you simply ignore us all.
Your cash flow will depend on your answer.....and silence will not help either.
Indeed, the longer you remain silent, the more people will assume that you simply dont care.
http://memecreator.eu/media/created/wt1jqf.jpg
Anyway, I have to say as far as people in larger fleets not complaining. It could also be that many people in large fleets are not complaining because most of them rarely donate as it is. They may donate a little here and there just to reach the level where they are allowed to purchase items from the fleet base. Beyond that, they see no reason to donate. They figure with so many other people in the fleet that their lack of donating won't really matter. In a way, that's true. The reason why smaller fleets are up in arms about this is that with a smaller fleet, people are expected to contribute more. There is no getting lost in the shuffle of a big fleet there. If your fleet has just 10 members, each member is expected to pitch in and if they don't want to, maybe they do belong in a larger fleet where they can just sleep through most of the hard stuff, yet still reap the rewards. Some people have told me that they all have thresholds that people must reach before they are allowed to purchase fleet items. Some of them are as small as 50k in contributions. That is not very hard to reach. In fact, just from the fleet marks one of my characters has I can pass that number in just a few donations. Given that i can do that, what is my motivation to keep contributing? There is none because in all likelihood I would never ascend to a leadership role in a fleet with several hundred member. Heck, I have been in a fleet where I was top 5 in contributions, but I was never looked at for a leadership spot because I didn't know the right people.
If you really think about it, this sounds an awful lot like the corporate world. Most people that get the promotions and the better jobs often have an inside track. To me, that feels so wrong. It basically means that no matter how hard I work I will probably never get to the top because I am not friends with the right people. This is why many of us choose to remain small because it feels more like a family and less like Office Space.
By coming out and saying that they are purposely making it harder on smaller fleets is their way of telling us that Wal Mart is going to swallow your mom and pop business and there is nothing you can do about it. The saddest thing about all this is that we can do something about it, but "God" won't listen. They've made up their mind and they don't care who they anger. This is their way of saying "It's our way or the highway."
where are your numbers for this simple math?
Do you even realize how many Fleet ships module sales my Fleet generates for cryptic compared to yours? Since we are able to advance our shipyard quickly, most people in my fleet own lots of fleet ships, and outsiders are sometimes able to make arrangements to join temporarily to get fleet ships. I myself own 9 fleet ships on my account, some people in my fleet own even more. You aren't likely to buy all the modules for that without unlocking high tier shipyard.
We don't need to use up all of our dil like you do either. So who do you think is grinding that dil out to sell to you on the dil exchange. Dil being put on exchange causes people to buy zen, that is also more sales for cryptic.
You fail to point out how just because each member of your small fleet has to indiviually work harder that is more profit for cryptic.
If anything your fleet is a drain on server resources compared to mine, the server has to use the same resources to generate an instance for your fleet holdings and mine, and has to use same resources to store that data. If everyone was in large fleets they might not even have to instance all our holdings and we could have persistent holdings like in other MMOs.
Maybe there should be a fleet maintenance fee to help discourage excessive fleet spam.
..........
And here I thought I'd already seen the most arrogant, self-centered, elitist and delusional post of the day...
All I can see is that Cryptic decided to take marks away from Foundry, decided to let everyone know in the patch notes a day before the patch was to go live, and failed to include a suitable alternative for earning marks.
To me this is lazy. I actually agree that fleet marks should be out of Foundry and that the system was abused much like clickies for Dil. I do not agree that they rushed in and took it away with barely any notice, and not without another means to earn marks in place.