You realize the people on the forums are the minority right? More people play the game then visit the forum.
I bet if you were some how to poll every active member, the majority of players probably would not know about this thread. Or even care.
All my fleetmates don't visit forums that often. And the people that actually play have been very unhappy about throwing away FMs from IOR. They used to do this not because they wanted to exploit, but just because they were not enjoying the content where fleet marks are rewarded. Foundry was a good option to have fun (even teamed) and gain something useful, especially for smaller fleets. The fact they aren't in the forums doesn't mean they don't care about this change. Because they do. At least those who are involved in fleet and actively contribute.
Things have changed with this last patch, and I'm curious to see how.
The only person telling you that you have to do all four grinds at once is YOU.
And really, it's only 3 grinds. Dilithium is part of the fleet and reputation grinds. And really, while pursuing marks, you end up doing stuff that rewards Dilithium as well. Plus, 15 minutes spend on DOffing can set up turn-ins for a fair amount od Dilithium as well...
But still it comes down to one simple thing: Just because there are three grindfests in the game does not mean you HAVE to grind them all at once. Try focusing on one per day. Whichever one you are most behind on, or more importantly, which one you are least annoyed by.
I get tired of people throwing out "I've got to grind 45 minutes to 3 hours grinding before I can play what I enjoy playing... No you most certainly don't. Play what you enjoy playing. You do not HAVE to do a single one of the rep grinds or the fleet grind.
Because I want to progress, would love to get my hads on cetain ships yes I have to and the Dil is for zen ships right now not fleet since till some major changes happen to the game I'm not spending anymore real money on STO.
For the most part, based on the complaints and comments from the complainers concerning the difficulty small fleets have, many of them are small because they WANT to be small. They do not want to grow their fleet.
I would say the majority of people would rather be in smaller fleets full stop because closer knit communities are more meaningful and fun, you don't feel simply another number.
The problem here is Cryptic preferred Large Fleets other Small ones which is entirely counter intuitive to human nature.
For the most part, based on the complaints and comments from the complainers concerning the difficulty small fleets have, many of them are small because they WANT to be small. They do not want to grow their fleet.
That's why I say that large fleets should get LARGE fleet holdings to work towars. Small fleets should get small ones.
Either that or you implement a system that tracks how large a fleet has ever been and implement scaling mark and dilithium costs based on that tracked value. That way, a large fleet cannot drop down to minimal size, blow through the scaled down progression costs and then invite everyone back. You also add a system that puts a daily cap of 5 new characters added to the fleet. so that a fleet cannot start small, take advantage of scaled down costs and then suddenly baloon up to a massive fleet.
The system needs to be balanced in such a way that a small fleet can advance as quickly as a large fleet but where those who would be large fleets cannot game the system.
So fairness will require some restrictions and regulations that do not exist now.
So I say leave the system as it is, but give those who would be small fleets small holdings they can advance reasonably with their PREFERRED fewer numbers. Let those holdings have a purpose. Maybe there are DOff assignments there that award commodities that are required for large fleet holdings. A fleet permissions system could be used to grant non-fleet members permission to visit the base and use the NPCs that grant DOff assignments.
A Tier 5 production facility could grant up to 50 of a single commodity every 5 minutes. at half the cost of replicating them. So if something ordinarily would cost 100ex, at the facility it would cost 50. This will help fleets produce large numbers of comodities needed for projects.
Let the small fleet holdings service large fleets. This way they serve a valid purpose.
Of course, I think that large holdings need to serve more of a purpose than to just grant members access to top-end gear. Fleet Holdings could and should become part of a greater end-game mechanic.
Things are a little bit different. Smaller fleets want to be bigger (ofc there are exceptions) but they can't get new players because they want better stuff, so they make big fleets even bigger. Smaller holdings would mean worse stuff (if I got you right) = small fleet which wants to improve dead. Here we go again. The less-hurting solution is Always a progressive system rewarding the same as bigger fleets. Less complicated than a fleet provision Exchange as you purposed too. Sure, some restrictions would be needed too, like not letting more than 5 alts in the same fleet etc (btw the progressive system should be based by accounts, not alts, as more alts you have, less time you can spend on them - a day is 24h for everyone)
First, "many people aren't happy" is a matter of perspective. There are certainly people that aren't happy, but there are also many people that are happy.
I'd planned on taking a break from this thread but this comment from Dan perplexes me.
How do you measure that Dan?
Your metrics merely tell you what people are doing, not whether they're 'happy' doing it.
Since this whole Fleet Marks thing exploded you've had precisely two threads pop up on the forums voicing support for the change and praise for you and the team.
Neither received many posts whilst this dissenting thread has thousands.
Doubtless you have many content, possibly even 'happy' Free-to-Play players playing missions, doing STFs, customizing their ships and trading Dilithium for Zen.
But if you relied on their contributions to feed your family you'd starve.
You have a loyal fan-base that subsidises the game for the genuinely F2P players and that sinks a great deal of money into this game, and moves like this and the general lack of communication are alienating the players that pay your salary.
I was once one of them, but no longer. Because I'm not happy.
I've spent some time in game trying to recruit players to my campaign and the overwhelming sentiment I've heard in-game is 'it's pointless - Cryptic doesn't listen to us' - does that sound like a 'happy' player?
How many more paying customers are you prepared to lose before you effect change?
while I have no idea what you intend to do about AFK'ers in the matches, I do hope that its got some safety nets. Vote to kick can be exploited, badly. I will await the arrival to comment. I'm just hoping its more of a activity level to gain an award.
I agree with vote to kick... Three people in a fleet and two other people in a vote to kick system will result in the two outsiders getting kicked out before the rewards are divvied up on occasion.
Not every time, but if it happens to you one time, that will be one time too many.
But a simple 'report/respond' function won't get it done, either. Maybe that other person is AFK, or maybe they are just sitting there assigning department head jobs to their duty officers while the other people in th einstance do the work.
If they get a pop-up that says that they have 10 seconds to click it before they get kicked for inactivity, they will have no problem clicking the button and moving along.
I think that it should come down to participation.
I would have no problem with rewards being given based upon what you actually did.
Did you deal DPS? Did you restore shield, hull, or hit points to an allied ship or character? Did you remove a status effect on a ship or character? Were you targeted by an attack?
These should all be worth points. The more you do, the more points you get, and the more points you get, the better your reward.
The people that sit back and do nothing will get nothing. It might not help the four people that tried if they fail to defeat the Borg in the allotted time, but the people that show up and do nothing will end up getting nothing if they do succeed, so that should be enough to at least minimize the amount of players that queue in and then just sit still while others do the work.
I get my keys from the exchange so not a dime by me there and just because some companies are STUPID to be bought my PWE doesn't mean they are in the right. THeir mentaility is mwhy I'm an old Westwood fan
Doesn't matter where you get your keys, they all come from the same place originally. Every key in the game is money paid to PWE. That you are giving someone EC so that they will give PWE $$$ doesn't affect how much money PWE is getting for the key.
The people working for Cryptic are probably pretty happy that Atari bought Cryptic, and then that Atari sold Cryptic to PWE.
To them, it was almost certainly a good, or the 'right', decision.
That is very true. Games by their very nature are repitive. It's how you alieviate that "here we go again" feeling.
First Person Shooters do it with atmosphere and story (of in the case of Modern Warfare 2 and MW 3 and Black Ops just atmosphere because the stories are TRIBBLE).
MMOs are also repititve (get a quest, go to point A killing everythin in your path, get item and go to point b, killing everything in your path). Most get through that by attacthing a story, some in depth lore, lot's of atmosphere or a persistant warzone. Inspite of its failing, The Secret World does a good job with the story, atmosphere (including the music), and has a persistant warzone. It even made an attempt to break the mold by trying to do away with the traditional holy trinity (I would say the results are mixed).
Sometimes you gotta be bold, As Sisko said, "Fortune favors the bold."
So i guess we can modify Benjamin Franklin's saying.
"The only things certain in life are grind and taxes."
Well, I used to think it was a Cryptic thing but I see it in Foundry missions too...
One thing that I like about the biggest competitor in the western market (the game that shall not be named with the initials W.O.W.)...
They use emotionally manipulative stories. I felt they got a bit too jokey with Cataclysm (and I like Jokey somewhat; it helps get me into the fantasy genre, which I'm not a devotee of on its own). But the classic missions through WotLK rarely involve orders or political stakes. You are so far from the periphery of your faction in WoW that, last I checked, nobody had a clear answer as to whether player characters in that game are soldiers or represent the official political interests of their factions. There are missions that you may want to skip or where you choose a path.
But above all, thir stories (while not exactly great literature for the most part) have an emotionally manipulative hook. Separated lovers. Sick child. Failing farmers. Lost family member. Running across an innocent in peril or a good person who died unjustly. All of the classic PvP scenarios actually do have a backstory with enough bad apples and good points on both sides that people actually debate who is right.
The presentation is not sophisticated and the writing in WoW is not often Shakespeare but the situations are morally complex and the stakes are emotionally manipulative.
And STO doesn't have much of that even if Star Trek traditionally did.
Take the Scarlet Crusade in that other game. You can have hours of debate over whether their position is justified or uneviable or a perfect example of how evil takes route. It's not settled even though most of the Scarlet story has been resolved. There are probably fifteen characters who are personally connected to that in the game.
Part of the reason Blizz keeps bringing them back (and did so again in this latest expansion) despite attempts to wrap up that story is because players indicate that killing Scarlets makes them feel things. Justified. Sad. Powerful. Righteous.
I don't see a lot of that in STO. The closest is Obisek and he's pretty unambiguously a good guy at this point.
Outside of that one oddball mission on the farm, killing True Way or Tal Shiar never triggered the same emotions in spite of being the closest thing to STO Scarlet Crusaders. They're just bad dudes.
Part of the problem with Fleet Actions is that they reinforce the interchangability of of the enemies. Tactics may change slightly (not much) but it ultimately doesn't send me to a different place emotionally if I'm fighting a colony defense against True Way, Dominion, Romulans, or Breen. They're just pixels to kill.
Whereas it kinda does matter in WoW if I'm fighting Scourge, Scarlets, Defias, Bloodsail, Eredar, Burning Legion, etc. The mechanics there are largely even more interchangable but there's a different set of emotions, themes, and motifs in play. I don't think a WoW player needs to be a total lorehead to sense that as I knew plenty of people who were mainly mechanical players but they at least had one boss, enemy group, quest line, or dungeon that triggered some emotional connection. Effectively, these are my enemies above the others and these are the ones I wish I didn't fight and these are the ones I want to join my faction.
And I find that to be oddly more Trek-y than what we have here. I think they've done a better job with attaching value to grinding. If I play WoW and have no other goals, there are certain groups I WANT to fight more and I know everybody has a favorite to blow off steam against and a favorite they wish they could play.
To the extent that's true in STO, it's based on the shows and not anything STO does.
C'mon almoost sinds the start people cry about grinding and doing things they dont like.
I dont agre with you guys, the game is not so much a grind as many other MMO's out there. Even the "adult" mmo's have grinds.
Any way , what i want to say is, stop complaining and try to be constructive in your feedback.
Dont attack people (cryptic) because they dont follow the path you want them to, but give them constructive idears. That works way beter then complaining and saying you will leave the game.
Also moost of the people saying they will leave, dont, just because they like the game...but then why would you complain? Doenst anybody c the circle they are in?
To Dan and the rest of the Crew, there are people still that like the game, and love what you are all doing. As one poster sayd, for 1 person complaining in this threath there are 5 that feel the same but stay still. Next to that there are 20 people that just love the game.....
Ah most of my complaints had ways to fix the problem CDF
Well, I used to think it was a Cryptic thing but I see it in Foundry missions too...
One thing that I like about the biggest competitor in the western market (the game that shall not be named with the initials W.O.W.)...
They use emotionally manipulative stories. I felt they got a bit too jokey with Cataclysm (and I like Jokey somewhat; it helps get me into the fantasy genre, which I'm not a devotee of on its own). But the classic missions through WotLK rarely involve orders or political stakes. You are so far from the periphery of your faction in WoW that, last I checked, nobody had a clear answer as to whether player characters in that game are soldiers or represent the official political interests of their factions. There are missions that you may want to skip or where you choose a path.
But above all, thir stories (while not exactly great literature for the most part) have an emotionally manipulative hook. Separated lovers. Sick child. Failing farmers. Lost family member. Running across an innocent in peril or a good person who died unjustly. All of the classic PvP scenarios actually do have a backstory with enough bad apples and good points on both sides that people actually debate who is right.
The presentation is not sophisticated and the writing in WoW is not often Shakespeare but the situations are morally complex and the stakes are emotionally manipulative.
And STO doesn't have much of that even if Star Trek traditionally did.
Take the Scarlet Crusade in that other game. You can have hours of debate over whether their position is justified or uneviable or a perfect example of how evil takes route. It's not settled even though most of the Scarlet story has been resolved. There are probably fifteen characters who are personally connected to that in the game.
Part of the reason Blizz keeps bringing them back (and did so again in this latest expansion) despite attempts to wrap up that story is because players indicate that killing Scarlets makes them feel things. Justified. Sad. Powerful. Righteous.
I don't see a lot of that in STO. The closest is Obisek and he's pretty unambiguously a good guy at this point.
Outside of that one oddball mission on the farm, killing True Way or Tal Shiar never triggered the same emotions in spite of being the closest thing to STO Scarlet Crusaders. They're just bad dudes.
Part of the problem with Fleet Actions is that they reinforce the interchangability of of the enemies. Tactics may change slightly (not much) but it ultimately doesn't send me to a different place emotionally if I'm fighting a colony defense against True Way, Dominion, Romulans, or Breen. They're just pixels to kill.
Whereas it kinda does matter in WoW if I'm fighting Scourge, Scarlets, Defias, Bloodsail, Eredar, Burning Legion, etc. The mechanics there are largely even more interchangable but there's a different set of emotions, themes, and motifs in play. I don't think a WoW player needs to be a total lorehead to sense that as I knew plenty of people who were mainly mechanical players but they at least had one boss, enemy group, quest line, or dungeon that triggered some emotional connection. Effectively, these are my enemies above the others and these are the ones I wish I didn't fight and these are the ones I want to join my faction.
And I find that to be oddly more Trek-y than what we have here. I think they've done a better job with attaching value to grinding. If I play WoW and have no other goals, there are certain groups I WANT to fight more and I know everybody has a favorite to blow off steam against and a favorite they wish they could play.
To the extent that's true in STO, it's based on the shows and not anything STO does.
I also need to get this out there, I know its probably not feasible with the current engine, but when someone says to me what do you want from a Star Trek MMO... this is what i dream:
I arrive at the Starbase to find a list of missions. These missions are essentially quests as you would find in say DDO or the such like. These are story missions. You and other players group up to carry out the mission. It could be diplomacy, it could be scientific investigation or a neutral zone patrol, or even exploration. We start the mission by traveling to our destination.
We may encounter issues to resolve on the way or conflicts to overcome and the when we get to the main mission it involves team work and specific skill traits from the the different classes to solve puzzles and mysteries, it could be repair work or helping out a criminal investigation as sleuths for a Federation member planet, it could creating and transporting vaccines through a dangerous zone to a colony in dire need (imagine this last one where you have to protect the player whose carrying the medical supplies from attack).
The quests and stories are endless and this for me would be far closer to an actual Star Trek experience, puzzles, mysteries, combat, morality plays, stories, adventure, exploration and above all fun!
And I find that to be oddly more Trek-y than what we have here. I think they've done a better job with attaching value to grinding. If I play WoW and have no other goals, there are certain groups I WANT to fight more and I know everybody has a favorite to blow off steam against and a favorite they wish they could play.
To the extent that's true in STO, it's based on the shows and not anything STO does.
It's an interesting point - beyond the Borg (who exist merely as a 'force of nature'), the villains of STO have little to differentiate them.
In Tau Dewa I favour fighting the Hirogen in the space patrols, but that's simply because they're the least annoying enemies - and that in itself speaks volumes.
That way, a large fleet cannot drop down to minimal size, blow through the scaled down progression costs and then invite everyone back. You also add a system that puts a daily cap of 5 new characters added to the fleet. so that a fleet cannot start small, take advantage of scaled down costs and then suddenly baloon up to a massive fleet.
Strangely the solution to that is already in the system: They may have a T5 starbase, but good luck buying anything (except for the few characters who turned everything in).
Let the small fleet holdings service large fleets. This way they serve a valid purpose.
Because small fleets should all leap at the chance to be every large fleet's b****? Come on. This argument really sounds like one for the preservation of large fleet ***** measuring -- which I admit is a large part of MMO culture, but it's not something that developers should design for. It's over complicated (and expensive to develop) than simply adding in variables and some calculations based on past and present members (by account, not characters).
How MMO companies reach for the stars: "And as far as Season 7 being "grindy" - welcome to the MMORPG genre."
Well, I used to think it was a Cryptic thing but I see it in Foundry missions too...
One thing that I like about the biggest competitor in the western market (the game that shall not be named with the initials W.O.W.)...
They use emotionally manipulative stories. I felt they got a bit too jokey with Cataclysm (and I like Jokey somewhat; it helps get me into the fantasy genre, which I'm not a devotee of on its own). But the classic missions through WotLK rarely involve orders or political stakes. You are so far from the periphery of your faction in WoW that, last I checked, nobody had a clear answer as to whether player characters in that game are soldiers or represent the official political interests of their factions. There are missions that you may want to skip or where you choose a path.
But above all, thir stories (while not exactly great literature for the most part) have an emotionally manipulative hook. Separated lovers. Sick child. Failing farmers. Lost family member. Running across an innocent in peril or a good person who died unjustly. All of the classic PvP scenarios actually do have a backstory with enough bad apples and good points on both sides that people actually debate who is right.
The presentation is not sophisticated and the writing in WoW is not often Shakespeare but the situations are morally complex and the stakes are emotionally manipulative.
And STO doesn't have much of that even if Star Trek traditionally did.
Take the Scarlet Crusade in that other game. You can have hours of debate over whether their position is justified or uneviable or a perfect example of how evil takes route. It's not settled even though most of the Scarlet story has been resolved. There are probably fifteen characters who are personally connected to that in the game.
Part of the reason Blizz keeps bringing them back (and did so again in this latest expansion) despite attempts to wrap up that story is because players indicate that killing Scarlets makes them feel things. Justified. Sad. Powerful. Righteous.
I don't see a lot of that in STO. The closest is Obisek and he's pretty unambiguously a good guy at this point.
Outside of that one oddball mission on the farm, killing True Way or Tal Shiar never triggered the same emotions in spite of being the closest thing to STO Scarlet Crusaders. They're just bad dudes.
Part of the problem with Fleet Actions is that they reinforce the interchangability of of the enemies. Tactics may change slightly (not much) but it ultimately doesn't send me to a different place emotionally if I'm fighting a colony defense against True Way, Dominion, Romulans, or Breen. They're just pixels to kill.
Whereas it kinda does matter in WoW if I'm fighting Scourge, Scarlets, Defias, Bloodsail, Eredar, Burning Legion, etc. The mechanics there are largely even more interchangable but there's a different set of emotions, themes, and motifs in play. I don't think a WoW player needs to be a total lorehead to sense that as I knew plenty of people who were mainly mechanical players but they at least had one boss, enemy group, quest line, or dungeon that triggered some emotional connection. Effectively, these are my enemies above the others and these are the ones I wish I didn't fight and these are the ones I want to join my faction.
And I find that to be oddly more Trek-y than what we have here. I think they've done a better job with attaching value to grinding. If I play WoW and have no other goals, there are certain groups I WANT to fight more and I know everybody has a favorite to blow off steam against and a favorite they wish they could play.
To the extent that's true in STO, it's based on the shows and not anything STO does.
What more can be said? I agree 100% with this.
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
Doesn't matter where you get your keys, they all come from the same place originally. Every key in the game is money paid to PWE. That you are giving someone EC so that they will give PWE $$$ doesn't affect how much money PWE is getting for the key.
The people working for Cryptic are probably pretty happy that Atari bought Cryptic, and then that Atari sold Cryptic to PWE.
To them, it was almost certainly a good, or the 'right', decision.[/QUOTE]
you have proof that real money was used. It could be that cryptic put it in there for they're nearly always the same price 1.3-1.4 mil.
It's an interesting point - beyond the Borg (who exist merely as a 'force of nature'), the villains of STO have little to differentiate them.
In Tau Dewa I favour fighting the Hirogen in the space patrols, but that's simply because they're the least annoying enemies - and that in itself speaks volumes.
Very true. What we need is a story with an emotional hook that evolves into fighting an enemy you're not sure you should be fighting.
Maybe even a hook like that in the original Mobile Suit Gundam in that you are not sure who the bad guy is supposed to be, or whether or not you are on the right side of the war.
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
I didn't want to get into this because I'm tired of typing and cranky too but seeing as Fleets have come up lets talk about what the real issue is.
The design stinks
Some fleets would be perfectly happy with a small starbase/fleet but say for example you build a Tier 1 base with Sci/Mil/Eng all at T1 - what do you have?
A whole lot of nothing - T1 ships, common Doffs unlocked, no Advanced weapons, missing amenities - basically a mostly non-functional starbase.
If low-Tier Fleets could have a full set of amenities (Bank/Exchange/Mail/Tailor and yes, Crafting) plus some nifty decor and some decent space/ground equipment unlocks then they wouldn't feel like they have to advance the base - and that's the key.
They should want to - in their own time, when they feel like it.
Tying all the goodies (ships/weapons etc.) into starbase Tiers means you're instantly making higher-Tier fleets more desirable for potential members and devaluing lower-Tier fleets.
Low-Tier starbases needed a base-level set of equipment projects that could fully kit out an end-game player with Fleet gear without having to be part of a T4 or 5 Fleet.
A good example is Advanced Weapons - T1 bases should have had Advanced Phasers/Disruptors available with more exotic weaponry being unlocked at higher Tiers.
The rewards should be there for T5 starbases - a whole plethora of interesting gear that's only available by fully levelling up the base - but that shouldn't deprive lower-Tier starbases of basic gear of a similar utility.
But Cryptic plainly doesn't want or support small Fleets - and the system, as-is, is shockingly punatative to those who try.
@brandon: I know, a bit off-topic, but could you please tell someone responsible to have a look at this thread? For a whole year now it didn't see any response from a dev anymore, giving people the impression that the issue has been either forgotten or is getting ignored.
For a whole year now it didn't see any response from a dev anymore, giving people the impression that the issue has been either forgotten or is getting ignored.
You noticed that too eh?
And you know what? You could change the appearance of your Marauding Boff by entering a code in the Tailor that allowed you to freely chose off-duty clothing options that you'd purchased - you could also alter the look of your Boff - hairstyle etc. this way.
An apology is due, and while I've admitted fault in previous posts about this , I'll do so again in this one.
The release that was pushed to Holodeck last week failed in several critical ways. There was a failure on the part of a designer to test their work before it was checked into the game.
...Snip...
And now... back to work.
First, I'd like to say thank you for taking the time to apologise for the oversight on your part about removing something without an adequate replacement being introduced at the same time.
I realise that a lot of the time, these threads can build up a lot of resentment towards the team and I'd like to apologise myself for the posts of mine which weren't exactly savoury (though hardly the worst). I'd say a large part of the reason behind that though, is we don't like to feel like we're not important enough to be heard. When threads drag on for days without any constructive response from the team, it's easy to feel we're being ignored.
This is perpetuated when you put content on Tribble, for us to test, then completely ignore our feedback and continue to push it to Holodeck unchanged. It can make us wonder why we bother using Tribble and giving feedback about the new content.
...snip...
It just takes time. And right now, you may not see it, but the team is working extra hard. It is one thing to say that Cryptic pays our salary. But it doesn't really pay for all the late nights and weekends all the salaried employees are working right now. Why are we doing it? Because we are excited. Excited about what we are building. Excited about what we might be able to achieve this year.
It might not seem like much to you, but to us it is a big TRIBBLE deal.
I think the fact that so many people have replied to this thread, shows that it is a "big TRIBBLE deal" to us too. As somebody who has been playing this game since Beta, it is very important to me. I've devoted over three years of my gaming life to STO, created and developed nine characters, worked them all through the new rep systems, given them all a back story, tried many a new vessel in combat and exploration, spent what probably adds up to several thousand pounds on lifetime sub, ships, costumes, extra character slots and (annoyingly) lock boxes.
When fleet bases were added to the game, I was so happy. My fleet mates and I have all known each other for years and although we're a small fleet, the thought of being able to carve out a small part of the STO world where we could call 'home' put a bounce in my step. Sadly, we quickly realised that we'd never be able to attain our dream because there simply aren't enough of us to do so. This quickly turned the game sour.
I can appreciate the need for 'balance' and to make sure that fleets with 500 members don't get things handed to them on a golden plate on day one. But it does have the sad effect of relegating those of us who are long standing players, who simply don't want to break up our family and become part of a 500 mass where nobody really knows anybody, to never being able to attain a tier five base and reap the rewards that come with it.
I simply hope, that although you've introduced a higher rate of Fleet Marks on the existing content, that you don't walk away from this thread thinking that everything is fine and dandy now. There are still a lot of issues which this thread has brought up, which are important to a lot of us, you may even call some of them a "big TRIBBLE deal".
Disclaimer: This is not me hating on you or the team and I am truly thankful for the feedback you've posted here now and for the changes being introduced to the game with today's patch.
Join date is wrong, I've actually been around since STO Beta.
True alters don't have a "main". Account wide unlocks for all unique event rewards!!
I simply hope, that although you've introduced a higher rate of Fleet Marks on the existing content, that you don't walk away from this thread thinking that everything is fine and dandy now. There are still a lot of issues which this thread has brought up, which are important to a lot of us, you may even call some of them a "big TRIBBLE deal".
Disclaimer: This is not me hating on you or the team and I am truly thankful for the feedback you've posted here now and for the changes being introduced to the game with today's patch.
The problem is the same thing happened with Season 7 this is a systemic failure that needs to be addressed it's a long term issue that hasn't been resolved by anything Cryptic have done as of yet. This goes way beyond shifting beans into different pots.
Please once again I call for people who are interested in helping improve this game to PM me so we can move forward together I want start a community based dialogue here but I can't do it alone.
And as far as Season 7 being "grindy" - welcome to the MMORPG genre..
WOW! I have to say, of all your statements, and you have said some whoppers, this one impresses me the most. As my mother would say, ?So if all the other Game Developers decided to jump off a bridge, you would too?? I mean way too go with the aiming low. Forget innovation. Forget trying to be better than the competition. It really makes you lose faith, when the Executive Producer says his products is just like all the others out there. And you wonder why you have such a low meta-critic score? I really would have to agree with all the critics who have said that STO is just a basic MMO with a thin Star Trek veneer on it.
How about striving for innovation in year four? How about not looking at other games and saying ?it worked for them, let just use that idea.?? How about digging deep into what Star Trek is all about and bringing that out in unique game play. You have done it in the past: Doffs, Foundry, and Featured Episodes. Those are all unique mechanics. Grind is not.
Beers,
Jengoz =\/=
"Star Trek Online is powered by the most abundant resource in the galaxy . . . Gullibility"
WOW! I have to say, of all your statements, and you have said some whoppers, this one impresses me the most.
Very well said - this isn't Hello Kitty Online or another cookie-cutter Asian grinder MMO, it's Star Trek FFS - are you really that uninspired by the IP that you can't do any better?
Originally Posted by sirsitsalot
Let the small fleet holdings service large fleets. This way they serve a valid purpose.
WHAT??!! While I realise this is taken somewhat out of the context of the larger post, it's sentiment is the same all the way through - the very notion is appalling! First, it isn't like ANY Starbase, the way they are set up right now, at least, serves a "valid purpose" other than to say "I have it and you don't." But, to even hint that smaller fleets equate to lesser or, in the spirit of this quote, should be "subservient" to larger fleets...:mad: My full response would get me banned from the Forums.
This is one of the problems being brought up in this thread, and the short summary is: small fleets are JUST as valid as larger fleets and deserve as much support and recognition as any other. I'll also say this: in my opinion, players disappear in large fleets, so they become just another lemming moving toward the cliff edge. If that's how you want to play, fine. But don't tell me that's how it SHOULD be.
The notion of "fleet" means team; team means cooperation, and only cooperation equals group success. In my experience, the only way that real cooperation happens is when you KNOW the faces you bump into every day, and they have your back because you have a relationship of respect and comradeship and you share common goals! I lead my fleet of 18, but I don't dictate to them - I discuss things with them. My experience with mega-fleets was being told "if you don't like it, I've got 300 other players to take your place."
Nothing against the larger or even the "mega" fleets, but don't try and sell the notion that one type of fleet, small or large, is superior or inferior to the other: they are just different strategies that fit different styles of play.
**[EDIT]** I re-read and re-read your post, sirsitsalot, and I get that you are not against small fleets exactly. But, the choice to remain small does not mean small fleets should get less: the food dish remains the same size whether you're a Great Dane or a Chihuahua, even if it takes longer for the Chihuahua to consume it. Small fleets should be able to obtain exactly the same things as larger fleets in their own time, not have the bar lowered so they can reach it more easily. The choice to play a certain way should not equate to the consequence of a different or, especially, lesser prize.
Fleet Commander
Caprica's Revenge (...actually active since November 2010, which may one day be important to archaeologists, but not to anyone else...)
BTW, my suggestion going forward would be more content like the Salt Vampire FA.
It's not perfect and feels long... and really, I personally would rather get FM than RM from it. (Heck. Make the victims there random.)
But the enemies have a distinct feel and MO. If every FA had enemies that felt that distinct (but maybe not quite that long), I 'd be a lot more into grinding.
I'd suggest that once current content planned is out of the box, try to focus on one off races from the shows and give the big empires a rest. If you need to rely on the big empires to get attention every content release, it says to me that there's something lacking about the content and that you're leaning too hard on the shows to build up interest that your content itself isn't doing.
And maybe some attention should be paid to the difference between farming and grinding. People farm because they want to. People grind because they feel forced to to do something else. It's a subtle difference but a real one I think.
More intrinsic reward, less use of carrots. You still NEED a carrot but if that's everyone's primary motivation, well... That's like getting married for the ring.
Ive seen this before in discussions when it came to stfs and loot drops; that alot of ppl felt even if it wasn't that great of a reward it was a small instant reward, a way for ppl to feel that they at least accomplished something. With that perspective in mind, I had a thought.
Could Cryptic add in a smaller version of starbase missions? Ones that would be half the resources,half the cooldown,but also half the reward? In essence, taking a flight of 25 stairs to get to the first floor, and making another flight of stairs that would be 50, but get you to the same floor? In all honesty, there would be no actual increase in progression that you would get from the larger steps, but in terms of appearance, it would offer the smaller fleets the ability to see the progression at a smaller scale. Upgrade missions would be exempt from this,unless you wanted to make them a 2 parter, with the reward of the upgrade coming at the end of part 2.
Sometimes offering a smaller carrot closer to the nose is better than offering a huge carrot but not being able to smell it cuz its so far away. Just a thought. Don't even know if its feasible or wanted,but It's early for me and just felt like throwing in something constructive.
And as far as Season 7 being "grindy" - welcome to the MMORPG genre.
This makes me regret that I almost stopped playing real (= no MMORPG) games. I thought that "being that grindy" happened by mistake. Now I know that it is unlikely to change. I miss the time, when games were just meant to entertain (and not to simulate a full-time job). *sad*
BTW, my suggestion going forward would be more content like the Salt Vampire FA.
(Heck. Make the victims there random.)
But the enemies have a distinct feel and MO.
I agree. Though I haven't played this one recently (time factor), I really like the concept of this map & mode. It really adds more complexity to the "shoot stuff" standard in game.
Comments
All my fleetmates don't visit forums that often. And the people that actually play have been very unhappy about throwing away FMs from IOR. They used to do this not because they wanted to exploit, but just because they were not enjoying the content where fleet marks are rewarded. Foundry was a good option to have fun (even teamed) and gain something useful, especially for smaller fleets. The fact they aren't in the forums doesn't mean they don't care about this change. Because they do. At least those who are involved in fleet and actively contribute.
Things have changed with this last patch, and I'm curious to see how.
Because I want to progress, would love to get my hads on cetain ships yes I have to and the Dil is for zen ships right now not fleet since till some major changes happen to the game I'm not spending anymore real money on STO.
I would say the majority of people would rather be in smaller fleets full stop because closer knit communities are more meaningful and fun, you don't feel simply another number.
The problem here is Cryptic preferred Large Fleets other Small ones which is entirely counter intuitive to human nature.
#2311#2700#2316#2500
Things are a little bit different. Smaller fleets want to be bigger (ofc there are exceptions) but they can't get new players because they want better stuff, so they make big fleets even bigger. Smaller holdings would mean worse stuff (if I got you right) = small fleet which wants to improve dead. Here we go again. The less-hurting solution is Always a progressive system rewarding the same as bigger fleets. Less complicated than a fleet provision Exchange as you purposed too. Sure, some restrictions would be needed too, like not letting more than 5 alts in the same fleet etc (btw the progressive system should be based by accounts, not alts, as more alts you have, less time you can spend on them - a day is 24h for everyone)
I'd planned on taking a break from this thread but this comment from Dan perplexes me.
How do you measure that Dan?
Your metrics merely tell you what people are doing, not whether they're 'happy' doing it.
Since this whole Fleet Marks thing exploded you've had precisely two threads pop up on the forums voicing support for the change and praise for you and the team.
Neither received many posts whilst this dissenting thread has thousands.
Doubtless you have many content, possibly even 'happy' Free-to-Play players playing missions, doing STFs, customizing their ships and trading Dilithium for Zen.
But if you relied on their contributions to feed your family you'd starve.
You have a loyal fan-base that subsidises the game for the genuinely F2P players and that sinks a great deal of money into this game, and moves like this and the general lack of communication are alienating the players that pay your salary.
I was once one of them, but no longer. Because I'm not happy.
I've spent some time in game trying to recruit players to my campaign and the overwhelming sentiment I've heard in-game is 'it's pointless - Cryptic doesn't listen to us' - does that sound like a 'happy' player?
How many more paying customers are you prepared to lose before you effect change?
I agree with vote to kick... Three people in a fleet and two other people in a vote to kick system will result in the two outsiders getting kicked out before the rewards are divvied up on occasion.
Not every time, but if it happens to you one time, that will be one time too many.
But a simple 'report/respond' function won't get it done, either. Maybe that other person is AFK, or maybe they are just sitting there assigning department head jobs to their duty officers while the other people in th einstance do the work.
If they get a pop-up that says that they have 10 seconds to click it before they get kicked for inactivity, they will have no problem clicking the button and moving along.
I think that it should come down to participation.
I would have no problem with rewards being given based upon what you actually did.
Did you deal DPS? Did you restore shield, hull, or hit points to an allied ship or character? Did you remove a status effect on a ship or character? Were you targeted by an attack?
These should all be worth points. The more you do, the more points you get, and the more points you get, the better your reward.
The people that sit back and do nothing will get nothing. It might not help the four people that tried if they fail to defeat the Borg in the allotted time, but the people that show up and do nothing will end up getting nothing if they do succeed, so that should be enough to at least minimize the amount of players that queue in and then just sit still while others do the work.
Doesn't matter where you get your keys, they all come from the same place originally. Every key in the game is money paid to PWE. That you are giving someone EC so that they will give PWE $$$ doesn't affect how much money PWE is getting for the key.
The people working for Cryptic are probably pretty happy that Atari bought Cryptic, and then that Atari sold Cryptic to PWE.
To them, it was almost certainly a good, or the 'right', decision.
Well, I used to think it was a Cryptic thing but I see it in Foundry missions too...
One thing that I like about the biggest competitor in the western market (the game that shall not be named with the initials W.O.W.)...
They use emotionally manipulative stories. I felt they got a bit too jokey with Cataclysm (and I like Jokey somewhat; it helps get me into the fantasy genre, which I'm not a devotee of on its own). But the classic missions through WotLK rarely involve orders or political stakes. You are so far from the periphery of your faction in WoW that, last I checked, nobody had a clear answer as to whether player characters in that game are soldiers or represent the official political interests of their factions. There are missions that you may want to skip or where you choose a path.
But above all, thir stories (while not exactly great literature for the most part) have an emotionally manipulative hook. Separated lovers. Sick child. Failing farmers. Lost family member. Running across an innocent in peril or a good person who died unjustly. All of the classic PvP scenarios actually do have a backstory with enough bad apples and good points on both sides that people actually debate who is right.
The presentation is not sophisticated and the writing in WoW is not often Shakespeare but the situations are morally complex and the stakes are emotionally manipulative.
And STO doesn't have much of that even if Star Trek traditionally did.
Take the Scarlet Crusade in that other game. You can have hours of debate over whether their position is justified or uneviable or a perfect example of how evil takes route. It's not settled even though most of the Scarlet story has been resolved. There are probably fifteen characters who are personally connected to that in the game.
Part of the reason Blizz keeps bringing them back (and did so again in this latest expansion) despite attempts to wrap up that story is because players indicate that killing Scarlets makes them feel things. Justified. Sad. Powerful. Righteous.
I don't see a lot of that in STO. The closest is Obisek and he's pretty unambiguously a good guy at this point.
Outside of that one oddball mission on the farm, killing True Way or Tal Shiar never triggered the same emotions in spite of being the closest thing to STO Scarlet Crusaders. They're just bad dudes.
Part of the problem with Fleet Actions is that they reinforce the interchangability of of the enemies. Tactics may change slightly (not much) but it ultimately doesn't send me to a different place emotionally if I'm fighting a colony defense against True Way, Dominion, Romulans, or Breen. They're just pixels to kill.
Whereas it kinda does matter in WoW if I'm fighting Scourge, Scarlets, Defias, Bloodsail, Eredar, Burning Legion, etc. The mechanics there are largely even more interchangable but there's a different set of emotions, themes, and motifs in play. I don't think a WoW player needs to be a total lorehead to sense that as I knew plenty of people who were mainly mechanical players but they at least had one boss, enemy group, quest line, or dungeon that triggered some emotional connection. Effectively, these are my enemies above the others and these are the ones I wish I didn't fight and these are the ones I want to join my faction.
And I find that to be oddly more Trek-y than what we have here. I think they've done a better job with attaching value to grinding. If I play WoW and have no other goals, there are certain groups I WANT to fight more and I know everybody has a favorite to blow off steam against and a favorite they wish they could play.
To the extent that's true in STO, it's based on the shows and not anything STO does.
Ah most of my complaints had ways to fix the problem CDF
My feelings exactly....
#2311#2700#2316#2500
It's an interesting point - beyond the Borg (who exist merely as a 'force of nature'), the villains of STO have little to differentiate them.
In Tau Dewa I favour fighting the Hirogen in the space patrols, but that's simply because they're the least annoying enemies - and that in itself speaks volumes.
Strangely the solution to that is already in the system: They may have a T5 starbase, but good luck buying anything (except for the few characters who turned everything in).
Because small fleets should all leap at the chance to be every large fleet's b****? Come on. This argument really sounds like one for the preservation of large fleet ***** measuring -- which I admit is a large part of MMO culture, but it's not something that developers should design for. It's over complicated (and expensive to develop) than simply adding in variables and some calculations based on past and present members (by account, not characters).
What more can be said? I agree 100% with this.
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
Doesn't matter where you get your keys, they all come from the same place originally. Every key in the game is money paid to PWE. That you are giving someone EC so that they will give PWE $$$ doesn't affect how much money PWE is getting for the key.
The people working for Cryptic are probably pretty happy that Atari bought Cryptic, and then that Atari sold Cryptic to PWE.
To them, it was almost certainly a good, or the 'right', decision.[/QUOTE]
you have proof that real money was used. It could be that cryptic put it in there for they're nearly always the same price 1.3-1.4 mil.
Very true. What we need is a story with an emotional hook that evolves into fighting an enemy you're not sure you should be fighting.
Maybe even a hook like that in the original Mobile Suit Gundam in that you are not sure who the bad guy is supposed to be, or whether or not you are on the right side of the war.
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
I didn't want to get into this because I'm tired of typing and cranky too but seeing as Fleets have come up lets talk about what the real issue is.
The design stinks
Some fleets would be perfectly happy with a small starbase/fleet but say for example you build a Tier 1 base with Sci/Mil/Eng all at T1 - what do you have?
A whole lot of nothing - T1 ships, common Doffs unlocked, no Advanced weapons, missing amenities - basically a mostly non-functional starbase.
If low-Tier Fleets could have a full set of amenities (Bank/Exchange/Mail/Tailor and yes, Crafting) plus some nifty decor and some decent space/ground equipment unlocks then they wouldn't feel like they have to advance the base - and that's the key.
They should want to - in their own time, when they feel like it.
Tying all the goodies (ships/weapons etc.) into starbase Tiers means you're instantly making higher-Tier fleets more desirable for potential members and devaluing lower-Tier fleets.
Low-Tier starbases needed a base-level set of equipment projects that could fully kit out an end-game player with Fleet gear without having to be part of a T4 or 5 Fleet.
A good example is Advanced Weapons - T1 bases should have had Advanced Phasers/Disruptors available with more exotic weaponry being unlocked at higher Tiers.
The rewards should be there for T5 starbases - a whole plethora of interesting gear that's only available by fully levelling up the base - but that shouldn't deprive lower-Tier starbases of basic gear of a similar utility.
But Cryptic plainly doesn't want or support small Fleets - and the system, as-is, is shockingly punatative to those who try.
You noticed that too eh?
And you know what? You could change the appearance of your Marauding Boff by entering a code in the Tailor that allowed you to freely chose off-duty clothing options that you'd purchased - you could also alter the look of your Boff - hairstyle etc. this way.
But they've taken the time to remove that code.
But still left the Marauding Boffs bugged.
Kinda makes you think eh?
Working as intended I'm sure.
#2311#2700#2316#2500
First, I'd like to say thank you for taking the time to apologise for the oversight on your part about removing something without an adequate replacement being introduced at the same time.
I realise that a lot of the time, these threads can build up a lot of resentment towards the team and I'd like to apologise myself for the posts of mine which weren't exactly savoury (though hardly the worst). I'd say a large part of the reason behind that though, is we don't like to feel like we're not important enough to be heard. When threads drag on for days without any constructive response from the team, it's easy to feel we're being ignored.
This is perpetuated when you put content on Tribble, for us to test, then completely ignore our feedback and continue to push it to Holodeck unchanged. It can make us wonder why we bother using Tribble and giving feedback about the new content.
I think the fact that so many people have replied to this thread, shows that it is a "big TRIBBLE deal" to us too. As somebody who has been playing this game since Beta, it is very important to me. I've devoted over three years of my gaming life to STO, created and developed nine characters, worked them all through the new rep systems, given them all a back story, tried many a new vessel in combat and exploration, spent what probably adds up to several thousand pounds on lifetime sub, ships, costumes, extra character slots and (annoyingly) lock boxes.
When fleet bases were added to the game, I was so happy. My fleet mates and I have all known each other for years and although we're a small fleet, the thought of being able to carve out a small part of the STO world where we could call 'home' put a bounce in my step. Sadly, we quickly realised that we'd never be able to attain our dream because there simply aren't enough of us to do so. This quickly turned the game sour.
I can appreciate the need for 'balance' and to make sure that fleets with 500 members don't get things handed to them on a golden plate on day one. But it does have the sad effect of relegating those of us who are long standing players, who simply don't want to break up our family and become part of a 500 mass where nobody really knows anybody, to never being able to attain a tier five base and reap the rewards that come with it.
I simply hope, that although you've introduced a higher rate of Fleet Marks on the existing content, that you don't walk away from this thread thinking that everything is fine and dandy now. There are still a lot of issues which this thread has brought up, which are important to a lot of us, you may even call some of them a "big TRIBBLE deal".
Disclaimer: This is not me hating on you or the team and I am truly thankful for the feedback you've posted here now and for the changes being introduced to the game with today's patch.
The problem is the same thing happened with Season 7 this is a systemic failure that needs to be addressed it's a long term issue that hasn't been resolved by anything Cryptic have done as of yet. This goes way beyond shifting beans into different pots.
Please once again I call for people who are interested in helping improve this game to PM me so we can move forward together I want start a community based dialogue here but I can't do it alone.
#2311#2700#2316#2500
WOW! I have to say, of all your statements, and you have said some whoppers, this one impresses me the most. As my mother would say, ?So if all the other Game Developers decided to jump off a bridge, you would too?? I mean way too go with the aiming low. Forget innovation. Forget trying to be better than the competition. It really makes you lose faith, when the Executive Producer says his products is just like all the others out there. And you wonder why you have such a low meta-critic score? I really would have to agree with all the critics who have said that STO is just a basic MMO with a thin Star Trek veneer on it.
How about striving for innovation in year four? How about not looking at other games and saying ?it worked for them, let just use that idea.?? How about digging deep into what Star Trek is all about and bringing that out in unique game play. You have done it in the past: Doffs, Foundry, and Featured Episodes. Those are all unique mechanics. Grind is not.
Beers,
Jengoz =\/=
Very well said - this isn't Hello Kitty Online or another cookie-cutter Asian grinder MMO, it's Star Trek FFS - are you really that uninspired by the IP that you can't do any better?
WHAT??!! While I realise this is taken somewhat out of the context of the larger post, it's sentiment is the same all the way through - the very notion is appalling! First, it isn't like ANY Starbase, the way they are set up right now, at least, serves a "valid purpose" other than to say "I have it and you don't." But, to even hint that smaller fleets equate to lesser or, in the spirit of this quote, should be "subservient" to larger fleets...:mad: My full response would get me banned from the Forums.
This is one of the problems being brought up in this thread, and the short summary is: small fleets are JUST as valid as larger fleets and deserve as much support and recognition as any other. I'll also say this: in my opinion, players disappear in large fleets, so they become just another lemming moving toward the cliff edge. If that's how you want to play, fine. But don't tell me that's how it SHOULD be.
The notion of "fleet" means team; team means cooperation, and only cooperation equals group success. In my experience, the only way that real cooperation happens is when you KNOW the faces you bump into every day, and they have your back because you have a relationship of respect and comradeship and you share common goals! I lead my fleet of 18, but I don't dictate to them - I discuss things with them. My experience with mega-fleets was being told "if you don't like it, I've got 300 other players to take your place."
Nothing against the larger or even the "mega" fleets, but don't try and sell the notion that one type of fleet, small or large, is superior or inferior to the other: they are just different strategies that fit different styles of play.
**[EDIT]** I re-read and re-read your post, sirsitsalot, and I get that you are not against small fleets exactly. But, the choice to remain small does not mean small fleets should get less: the food dish remains the same size whether you're a Great Dane or a Chihuahua, even if it takes longer for the Chihuahua to consume it. Small fleets should be able to obtain exactly the same things as larger fleets in their own time, not have the bar lowered so they can reach it more easily. The choice to play a certain way should not equate to the consequence of a different or, especially, lesser prize.
Fleet Commander
Caprica's Revenge
(...actually active since November 2010, which may one day be important to archaeologists, but not to anyone else...)
It's not perfect and feels long... and really, I personally would rather get FM than RM from it. (Heck. Make the victims there random.)
But the enemies have a distinct feel and MO. If every FA had enemies that felt that distinct (but maybe not quite that long), I 'd be a lot more into grinding.
I'd suggest that once current content planned is out of the box, try to focus on one off races from the shows and give the big empires a rest. If you need to rely on the big empires to get attention every content release, it says to me that there's something lacking about the content and that you're leaning too hard on the shows to build up interest that your content itself isn't doing.
And maybe some attention should be paid to the difference between farming and grinding. People farm because they want to. People grind because they feel forced to to do something else. It's a subtle difference but a real one I think.
More intrinsic reward, less use of carrots. You still NEED a carrot but if that's everyone's primary motivation, well... That's like getting married for the ring.
Could Cryptic add in a smaller version of starbase missions? Ones that would be half the resources,half the cooldown,but also half the reward? In essence, taking a flight of 25 stairs to get to the first floor, and making another flight of stairs that would be 50, but get you to the same floor? In all honesty, there would be no actual increase in progression that you would get from the larger steps, but in terms of appearance, it would offer the smaller fleets the ability to see the progression at a smaller scale. Upgrade missions would be exempt from this,unless you wanted to make them a 2 parter, with the reward of the upgrade coming at the end of part 2.
Sometimes offering a smaller carrot closer to the nose is better than offering a huge carrot but not being able to smell it cuz its so far away. Just a thought. Don't even know if its feasible or wanted,but It's early for me and just felt like throwing in something constructive.
This makes me regret that I almost stopped playing real (= no MMORPG) games. I thought that "being that grindy" happened by mistake. Now I know that it is unlikely to change. I miss the time, when games were just meant to entertain (and not to simulate a full-time job). *sad*
I agree. Though I haven't played this one recently (time factor), I really like the concept of this map & mode. It really adds more complexity to the "shoot stuff" standard in game.
All part of the same pattern of rushed, under tested things being chucked onto Holodeck, when will they learn.
#2311#2700#2316#2500
Hitting your head against a wall burns 150 calories per hour...
I'll start instantly...
Watch out for my Starship Comparator app at
http://ssc.levega.de or http://www.stoshipcompare.tk
It's a good (and meaningful) start.
I was particulary glad to see Mr Stahl recognise the problem with not taking into account feedback from tribble.
I hope that this leads to cryptic in general valuing feedback more.
A lot of our frustrations have, as an underlying cause, been based on the sense that we were being ignored.
Even if that frustration is untrue, the point is that we felt we were being ignored.
Clearly thats a problem all by itself.
So, in future I look forward to a little more asking and a whole lot less telling from cryptic.
We would love to give constructive feedback, indeed there is tons of it on this thread.
Mr Stahl, allow us to cooperate with you on an equal footing to make this game all it can be.