It would be a huge improvement and reward to the team, if the Anti-Tachyon pulse is fired when the station reaches Defense level 5. At the same time the plasma lance can be used (again) for the final dread.
This way good teams wouldnt have to wait 5 or more minutes till the bossfight finally starts.
Storyline explanation could be the following:
"We need a huge amount of energy to fire that pulse. All defenses other then shields will be offline. We can bring them partially online if you can configure the power station relays, so it sends us their stored energy. The plasma lance will however only be avaiable after we fire the pulse, as it draws far too much energy."
So basically, the first part of the mission still ends after 11min, as the station itself saves the power to fire. But if you get enough energy to it, it will be able to fire the pulse sooner, and thus the mission gets shorter.
Cryptic designers have a problem with understanding the basic principle of "better effort = better reward". Time gating is the antithesis of this concept. Like all things, time gating is okay in moderation, but Cryptic has been adding it in every single mechanic throughout the game in the past year. Its really bogging down the gameplay and pacing of the game.
You'd think developers would take notice after the backlash Dungeon Keeper got, but apparently not. Someone at the Game Developer's Conference has been giving other devs the idea that time gating is awesome, and its been springing up like a bad weed across all sorts of games for the past couple of years now.
They don't want "better effort = more reward", because that means the advancement times of players are not predictable and some hard core players (also the most likely to spend money on the game)w ill be finished with their grind too early and leave the game earlier and spend less on the game or contribute less to the game.
I think that's how it works, basically.
Though that doesn't mean an absolute no to "better effort = more reward", but it means it needs to be tightly controlled. In Mirror Invasion, if you close more rifts for example (which requires effort and skill), you get more marks. But this gives only a low variance, which is not the same as the variance that exists in skill and effort.
If you're team is 10 times better than another team, you don't get 10 times the reward, but only 50 % more or something like that. And if you're just twice as good, you may also get 50 % more rewards.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
They don't want "better effort = more reward", because that means the advancement times of players are not predictable and some hard core players (also the most likely to spend money on the game)w ill be finished with their grind too early and leave the game earlier and spend less on the game or contribute less to the game.
I think that's how it works, basically.
Though that doesn't mean an absolute no to "better effort = more reward", but it means it needs to be tightly controlled. In Mirror Invasion, if you close more rifts for example (which requires effort and skill), you get more marks. But this gives only a low variance, which is not the same as the variance that exists in skill and effort.
If you're team is 10 times better than another team, you don't get 10 times the reward, but only 50 % more or something like that. And if you're just twice as good, you may also get 50 % more rewards.
Then they're clueless. Replaying the same content gives you rewards to increase efficiency (faster, stronger, better). If increasing efficiency does nothing due to all of the time gates, then there is no point in replaying content. Said content becomes a one-and-done. People are now finished after playing it once.
Also, your Mirror Invasion example is flawed. You can't close more rifts because there are no more rifts to close. You can finish Mirror Invasion before the timer goes under 5 minutes. After that, you're left standing there twiddling your thumbs for the next 5 minutes. Effort doesn't reward you with more marks or faster clear times. The only thing it "rewards" you with is a bathroom break at best.
Comments
If you want play short games go to another game....
"Coffee: the finest organic suspension ever devised. It's got me through the worst of the last three years. I beat the Borg with it."
Nah, we don't want nice things, do we?
Why do you hate nice things?
You'd think developers would take notice after the backlash Dungeon Keeper got, but apparently not. Someone at the Game Developer's Conference has been giving other devs the idea that time gating is awesome, and its been springing up like a bad weed across all sorts of games for the past couple of years now.
I think that's how it works, basically.
Though that doesn't mean an absolute no to "better effort = more reward", but it means it needs to be tightly controlled. In Mirror Invasion, if you close more rifts for example (which requires effort and skill), you get more marks. But this gives only a low variance, which is not the same as the variance that exists in skill and effort.
If you're team is 10 times better than another team, you don't get 10 times the reward, but only 50 % more or something like that. And if you're just twice as good, you may also get 50 % more rewards.
/300 seconds
Then they're clueless. Replaying the same content gives you rewards to increase efficiency (faster, stronger, better). If increasing efficiency does nothing due to all of the time gates, then there is no point in replaying content. Said content becomes a one-and-done. People are now finished after playing it once.
Also, your Mirror Invasion example is flawed. You can't close more rifts because there are no more rifts to close. You can finish Mirror Invasion before the timer goes under 5 minutes. After that, you're left standing there twiddling your thumbs for the next 5 minutes. Effort doesn't reward you with more marks or faster clear times. The only thing it "rewards" you with is a bathroom break at best.