test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Why forum posters are important

1356

Comments

  • diogene0diogene0 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    Again, we are looking to make sensible changes. We realize that we control the game code and so if an exploit exists, we responsible for it. But we are also responsible to resolve issues that are adversly impacting the game.

    You do know that there are still exploits the devs aren't aware of? :rolleyes: Close one, add something to compensate the loss, and you'll likely create another flaw in your system. You will close it and then you create even more frustration, and the proccess starts over.

    What you could do is: giving some time for players to test stuff on tribble and then giving them some sort of reward if they find a way to exploit it, because, otherwise, nothing will change. Your testing team might be very busy with season 8, and this may also be solved by testing stuff more actively (or just hiring people who are good at finding loopholes). Not creating new exploits would be a premium choice solution.
    Lenny Barre, lvl 60 DC. 18k.
    God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
  • captainoblivouscaptainoblivous Member Posts: 2,284 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    They seem pretty active to me, compared to the general lack of activity I see from developers in other MMOs, which is to say other developers usually avoid general forums except to troll or make vague statements, and 90% of developer comments are off-topic in various other sub-forums.

    And of course, the devs here don't do that? There are exceptions of course, but they are just that; exceptions.

    Don't forget that there's a huge liability in being too vocal; players are very likely to develop expectations, usually unreasonable if not outright fantastical expectations, and when they don't manifest players blame the developers.

    Something that can be at least partially allayed by honesty and transparency. As well as a thick skin!
    Speaking of Klingons, I would have thought Klingon players were of the same breed as release-WoW Horde. They sure complain an awful lot for a group of supposed warriors, but perhaps that's why the Klingons have been losing ground pretty much constantly since the TOS series.

    Well, perhaps they have actually been trampled all over for the last few years?
    You have actually played the KDF side right? Ah, if only I knew where that stowiki "History of the KDF" page was...
    I need a beer.

  • weylandjuarezweylandjuarez Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Ah, if only I knew where that stowiki "History of the KDF" page was...

    You're welcome :)
    Please join our peaceful protest to help make STO a better game
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Proudly not contributing to PWE's bottom-line since October 2012
  • captainoblivouscaptainoblivous Member Posts: 2,284 Arc User
    edited February 2013

    I love you Kaz :)
    I need a beer.

  • dastahldastahl Member Posts: 185 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    ...Would I like faster queues on KDF side? Of course. That's why I didn't mind removing Fleet Marks from the Foundry. More people in the queues. But even so, just based on math, Feds are going to progress faster, on the whole, than KDF, and big fleets faster than small ones. Its hard to engineer a system that overcomes arithmetic.

    We have a proposal on the table for the May update which is intended to address the discrepency for KDF queues and mark earning. Along with overall fleet size issues, we do also recognize that the KDF is at a disadvantage due to the smaller number of players. The solution we have on the table will seek to resolve this.
  • redrickyredricky Member Posts: 1,004 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    We are actively working on solutions to AFK'ing and we are working directly with customer service to establish how we are going to do it.

    You will see some changes in PvP this week. We are still gathering information on STFs, but will be acting on that issue soon as well.

    Again, we are looking to make sensible changes. We realize that we control the game code and so if an exploit exists, we responsible for it. But we are also responsible to resolve issues that are adversly impacting the game.
    Thank you for the response, and thank you for your continued presence. This is me when you mention PvP changes.

    Edit: Also see my signature for a way to sell more Z-Store ships to Jem HEC owners.
    _______________
    CommanderDonatra@Capt.Sisko: ahhh is it supposed to do that?
    Norvo Tigan@dontdrunkimshoot: hell ya, maybe
  • jengozjengoz Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    We have a proposal on the table for the May update which is intended to address the discrepency for KDF queues and mark earning. Along with overall fleet size issues, we do also recognize that the KDF is at a disadvantage due to the smaller number of players. The solution we have on the table will seek to resolve this.

    oh, you mean the "War is over" proposal. Where the KDF is folded into the FEDs and we have only one faction?

    And then you sell us Romulans as a playable race that does all the same content as before?
    "Star Trek Online is powered by the most abundant resource in the galaxy . . . Gullibility"
  • millimidgetmillimidget Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Always remember that 'metrics' just tell a company what their customers are doing - it tells them nothing about how satisfied they are doing that.
    QFT

    I've watched plenty of developers cling to their metrics while the game wastes away around them.

    But metrics are no doubt an easy sell in a meeting. They're concrete, and they're conducive to being related in terms of profit. Certainly moreso than the alternative, a simple gut check.

    At the same time, the Holy Grail of MMO gaming was originally designed using gut checks. WoW only started going to **** when the replacement devs began clinging to metrics (from what I hear, the game is now populated for 1-2 months after an expansion before emptying out again). Granted, gut checks are a talent, not a skill (now go implement account wide reputation; TRIBBLE the metrics).
    And of course, the devs here don't do that? There are exceptions of course, but they are just that; exceptions.
    I've seen more useful dialogue from dstahl in this one thread than I saw from Anet in 4-5 months of GW2, or from Blizzard in the four months of D3 I played before that, or from EA/BWA in the four months I played TOR before that (they should really release Huttball as a standalone game; it's the only good to come from TOR besides a sequel to KOTOR2).
    "Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society." - Aristotle
  • clannmacclannmac Member Posts: 279 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I find it interesting - and appalling - that you felt the need to start a new thread here to provide your "answers." The VERY large feedback thread from the community wherein the questions were actually raised received a - very curt and unprofessional, I might add - reply, but not a response - i.e. "answers." Many seeing THIS thread for the first time may not even realize what has been talked about in 200+ posts for several days running, and it will add to the confusion and divisiveness.

    The removal of Marks from IOR is such a small and even insignificant part of all that is being queried and challenged. If you do indeed listen to feedback, perhaps you should revisit THAT thread and reply to the mainstay of what is being discussed: your contradictory statements and actions, the loss of trust in the developers and in the game mechanics, the nerfing of things we grind for after-the-fact, and so forth - the HEART of the matter, not its symptoms and side-effects.

    Exploits certainly happen, and I can see where some "bad apples have spoiled the barrel," as far as some of the play goes - I personally have never played any of the Foundry missions. But, what is being expressed is the discontent over smoke-and-mirror policy, double-talk, and heavy-handed dictation of how YOU feel WE should play OUR game. You develop and do the work, sure, but it is the PLAYER base who fund you and who you do it for; at least it was - you have clearly lost sight of that. And, in "100s of threads ago," you yourself declared that this game was not designed to be a grind-fest, and that is was developed "by players, FOR players."

    Your disdainful approach to how things are handled shows even more the "we're going to do what we want, and you have to deal with it (or not)" attitude, and your continued secrecy in how and when you do things adds to the distrust. No one wants you to reveal the contents of the "presents" and surprises - we still like anticipation of new things. But, especially when there is a problem and issues you now admit to being handled poorly, we need you to lay out how you intend to deal with the problems, and give us a definite timeline - "in the months ahead" was also when the fully formed and functional Klingon faction was supposed to be in our hands...three years ago. And, a new "oooh, shiney!" is NOT the fix or what we are seeking.

    I do appreciate your admission to being "heavy handed" in your decisions to take away something without compensation or balancing, and to even giving out a reply at all. But, since it is not a truly forth-coming DISCUSSION with the player base, I think the majority who have raised issues feel it is not only too little and too late, but just another sidestepping tactic.

    But hey, your "metrics bear out that players are happy," right? So, I guess we'll wait for the next time you contradict your own actions and statements to see how long that lasts.

    Until then, we'll continue goose-stepping behind you into the Final Frontier...
    366400.jpg

    Fleet Commander
    Caprica's Revenge
    (...actually active since November 2010, which may one day be important to archaeologists, but not to anyone else...)
  • jengozjengoz Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    You will see some changes in PvP this week. We are still gathering information on STFs, but will be acting on that issue soon as well.

    .

    oh. please dont tell me you are going to "fix" PVP by just adding Fleet Marks to it.? That is how you "fixed " the foundry six months ago.
    "Star Trek Online is powered by the most abundant resource in the galaxy . . . Gullibility"
  • tjexcimer500tjexcimer500 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    So recently, we pulled Fleet Marks from the Foundry because there were too many people AFK completing missions, or in other words logging into the mission, letting the client sit there for 30 minutes and then collecting rewards, and Fleet Marks to boot.

    So you punished everyone for a flaw you allowed?

    I see... this truly follows the spirit of Star Trek now doesn't it?

    A non-handicapped individual parks in a handicapped spot that is not designated as a handicapped spot and so no one is allowed to use the entire parking lot.

    Someone steals an item from a store, so the entire store no longer allows customers in. Furthermore, the police arrest everyone in the store and nearby stores as well.

    Your logic is quite illogical.

    Happy paying customers continue to pay. Unhappy customers go pay somewhere else.
    -Tired of the Cryptic Shake.
    There are Four Lights... say no to ARC
    Fleet: 1st Order of Role-Players' Guild - gaming together since 2004
  • lordmalak1lordmalak1 Member Posts: 4,681 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    jengoz wrote: »
    oh, you mean the "War is over" proposal. Where the KDF is folded into the FEDs and we have only one faction?

    And then you sell us Romulans as a playable race that does all the same content as before?

    :mad:
    You better NOT !
    I assure you if that is the plan and it goes live it WILL be the last day I play, and I KNOW many other KDF players will join me.
    KBF Lord MalaK
    Awoken Dead
    giphy.gif

    Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
  • millimidgetmillimidget Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    clannmac wrote: »
    If you do indeed listen to feedback, perhaps you should revisit THAT thread and reply to the mainstay of what is being discussed: your contradictory statements and actions, the loss of trust in the developers and in the game mechanics, the nerfing of things we grind for after-the-fact, and so forth - the HEART of the matter, not its symptoms and side-effects.
    There's little to be said about it from their end that could go over well with the community. "We're sorry for TRIBBLE up, we'll be more attentive to your concerns moving forward" can only said so many times before it rings hollow.

    I'm all for QQing on the forums, but not at all about dragging developers into a pity party.
    "Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society." - Aristotle
  • vinru821vinru821 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    We have a proposal on the table for the May update which is intended to address the discrepency for KDF queues and mark earning. Along with overall fleet size issues, we do also recognize that the KDF is at a disadvantage due to the smaller number of players. The solution we have on the table will seek to resolve this.

    OoOo haha, how great would it be if this means that .. any new romulan faction will be melded with the KDF!!!! hahahaha take that feds! now you have to join us if you want to be a precious romulan!

    and this would mean Keeping standard cloaks on the KDF side! :D

    Look at the romulans.. so weak.. so alone.. heck they are too stupid to keep running away from the salt vamps! They will run right into our space, and we will gladly subjugate them! :eek:

    lmao extremely doubtful but how friggin' funny would this be!
    :eek:
  • broadnaxbroadnax Member Posts: 340 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Yeah, you follow your usual reply MO. If you look at my available posting history, you'll see I give them credit where I think its die; and criticism when I feel they've done something bad. And I occasionally go overboard on either side; but, at least I'm palying the game and experiencing the effect of these decisions (good or bad) and posting my thoughts based on that experience.

    Haven't you learned yet that you are either a fanboy or doomsayer? :)

    I follow the same principle: Give credit when credit is due and provide constructive criticism when needed (hopefully constructive; it's easy to "go overboard" as you say).

    Those who despise Cryptic for whatever reason will call us fanboys; those who think Cryptic can do no wrong regardless will call us doomsayers. Neither extreme is beneficial to the game.

    While I have no doubt that Dan, et al., like to see positive comments that show people actually appreciate their efforts, one reason they do read the forums to find ways to make the game better.

    Both affirmation and *constructive* criticism are beneficial.
    I don't hang around on the Forums of MMOs I no longer play; as I have no real basis for feedback of the actual current gameplay situation first hand.

    Indeed. If one no longer plays, then one is no longer qualified to make assessments on changes in gameplay.
  • nicha0nicha0 Member Posts: 1,456 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I think you have a whole storm of issues here that are causing a major feedback problem, and its going to take more than just words to properly address the issues in the long term.

    1. You are pushing out patches without any testing, things in patch notes are just plain wrong or borken, and never were tested ever. This has to stop. A customer is happier to get something and have it working then to get something that is broken or get something and have it taken away. When I deal with customers I tell them a time and then I exceed their expectations.

    2. You have been fixing parts of the game which you determine to be exploits at the cost of the game's health. I know the forum base isn't the whole game, but do you really want to see what the in game players are saying too? The only people not complaining are your casual people that didn't even know what IOR was.

    What I think you guys need here is a feedback group, a lot of MMOs have them, and if you do you aren't using them. You select some reasonable, responsible posters that have a high diversity of game knowledge and tell them this is what we have to do. Their experience in the game will let them know immediately if the solution isn't complete, will cause a rage, or is sensible. The idea is a small group that is interested in bettering the game, not profiting or being selfish.
    It is pretty normal for devs to not really get the game they are making, its normal, you don't want to bring your work home. What the theory of the game is, and what really happens is different.

    3. The bugs have to be fixed faster than they are being produced, they aren't. There is nearly no part of this game you aren't constantly working around bugs. When people get frustrated they start to leave, when they get frustrated all those little bugs just scratch at them until they scream.
    Delirium Tremens
    Completed Starbase, Embassy, Mine, Spire and No Win Scenario
    Nothing to do anymore.
    http://dtfleet.com/
    Visit our Youtube channel
  • kyuui13kyuui13 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    There's little to be said about it from their end that could go over well with the community. "We're sorry for TRIBBLE up, we'll be more attentive to your concerns moving forward" can only said so many times before it rings hollow.

    I'm all for QQing on the forums, but not at all about dragging developers into a pity party.

    While I would agree with this, lest we forget however, it was they who mentioned the "no cups in the kitchen"

    The major problem for them, is that in spite of repeated statements of "improvement" we still see the same systematic issues occurring, months and years later. At a certain point one must assume that what they say, will ring hollow, because their actions have proven this to be the case.
    For me, I'm at that point, Their words, mean little now, since their actions, will show otherwise.
    Next time you log in, ask yourself this.
    dastahl wrote: »
    If you can't have fun, then what is the point?
  • kirksplatkirksplat Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    We absolutely do listen to feedback. But there is another issue, some people like to exploit.

    I take full responsibility and freely admit that we have been heavy handed with closing exploits and that in the future we will strive to be more considerate about how we close loopholes. Providing clear alternatives for players NOT exploiting while we close down the holes.

    If you go back in time to when Foundry missions HAD NO REWARDS, these issues were not around. It is only when we started adding "tangible" rewards to the Foundry that the issues surrounding the Foundry became more in depth.

    We want to reward Foundry missions. We want players to be recognized for making great missions (where great is determined by the player base - not us).

    However, as soon as we started attaching real rewards to the Foundry, exploits started.

    Whether it was the click a contact missions or the recent AFK farming of Foundry missions, having rewards on Foundry missions is problematic.


    I regret that I thought rewards for foundry were a good idea.

    At this point, I think you guys would be justified only attaching rewards to vetted spotlights. Get rid of the blue and green drops.

    If you actually do that, I will be happy to take the blame as a super elitist foundry author who is part of a secret society that controls the devs.

    Please nerf.

    Only a small percentage of folks will play my stories. I don't care as long as that small percentage can actually find my stories.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • dastahldastahl Member Posts: 185 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    So you punished everyone for a flaw you allowed?
    ....


    It was absolutely our poor decision to put Fleet Marks on the Foundry mission in the first place. That is our mistake and we let it go on for too long.

    To say that we punished everyone is very subjective because at the same time that we removed Fleet Marks, we greatly increased the amount of Dilithium that Foundry missions can reward. Dilithium is in far more demand by Fleets than Fleet Marks, and this entirely designed to aid. Dilithium is much safer to reward in Foundry (which tends to see a large amount of exploiting) because of the refinement cap.

    So, as one upset customer wrote in "now I have to actually play the game in order to make Fleet Marks?" Yes. You must actively participate in order to gain Fleet Marks. You cannot go AFK in a Foundry mission and then alt-tab back over once the mission completes.

    On a programming side, we are working on better ways to detect this so that we can be clearer about "qualifying missions" but in the meantime the changes are done in the best interest of the game.
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    To say that we punished everyone is very subjective because at the same time that we removed Fleet Marks, we greatly increased the amount of Dilithium that Foundry missions can reward. Dilithium is in far more demand by Fleets than Fleet Marks, and this entirely designed to aid. Dilithium is much safer to reward in Foundry (which tends to see a large amount of exploiting) because of the refinement cap.

    How does awarding more ore help when the refinement cap hasn't budged, and anyone with more than two neurons firing is hitting that cap daily?
    dastahl wrote: »
    So, as one upset customer wrote in "now I have to actually play the game in order to make Fleet Marks?" Yes. You must actively participate in order to gain Fleet Marks. You cannot go AFK in a Foundry mission and then alt-tab back over once the mission completes.

    Give your players something that's fun to do to earn fleet marks (and by fun I don't mean adding two more mind-numbingly repetitive fleet defense mission variations) and you won't have a situation where people don't want to play your game.
  • wanderintxwanderintx Member Posts: 144 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    It was absolutely our poor decision to put Fleet Marks on the Foundry mission in the first place.

    It was only a poor decision because the Foundry is exploitable in its current state. Please don't dismiss the idea of the Foundry as an alternative source of FMs entirely. I'd like to be able to play new content and get rewarded for it instead of grinding the same content over and over for the same reward.
  • umaekoumaeko Member Posts: 748 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Really?

    Let's consider this, then: fleet content is essentially group content in which we 'defend' our assets. Protect the starbase, prevent a blockade, prevent sabotage and run the no win scenario.

    Evidently stuff that advances the fleet! Not. This defends our assets. Sure, it contributes to steady advancement, but none of that is actually truly indicative of elements which ends up improving a fleet's assets in itself. It's nothing symbolically proactive.

    If we think about the whole design scheme behind the Enterprise-F, wasn't it because Starfleet cared about the value of its exploration arm despite the Federation being at war on multiple front? This tells me something about what Starfleet values in its personnel.

    So, following that logic, wouldn't fleets whom promote having their captain go out there and fulfill the sort of varied exploration/content found in the Foundry mission actually all about "going boldly where no one has gone before" be looked on favorably and receive more resources from Starfleet in order to further expand thier range of operations? Isn't that the exact same angle that you, Mister Stahl, said you hoped the Foundry would fulfill in relation to exploration clusters?

    I think your stance is flawed. I think your foundry missions ought to have had included a fleet mark reward or at least the choice of getting a foundry mark reward (which the wrapper could've accomplished - I know I liked the wrapper a lot more in any case). I think Terilynn Shull was entirely correct in the stance she broached in the Massively article.

    You say that we have to actually play the game to get our marks. I've nothing against that. But your offerings for Fleet Marks in themselves are seriously unappealing in the long run... whereas the Foundry builds on a long term sustainable strength for STO.
  • tsurutafan01tsurutafan01 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I can't speak for any silent majority, vocal minority, or whatever. I can say threads like this make me want to distance myself from the forums.

    It's a video game. I will play it as long as the play conditions suit my ability to (1) enjoy myself (2) be able to "win", however I define that, with a reasonable commitment.

    When those aren't being met, don't flippin' play. There are 30 000 other video games. The ones who declare OMG I AM LEAVING 4 REALZ U GUYS WE R THE DEFENDERS OF THE FAITH need to get a grip. There's nothing dramatic about it.

    I criticize the game at times on this forum, but I try and keep that criticism constructive and realistic. Which frankly is way ahead of a lot of the recent drivel over how people in a 4 man fleet want the game to be the same as if it was 400.

    Again, get a grip.

    This game is a long way from perfect. But I have high hopes that season 8 will be interesting. If it's not, like I said, there's 30 000 other video games. And I have Star Trek DVDs so it's not like I really need this place for a fix.


    "We are smart." - Grebnedlog

    Member of Alliance Central Command/boq botlhra'ghom
  • millimidgetmillimidget Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    When those aren't being met, don't flippin' play. There are 30 000 other video games. The ones who declare OMG I AM LEAVING 4 REALZ U GUYS WE R THE DEFENDERS OF THE FAITH need to get a grip. There's nothing dramatic about it.
    That's why you ignore them and let their thread fall off the front page.

    You had good advice in the opening of your post.
    "Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society." - Aristotle
  • boglejam73boglejam73 Member Posts: 890 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    deleted - cross post. My bad.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • solomacesolomace Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I don't hang around stirring up stuff; but that's me.)

    And yet you still respond to any post I do, contributing to the "stirring up stuff";)
    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
  • cptvanorcptvanor Member Posts: 274 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    umaeko wrote: »
    You say that we have to actually play the game to get our marks. I've nothing against that. But your offerings for Fleet Marks in themselves are seriously unappealing in the long run... whereas the Foundry builds on a long term sustainable strength for STO.

    Agreed completely.

    Lets be honest, the IOR wrapper had to change. The very idea someone could AFK for 30 minutes and earn 50 FM and 960 Dil is broken and no one can really argue otherwise. Sure not everyone did that, but just because some people weren't doesn't mean that others can be allowed to keep exploiting the system.

    I don't mind the fleet events, but they are not all that enjoyable either. So there needs to be something done that gives us more ways to earn FM's. But keeping the system they had in place couldn't really work either.
  • diogene0diogene0 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    We have a proposal on the table for the May update which is intended to address the discrepency for KDF queues and mark earning. Along with overall fleet size issues, we do also recognize that the KDF is at a disadvantage due to the smaller number of players. The solution we have on the table will seek to resolve this.

    You mean merging factions or more cross-faction queues? I hope I'm wrong...
    Lenny Barre, lvl 60 DC. 18k.
    God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    diogene0 wrote: »
    You mean merging factions or more cross-faction queues? I hope I'm wrong...

    I suddenly have an image of KDF players being forced to defend Fed starbases from Klingon attacks...
  • bluedarkybluedarky Member Posts: 548 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    How does awarding more ore help when the refinement cap hasn't budged, and anyone with more than two neurons firing is hitting that cap daily?

    Because most people aren't hitting the cap daily. End of story.

    I could hit the cap daily if I wanted too, but I only do it only couple of days because I have things I'd rather be doing in game than repeating Dilithium content over and over.
Sign In or Register to comment.