If it takes, totalled up, ten million EC, ten million fleet marks and ten million dilithium to get access to an item, that's what it takes. If it only takes 5 EC, 5 fleet marks and 5 dil, then that's what it takes, too. Doesn't matter whether it's done by one person or a hundred. The numbers are the numbers.
And we're right back to codifying disparity based on feet size. For someone who claims to be uninterested in stats I find it very interesting that you're going so far out of your way to justify treating a not insignificant population of the game as unworthy of having access to a wide swath of rewards and content solely because they don't want to be a part of a particular branch of STO's fleets.
All I said was I wasn't interested in gear. Or having the 'most ubah' gear. A lack of interest in being 'statsically competitive' in the context of a video game, not necessarily a lack of interest in stats, period. Although to be fair, that's also true - Which is probably why I never really thought about the percentage of people this issue may or may not affect.
I've made a handful of posts on a forum, dude. That's not exactly going 'far out of my way', LOL.
Unworthy's your word, not mine. But it's how MMOs work. If I wanted raid-level gear in EQ, I had to raid. If if I didn't want to raid, or my guild wasn't big enough to take on the 60-man encounters, I had to live without the raid-level gear. That's just kinda how it works.
Back then, I did want that stuff. And I did join a very large endgame raiding guild. And I raided, and I got the gear. That was the path that was laid out that resulted in the acquisition of the virtual items that I desired. Smaller guilds who couldn't clear NToV didn't get NToV gear. Harsh, but true.
These days, I'm in one of those smaller guilds (approx 6 active members), and I'm probably never going to see a T5 Starbase - or if I do, it'll take a lot longer than if I was in a fleet of 100. So be it. That's the path I chose in this game and I'm happy with my choice.
Back then, I did want that stuff. And I did join a very large endgame raiding guild. And I raided, and I got the gear. That was the path that was laid out that resulted in the acquisition of the virtual items that I desired. Smaller guilds who couldn't clear NToV didn't get NToV gear. Harsh, but true.
These days, I'm in one of those smaller guilds (approx 6 active members), and I'm probably never going to see a T5 Starbase - or if I do, it'll take a lot longer than if I was in a fleet of 100. So be it. That's the path I chose in this game and I'm happy with my choice.
At the severe risk of sounding like a broken record, once again I'd like to note that, with the sole exception of Fleet Ships, all high-level fleet gear is accessible with only a simple base invite. If your fleet has the requisite provisions and you have rights to use them, setting foot on a T5 base gives you access to that base's unlocked stores.
At the severe risk of sounding like a broken record, once again I'd like to note that, with the sole exception of Fleet Ships, all high-level fleet gear is accessible with only a simple base invite. If your fleet has the requisite provisions and you have rights to use them, setting foot on a T5 base gives you access to that base's unlocked stores.
The barriers to access in STO are really low.
Which is true. Something I take advantage of, something many others take advantage of. And functions as an acceptable work-around.
But at the end of the day, it is still a work-around. A temporary solution to what has been a long-term problem.
If there is the opportunity to get rid of the work-around and implement a permanent, viable solution that gives more options to lower-population fleets without taking anything away from the progress that the higher-population fleets have, then I think this is something that should considered and actioned upon.
Barriers may be low, but they are still existant. And I would rather have non-existant barriers to low barriers. I think there are many others who would agree with that sentiment.
This prevents fleet leaders from being predatory and rounding up bums from the bus stop
As most of us live in a democratic countries - then it would be logical to propose a voting system. In which a fleet will have regular voting/election to choose who the fleet leader will be and current fleet leader - if he didnt win the election, will be automatically reduced to normal member and stripped of all privileges.
This prevent fleet members from being forced into a labour-camp-forced-working scenarios and being worked to the death by their incompetent fleet leaders. This is what used to be during the dark ages - but since we live in the 24th century and United Federation of Planets is a democratic institution, I'm sure that's not the case anymore.
OR we can do it the KDF way: that if a member found current leadership is incompetent, he can challenge him to a duel to the death. The winner will be granted full leadership of the said fleet, and the looser will be dead, or in STO case - will have the char deleted automatically and loose everything bound to that char - to simulate proper death.
Small fleets should seek out alliances with larger fleets to give large fleet members access to more projects to contribute to projects so they can get more fleet credits. Projects in large fleets fill up fast. So it can be a challenge for those that grind less often to get their FC. Forming an alliance allows those people to get their FC and the small fleet gets their projects filled faster. Some fleets already do this.
Go here and show your support for a better Foundry!
As most of us live in a democratic countries - then it would be logical to propose a voting system. In which a fleet will have regular voting/election to choose who the fleet leader will be and current fleet leader - if he didnt win the election, will be automatically reduced to normal member and stripped of all privileges.
This prevent fleet members from being forced into a labour-camp-forced-working scenarios and being worked to the death by their incompetent fleet leaders. This is what used to be during the dark ages - but since we live in the 24th century and United Federation of Planets is a democratic institution, I'm sure that's not the case anymore.
OR we can do it the KDF way: that if a member found current leadership is incompetent, he can challenge him to a duel to the death. The winner will be granted full leadership of the said fleet, and the looser will be dead, or in STO case - will have the char deleted automatically and loose everything bound to that char - to simulate proper death.
This may come as a shock to you, but you can leave a fleet at any time. The leave button is on the roster page. You'll keep all of the credits you've earned and all of the items you've bought (which should be obvious, but people still ask).
Barriers may be low, but they are still existant. And I would rather have non-existant barriers to low barriers. I think there are many others who would agree with that sentiment.
if getting a free invite to a t5 fleet store is seen as a barrier that isnt low enough, i can only surmise that a 'non-existent barrier' means that you want every fleet created to instantly be created as t5, with zero effort, zero investment, and no provisions required. no barrier at all, just create your fleet and kit out. cos thats certainly what it sounds like to me.
As most of us live in a democratic countries - then it would be logical to propose a voting system. In which a fleet will have regular voting/election to choose who the fleet leader will be and current fleet leader - if he didnt win the election, will be automatically reduced to normal member and stripped of all privileges.
This prevent fleet members from being forced into a labour-camp-forced-working scenarios and being worked to the death by their incompetent fleet leaders. This is what used to be during the dark ages - but since we live in the 24th century and United Federation of Planets is a democratic institution, I'm sure that's not the case anymore.
OR we can do it the KDF way: that if a member found current leadership is incompetent, he can challenge him to a duel to the death. The winner will be granted full leadership of the said fleet, and the looser will be dead, or in STO case - will have the char deleted automatically and loose everything bound to that char - to simulate proper death.
Sorry, but absolutely not. I have invested large amounts of Time and RL monies into my fleet. No fleet member is forced to do anything, donate anything, participate at all with the fleet, if that is their choice. Each and every fleet member is free to leave at anytime, there is a leave button on the roster page.
If you do not like how your fleet is run, then leave and then either a) Start your own fleet, or b) join a fleet not run by asshats.
I have to say, the only reason these fleets have these projects and require vast resources to complete them is to create something PWE can monetize (i.e. dilithium is required). Fleet projects could be done purely by assigning Doffs to the project with a variable chance of success just like Doff assignments. In fact, fleet members could loan out their Doffs for "fleet duty" and the fleet leaders can apply them to fleet projects as they see fit. The more Doffs loaned to the fleet, the more projects that can be undertaken. Make them require rare and very rare Doffs for fleet projects so they aren't exploiting the system.
Go here and show your support for a better Foundry!
if getting a free invite to a t5 fleet store is seen as a barrier that isnt low enough, i can only surmise that a 'non-existent barrier' means that you want every fleet created to instantly be created as t5, with zero effort, zero investment, and no provisions required. no barrier at all, just create your fleet and kit out. cos thats certainly what it sounds like to me.
Not really sure how you can make the jump from "I don't think STO players in fleets should have to be content and satisfied with a work-around solution." to "I want everything unlocked and free forever and ever.", but that's pretty impressive.
Fleet leader places a dilithium tax. (Yes I realize you said not personal. ) and Charge members for leaving.
Neither of these points are even a remotely good idea and they're even worse together.
Taken out of context from the entire proposal I made, yes. I agree. Those particular points I made are horrible ideas.
But when included as parts of a comprehensive solution incorporating various other parts, I consider them to be a reasonable and rational solution.
It stops people from exploiting small population fleets due to their lower costs. One of the reasons they have flat out refused to adjust diltihium costs to fleet size is due to the extremely obvious problem of fleet members artificially keeping a fleet population low and only joining it to acquire something before jumping back to their large population fleet.
My proposed solution offers those mechanics to deter players from being whimsical with what fleet they join and puts more responsibility in their hands, while discouraging the exploitation of small population fleets based on lower project requirements.
Artificially maintaining low fleet numbers would be punished through excessive 'termination fees', as a result of constant leaving/rejoining.
But when included as parts of a comprehensive solution incorporating various other parts, I consider them to be a reasonable and rational solution.
It stops people from exploiting small population fleets due to their lower costs. One of the reasons they have flat out refused to adjust diltihium costs to fleet size is due to the extremely obvious problem of fleet members artificially keeping a fleet population low and only joining it to acquire something before jumping back to their large population fleet.
My proposed solution offers those mechanics to deter players from being whimsical with what fleet they join and puts more responsibility in their hands, while discouraging the exploitation of small population fleets based on lower project requirements.
Artificially maintaining low fleet numbers would be punished through excessive 'termination fees', as a result of constant leaving/rejoining.
FIrst off, I help to run a fleet of under 50 people making the climb from T4 to T5. I completely understand the problem that small fleets have in building the holdings. I try to help them with things such as free starbase invites whenever I can, I am completely opposed to fleet taxes though. Here's what happens.
There are 2 ways I can think of to recruit a lot of people. You either just random invite or you post messages to try to convince people to join.
Some person trying to exploit this for themselves just random invites with the maximum possible tax. Anyone who accepts (maybe even by accident) is now subject to the tax or a fee for leaving. The fleet leader just got guaranteed progress towards making his personal starbase.
The other possibility for the exploiter is that he simply lies in his recruitment message and the same scenario as above occurs.
Even if someone isn't trying to exploit, if a player has to pay to try a fleet and then pay again for leaving if they don't like it, nobody would ever join fleets (myself included) which kind of kills the "Massively Multiplayer" part of STO.
Artificially maintaining low fleet numbers would be punished through excessive 'termination fees', as a result of constant leaving/rejoining.
It also punishes people who find that particular fleet isn't a good fit for them, but who's fleet leader (or anyone else capable of kicking), isn't willing to do so.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
Both are fair points. Since we know there is no honor system on the internet, and that people have no reservations about violating the spirit of the game for the sake of personal gain, I can certainly see how the actions of a few unscrupulous players might unfairly cost other players who leave their fleet of their own accord and simply would not want to pay a fee/tax for leaving.
I do think there should be some mechanic in place to deter rapid joining/leaving, however. A termination fee could be considered harsh as it has a very tangible penalty attached to it.
What about a cooldown timer mechanic? You must wait 20 hours before joining another fleet once you leave one?
It would not be as harsh as having to pay a cost to leave a fleet, which would deter predatory fleets from inviting new players for the sake of crowd-sourcing in the hopes of getting 'termination fees' racked up.
But it would also inconvenience/deter players from artificially keeping fleet membership low by offering a 20 hour wait period before joining a new fleet. During this time they would obviously not be able to queue for fleet events, and if they had fleet credits they would still be unable to purchase fleet supplies that would require provisions.
The only downside is the only real penalty is a wait period. Nothing would stop a fleet from simply creating another alt fleet with low numbers, take advantage of low costs, and continue to shuffle fleet members around to acquire their equipment/ships.
The punishment would be a 40 hour wait period. 20 hours from leaving the original fleet, joining the small fleet and acquiring their equipment, leaving and then waiting another 20 hours before rejoining the original fleet.
Would a 40 hour wait period penalty be more fair? Since there would be no currencies at stake. There would be nothing to gain.
Both are fair points. Since we know there is no honor system on the internet, and that people have no reservations about violating the spirit of the game for the sake of personal gain, I can certainly see how the actions of a few unscrupulous players might unfairly cost other players who leave their fleet of their own accord and simply would not want to pay a fee/tax for leaving.
I do think there should be some mechanic in place to deter rapid joining/leaving, however. A termination fee could be considered harsh as it has a very tangible penalty attached to it.
What about a cooldown timer mechanic? You must wait 20 hours before joining another fleet once you leave one?
It would not be as harsh as having to pay a cost to leave a fleet, which would deter predatory fleets from inviting new players for the sake of crowd-sourcing in the hopes of getting 'termination fees' racked up.
But it would also inconvenience/deter players from artificially keeping fleet membership low by offering a 20 hour wait period before joining a new fleet. During this time they would obviously not be able to queue for fleet events, and if they had fleet credits they would still be unable to purchase fleet supplies that would require provisions.
The only downside is the only real penalty is a wait period. Nothing would stop a fleet from simply creating another alt fleet with low numbers, take advantage of low costs, and continue to shuffle fleet members around to acquire their equipment/ships.
The punishment would be a 40 hour wait period. 20 hours from leaving the original fleet, joining the small fleet and acquiring their equipment, leaving and then waiting another 20 hours before rejoining the original fleet.
Would a 40 hour wait period penalty be more fair? Since there would be no currencies at stake. There would be nothing to gain.
I would disagree with any penalty for leaving, other than the Fleet(s) being ditched, telling people what they think of said individual. (Like if they ninjaed the bank, I'd want to know about that, before letting him/her in MY fleet), otherwise, I just don't think it's really appropriate.
I'd rather see ways to enhance the gameplay, rather than having penalties, for what a few think isn't good "behaviour", be put into effect gamewide.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
How would that even work, anyway? If someone is kicked out by the leaders, did they leave, and thus incur a penalty for actions they didn't even take on their own, or did they not leave on their own, and thus manage to leave the fleet without penalty? If the former, then it becomes a LOT harder for smaller fleets to recruit anyone at all because of the fear of being penalized when the leader winds up being a loon and kicks you. If the former, then your penalty is meaningless because it can be dodged simply by getting the leader to kick you instead.
This idea is a fail from the very beginning. It is a bad idea, and you should feel bad.
That's great. But you've got to pay the price. Altering the price is fundamentally unfair to those who've already paid it.
Tell that to Cryptic when they have a sale then :P
The main problem as I see it is that this game no longer has the huge amount of people playing it that it had at the start and as other games come and go players leave or come back. Trouble is that this leaves the long term players to sort out building their fleets and it is taking way too long.
My fleet started at 10 full time players and it now down to 2 full time and 4 part time occasional players. I don't want to break up the fleet and lose all that hard work, but I would like Cryptic to give the small fleets a little love and a helping hand even if it is a one off.
Here's an idea: Make requirements automatically scale to the number of fleet members.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Yes it is. Lets face it we all knew that building a fleet starbase was going to be a challenge and we all knew the size of our fleet before season six started every fleet had the chance to go on a recruitment drive long before the starbase went live I don't recall cryptic saying once this goe's live you cant add to your roster.
My fleet in not a mega fleet nor is it a small fleet but we struggle as well were just now close to hitting tier 5 ship yard and that's ok were proud of what we did.
I don't think cryptic should hand out a bail out to small fleets just to keep up with the public are they going to give my fleet and others a refund if they ever due lower the requirements ??? answer noooooo.
The way I see it if your in a small fleet you have two options (1) go on a major recruitment drive or (2) merge with a bigger fleet. choice is yours. Its not like cryptic tells anyone your fleet has to be small.
Sorry, but absolutely not. I have invested large amounts of Time and RL monies into my fleet. No fleet member is forced to do anything, donate anything, participate at all with the fleet, if that is their choice. Each and every fleet member is free to leave at anytime, there is a leave button on the roster page.
If you do not like how your fleet is run, then leave and then either a) Start your own fleet, or b) join a fleet not run by asshats.
^^^^^I totally approve this message. JUST SAY NO TO ASSHATS!:D
No it's not. Is it "fundamentally unfair" when the computer you bought a year ago is half the price now? Is it "fundamentally unfair" when the TV you bought goes on sale a week later?
Everything in an MMO is subject to change. In fact, they make us all agree to that.
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
No it's not. Is it "fundamentally unfair" when the computer you bought a year ago is half the price now? Is it "fundamentally unfair" when the TV you bought goes on sale a week later?
Everything in an MMO is subject to change. In fact, they make us all agree to that.
Lol yea I just love it when you buy a new computer and a week later its out of date but thats the gamble we take.
Again im going to say this you and your fleet knew going in that building this starbase was going to be a pain and if you didnt know then shame on your fleet leadership for not taking the time to read up and educate their members on what its going to cost to complete.
When season six was announced at the time I was only a member in my fleet and our leader took the time to educate us as to what this baby was going to cost to build we all then formed a plan and to this day even with me as a co. leader were still using that same plan.
Do I wish we can finish sooner ?? yes do I want a nerf or a hand out ?? no
Yes it is. Lets face it we all knew that building a fleet starbase was going to be a challenge and we all knew the size of our fleet before season six started every fleet had the chance to go on a recruitment drive long before the starbase went live I don't recall cryptic saying once this goe's live you cant add to your roster.
My fleet in not a mega fleet nor is it a small fleet but we struggle as well were just now close to hitting tier 5 ship yard and that's ok were proud of what we did.
I don't think cryptic should hand out a bail out to small fleets just to keep up with the public are they going to give my fleet and others a refund if they ever due lower the requirements ??? answer noooooo.
The way I see it if your in a small fleet you have two options (1) go on a major recruitment drive or (2) merge with a bigger fleet. choice is yours. Its not like cryptic tells anyone your fleet has to be small.
So in your world everyone needs to run in a large fleet that has, for some, little attraction?
What about small groups of friends who want to keep their fleet personal? Personally I belong to a large fleet which is great, and can get things done at a fair clip. I also belong to a tiny 4 man fleet which has no chance of hitting high tiers of anything anytime soon.
Having a scaling form to the fleet building part of the game should be there, just make sure that the resources available to the smaller fleets are reduced in number, while still allowing them to get to the desirable high quality equipment.
That way big fleets get economy of scale while smaller ones are focussed on the needs of the few. Everyone wins.
So in your world everyone needs to run in a large fleet that has, for some, little attraction?
What about small groups of friends who want to keep their fleet personal? Personally I belong to a large fleet which is great, and can get things done at a fair clip. I also belong to a tiny 4 man fleet which has no chance of hitting high tiers of anything anytime soon.
Having a scaling form to the fleet building part of the game should be there, just make sure that the resources available to the smaller fleets are reduced in number, while still allowing them to get to the desirable high quality equipment.
That way big fleets get economy of scale while smaller ones are focussed on the needs of the few. Everyone wins.
Again I will state we all knew this was going to be a tough job to complete. I am not in a big fleet nor am I in a very small fleet we struggle as well. However in my world if I were in a very small fleet and we could not get the star base done I would not be on this forum screaming foul play I would simply look at bringing more members into my fleet so we could get the base built. Dont you take the time and look in zone chats there's alot of players looking for a home yes....some only want a tier 3 and above but other players are new to the game. Not to mention you could always start a post on this forum. Anyway thats my two cents.
I will tell you a story. Before this game started, back when three friends and myself were playing Star Trek Legacy on xbox360, we heard about this game coming out and when bat**** crazy. Finally a Star Trek game the way it was meant to be...or close to it anyway. We spoke about making our fleet, the things our fleet would stand for.....all that. When the game came out, i did not have a computer to run it. So my friends made the fleet and while not in game, i was always considered a fleet member being there during the fleet's inception. Once i got a computer to run the game, i jumped in and have loved the game ever since. i joined the fleet and took my place among my friends as one of the founders. the fleet had grown to far more than the four of us and the others, after putting the time in were promoted in grade. as time went on the fleet changed. The non-founders wanted things to be decided by a vote so we agreed, only to have 3 of the four founding members voted out of leadership positions. They had effectively taken our fleet with a coup. Feeling outed, we left to start our own fleet....again. This brings us to present day. We went from a fleet with a T4 starbase, T2 emebasy, T2 Dil mine. Soon to be T2 spire. Now we are T0-1 across the board.
We have MAYBE 2-3 active members. There is gear we need and cant get, further more, we cant even buy from other fleets because we have no provisions. THIS to me is the problem. Fleets should be allowed to do those provision missions from day one so they can buy good gear. as of now, we lose all our fleet defense missions, we have nearly no fleet gear and our starbase is little more than steel framework. Luckily i have a couple fleet ships from when we were in the other fleet....traitors....but PVP is nearly out of the question for god knows how long until we can get the gear....
If we could get provisions ASAP to buy that gear from fleets, we would have stronger ships to grind with, doing better if the PVE missions, getting more marks faster, more dil faster, building the SB faster...
what i am proposing is to simply allow day one fleets to do all the provisions missions.
Comments
And we're right back to codifying disparity based on feet size. For someone who claims to be uninterested in stats I find it very interesting that you're going so far out of your way to justify treating a not insignificant population of the game as unworthy of having access to a wide swath of rewards and content solely because they don't want to be a part of a particular branch of STO's fleets.
I've made a handful of posts on a forum, dude. That's not exactly going 'far out of my way', LOL.
Unworthy's your word, not mine. But it's how MMOs work. If I wanted raid-level gear in EQ, I had to raid. If if I didn't want to raid, or my guild wasn't big enough to take on the 60-man encounters, I had to live without the raid-level gear. That's just kinda how it works.
Back then, I did want that stuff. And I did join a very large endgame raiding guild. And I raided, and I got the gear. That was the path that was laid out that resulted in the acquisition of the virtual items that I desired. Smaller guilds who couldn't clear NToV didn't get NToV gear. Harsh, but true.
These days, I'm in one of those smaller guilds (approx 6 active members), and I'm probably never going to see a T5 Starbase - or if I do, it'll take a lot longer than if I was in a fleet of 100. So be it. That's the path I chose in this game and I'm happy with my choice.
At the severe risk of sounding like a broken record, once again I'd like to note that, with the sole exception of Fleet Ships, all high-level fleet gear is accessible with only a simple base invite. If your fleet has the requisite provisions and you have rights to use them, setting foot on a T5 base gives you access to that base's unlocked stores.
The barriers to access in STO are really low.
Which is true. Something I take advantage of, something many others take advantage of. And functions as an acceptable work-around.
But at the end of the day, it is still a work-around. A temporary solution to what has been a long-term problem.
If there is the opportunity to get rid of the work-around and implement a permanent, viable solution that gives more options to lower-population fleets without taking anything away from the progress that the higher-population fleets have, then I think this is something that should considered and actioned upon.
Barriers may be low, but they are still existant. And I would rather have non-existant barriers to low barriers. I think there are many others who would agree with that sentiment.
As most of us live in a democratic countries - then it would be logical to propose a voting system. In which a fleet will have regular voting/election to choose who the fleet leader will be and current fleet leader - if he didnt win the election, will be automatically reduced to normal member and stripped of all privileges.
This prevent fleet members from being forced into a labour-camp-forced-working scenarios and being worked to the death by their incompetent fleet leaders. This is what used to be during the dark ages - but since we live in the 24th century and United Federation of Planets is a democratic institution, I'm sure that's not the case anymore.
OR we can do it the KDF way: that if a member found current leadership is incompetent, he can challenge him to a duel to the death. The winner will be granted full leadership of the said fleet, and the looser will be dead, or in STO case - will have the char deleted automatically and loose everything bound to that char - to simulate proper death.
This may come as a shock to you, but you can leave a fleet at any time. The leave button is on the roster page. You'll keep all of the credits you've earned and all of the items you've bought (which should be obvious, but people still ask).
free jkname
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Sorry, but absolutely not. I have invested large amounts of Time and RL monies into my fleet. No fleet member is forced to do anything, donate anything, participate at all with the fleet, if that is their choice. Each and every fleet member is free to leave at anytime, there is a leave button on the roster page.
If you do not like how your fleet is run, then leave and then either a) Start your own fleet, or b) join a fleet not run by asshats.
Star Trek Online, Now with out the Trek....
Fleet leader places a dilithium tax. (Yes I realize you said not personal. ) and Charge members for leaving.
Neither of these points are even a remotely good idea and they're even worse together.
Not really sure how you can make the jump from "I don't think STO players in fleets should have to be content and satisfied with a work-around solution." to "I want everything unlocked and free forever and ever.", but that's pretty impressive.
Taken out of context from the entire proposal I made, yes. I agree. Those particular points I made are horrible ideas.
But when included as parts of a comprehensive solution incorporating various other parts, I consider them to be a reasonable and rational solution.
It stops people from exploiting small population fleets due to their lower costs. One of the reasons they have flat out refused to adjust diltihium costs to fleet size is due to the extremely obvious problem of fleet members artificially keeping a fleet population low and only joining it to acquire something before jumping back to their large population fleet.
My proposed solution offers those mechanics to deter players from being whimsical with what fleet they join and puts more responsibility in their hands, while discouraging the exploitation of small population fleets based on lower project requirements.
Artificially maintaining low fleet numbers would be punished through excessive 'termination fees', as a result of constant leaving/rejoining.
FIrst off, I help to run a fleet of under 50 people making the climb from T4 to T5. I completely understand the problem that small fleets have in building the holdings. I try to help them with things such as free starbase invites whenever I can, I am completely opposed to fleet taxes though. Here's what happens.
There are 2 ways I can think of to recruit a lot of people. You either just random invite or you post messages to try to convince people to join.
Some person trying to exploit this for themselves just random invites with the maximum possible tax. Anyone who accepts (maybe even by accident) is now subject to the tax or a fee for leaving. The fleet leader just got guaranteed progress towards making his personal starbase.
The other possibility for the exploiter is that he simply lies in his recruitment message and the same scenario as above occurs.
Even if someone isn't trying to exploit, if a player has to pay to try a fleet and then pay again for leaving if they don't like it, nobody would ever join fleets (myself included) which kind of kills the "Massively Multiplayer" part of STO.
It also punishes people who find that particular fleet isn't a good fit for them, but who's fleet leader (or anyone else capable of kicking), isn't willing to do so.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
I do think there should be some mechanic in place to deter rapid joining/leaving, however. A termination fee could be considered harsh as it has a very tangible penalty attached to it.
What about a cooldown timer mechanic? You must wait 20 hours before joining another fleet once you leave one?
It would not be as harsh as having to pay a cost to leave a fleet, which would deter predatory fleets from inviting new players for the sake of crowd-sourcing in the hopes of getting 'termination fees' racked up.
But it would also inconvenience/deter players from artificially keeping fleet membership low by offering a 20 hour wait period before joining a new fleet. During this time they would obviously not be able to queue for fleet events, and if they had fleet credits they would still be unable to purchase fleet supplies that would require provisions.
The only downside is the only real penalty is a wait period. Nothing would stop a fleet from simply creating another alt fleet with low numbers, take advantage of low costs, and continue to shuffle fleet members around to acquire their equipment/ships.
The punishment would be a 40 hour wait period. 20 hours from leaving the original fleet, joining the small fleet and acquiring their equipment, leaving and then waiting another 20 hours before rejoining the original fleet.
Would a 40 hour wait period penalty be more fair? Since there would be no currencies at stake. There would be nothing to gain.
I would disagree with any penalty for leaving, other than the Fleet(s) being ditched, telling people what they think of said individual. (Like if they ninjaed the bank, I'd want to know about that, before letting him/her in MY fleet), otherwise, I just don't think it's really appropriate.
I'd rather see ways to enhance the gameplay, rather than having penalties, for what a few think isn't good "behaviour", be put into effect gamewide.
butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
Temperance Brennan, "A building"
This idea is a fail from the very beginning. It is a bad idea, and you should feel bad.
Tell that to Cryptic when they have a sale then :P
The main problem as I see it is that this game no longer has the huge amount of people playing it that it had at the start and as other games come and go players leave or come back. Trouble is that this leaves the long term players to sort out building their fleets and it is taking way too long.
My fleet started at 10 full time players and it now down to 2 full time and 4 part time occasional players. I don't want to break up the fleet and lose all that hard work, but I would like Cryptic to give the small fleets a little love and a helping hand even if it is a one off.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Yes it is. Lets face it we all knew that building a fleet starbase was going to be a challenge and we all knew the size of our fleet before season six started every fleet had the chance to go on a recruitment drive long before the starbase went live I don't recall cryptic saying once this goe's live you cant add to your roster.
My fleet in not a mega fleet nor is it a small fleet but we struggle as well were just now close to hitting tier 5 ship yard and that's ok were proud of what we did.
I don't think cryptic should hand out a bail out to small fleets just to keep up with the public are they going to give my fleet and others a refund if they ever due lower the requirements ??? answer noooooo.
The way I see it if your in a small fleet you have two options (1) go on a major recruitment drive or (2) merge with a bigger fleet. choice is yours. Its not like cryptic tells anyone your fleet has to be small.
^^^^^I totally approve this message. JUST SAY NO TO ASSHATS!:D
No it's not. Is it "fundamentally unfair" when the computer you bought a year ago is half the price now? Is it "fundamentally unfair" when the TV you bought goes on sale a week later?
Everything in an MMO is subject to change. In fact, they make us all agree to that.
Lol yea I just love it when you buy a new computer and a week later its out of date but thats the gamble we take.
Again im going to say this you and your fleet knew going in that building this starbase was going to be a pain and if you didnt know then shame on your fleet leadership for not taking the time to read up and educate their members on what its going to cost to complete.
When season six was announced at the time I was only a member in my fleet and our leader took the time to educate us as to what this baby was going to cost to build we all then formed a plan and to this day even with me as a co. leader were still using that same plan.
Do I wish we can finish sooner ?? yes do I want a nerf or a hand out ?? no
So in your world everyone needs to run in a large fleet that has, for some, little attraction?
What about small groups of friends who want to keep their fleet personal? Personally I belong to a large fleet which is great, and can get things done at a fair clip. I also belong to a tiny 4 man fleet which has no chance of hitting high tiers of anything anytime soon.
Having a scaling form to the fleet building part of the game should be there, just make sure that the resources available to the smaller fleets are reduced in number, while still allowing them to get to the desirable high quality equipment.
That way big fleets get economy of scale while smaller ones are focussed on the needs of the few. Everyone wins.
Again I will state we all knew this was going to be a tough job to complete. I am not in a big fleet nor am I in a very small fleet we struggle as well. However in my world if I were in a very small fleet and we could not get the star base done I would not be on this forum screaming foul play I would simply look at bringing more members into my fleet so we could get the base built. Dont you take the time and look in zone chats there's alot of players looking for a home yes....some only want a tier 3 and above but other players are new to the game. Not to mention you could always start a post on this forum. Anyway thats my two cents.
We have MAYBE 2-3 active members. There is gear we need and cant get, further more, we cant even buy from other fleets because we have no provisions. THIS to me is the problem. Fleets should be allowed to do those provision missions from day one so they can buy good gear. as of now, we lose all our fleet defense missions, we have nearly no fleet gear and our starbase is little more than steel framework. Luckily i have a couple fleet ships from when we were in the other fleet....traitors....but PVP is nearly out of the question for god knows how long until we can get the gear....
If we could get provisions ASAP to buy that gear from fleets, we would have stronger ships to grind with, doing better if the PVE missions, getting more marks faster, more dil faster, building the SB faster...
what i am proposing is to simply allow day one fleets to do all the provisions missions.