Yeah that sounds more like an issue of people such as yourself preaching doom and gloom to everyone in earshot incessantly....
Yeah missing the context here ... are we back to everyone who is complaining is a "Doomsayer" (with multiple Accounts) ?, and should be dismissed ? ... Q.E.D. ...
Patch Notes : Resolved an Issue, where people would accidently experience Fun.
I've seen a lot of people throwing the terms 'bug' and 'balance'.
Something to keep in mind is that with a predetermined sequential series of data, when you see something that is extremely offset, an outlier that is so obtuse, you will look at that as a single 'bug'. That is expected in trying to maintain said dataset.
What the conversation should be steered to (and I'm doing it with this post) is to a conversation about balance of XP, the balance of DOFFs, and the overall curve. That is the true nature of what the underlying concern is, so trying to use the outlier isnt the best approach. Let's have a constructive conversation about the balance including positive ways we can work without throwing extremes into the scenario. None of this "well increase everything by 10x otherwise it's a slap in the face noob get rekt ****".
When is the point whn we will say "enough" and walk? How many nerfs, how many recockulous nerfs and "fixes" will it take for us to gtfo?
Adjusting the 12 hour missions is one thing; missions that had an intentionally higher payout...but then nerfing many NON-12 hour missions (ones that happen to pay well xp-wise) Is bullsh!t.
SO how much obfuscation, ignoring and reticence do we need to endure from a gaming company to leave?
Because at this point, I'm tired of everything being a fight all the time. If it wasn't for the tangential relationship with the IP, id' been gone.
I've seen a lot of people throwing the terms 'bug' and 'balance'.
Something to keep in mind is that with a predetermined sequential series of data, when you see something that is extremely offset, an outlier that is so obtuse, you will look at that as a single 'bug'. That is expected in trying to maintain said dataset.
Hey, could you take a quick look at the rewards per minute?
The 12 hours missions were already scaled to take the multiplier into account. There'd be less pushback, I think, if the base (pre-timemultiplier) rewards were slid up to leave them as they are.
I've seen a lot of people throwing the terms 'bug' and 'balance'.
Something to keep in mind is that with a predetermined sequential series of data, when you see something that is extremely offset, an outlier that is so obtuse, you will look at that as a single 'bug'. That is expected in trying to maintain said dataset.
What the conversation should be steered to (and I'm doing it with this post) is to a conversation about balance of XP, the balance of DOFFs, and the overall curve. That is the true nature of what the underlying concern is, so trying to use the outlier isnt the best approach. Let's have a constructive conversation about the balance including positive ways we can work without throwing extremes into the scenario. None of this "well increase everything by 10x otherwise it's a slap in the face noob get rekt ****".
Either that or you talk about fava beans.
For the most part, things have been balanced with the Duty Officer system until now.
A 12 hour mission rewards more XP than a 1 hour mission. That's pretty natural, given that the duration is 12 times longer than then 1 hour mission. The way it's been working for the past 3 years has been as intended by it's designer (Heretic), seeing as one of the features of the Duty Officer system was to allow players an alternate route to level up, besides the constant combat missions (which is far removed from the spirit of Trek).
The way you guys have now haphazardly nerfed the 12 hour missions, throws the entire balance out of whack. The duration is still 12 hours, but the rewards are now less than the aforementioned 1 hour missions.
You guys need to look at a complete overhaul of your reward structure in this game. Ever since Delta Rising, the XP requirements have been absurdly high, and the XP gain from various activities have been nerfed again and again. It's only natural then, that people would resort to a bit of anger and pitchforks, when a source of XP that has been around for over 3 years is now being slashed by over 90%.
On top of that, you guys call it a "bug". Your Lead Content Designer on Twitter, has been actively blocking anyone who has commented against the change. How does one have any kind of meaningful conversation with the devs, when devs block your access from communicating whenever they see a hint of negativity?
This change (if it goes through) will all but kill my incentive to continue Doff grinding, until a better solution has been put in place. My Delta "alt" is at level 54 so far, and I've been pushing through the storyline episodes pretty hard (about to head into the Borg storyline). Buying an XP boost in the C-Store is meaningless, when you've nerfed the value of those as well.
What the conversation should be steered to (and I'm doing it with this post) is to a conversation about balance of XP, the balance of DOFFs, and the overall curve. That is the true nature of what the underlying concern is, so trying to use the outlier isnt the best approach. Let's have a constructive conversation about the balance including positive ways we can work without throwing extremes into the scenario. None of this "well increase everything by 10x otherwise it's a slap in the face noob get rekt ****".
Either that or you talk about fava beans.
*Sigh* ... what's the point if you're just going to ignore the last 28 pages ...
Patch Notes : Resolved an Issue, where people would accidently experience Fun.
Because at this point, I'm tired of everything being a fight all the time.
Trust me when I say this - they are too. Very tired of it. They just can't say it themselves because of job security.
When people come here to complain about a fix, especially when it's labeled as a "nerf", they are part of the problem. It's not helping at all. The devs know fully that the DOFF system isn't that good. All of it. But they can't review it if it isn't smoothed out first.
Instead of complaining about "nerfs" and the like, threatening to leave if the devs don't listen to the same things they've been hearing since they got the job, suggest things that do not appeal to keeping bugs and exploits. Hell, the devs probably want the Mall Santa treatment over the complaints. Tell them what you want them to do in the future instead of complaining about what they're doing now.
About DOFFing - it's getting a revamp anyway. Soon. One of the main reasons are that the rewarding for it is too low in general. It's brainstorming time for it, and it's a good time to post some suggestions.
I've seen a lot of people throwing the terms 'bug' and 'balance'.
Something to keep in mind is that with a predetermined sequential series of data, when you see something that is extremely offset, an outlier that is so obtuse, you will look at that as a single 'bug'. That is expected in trying to maintain said dataset.
What the conversation should be steered to (and I'm doing it with this post) is to a conversation about balance of XP, the balance of DOFFs, and the overall curve. That is the true nature of what the underlying concern is, so trying to use the outlier isnt the best approach. Let's have a constructive conversation about the balance including positive ways we can work without throwing extremes into the scenario. None of this "well increase everything by 10x otherwise it's a slap in the face noob get rekt ****".
Either that or you talk about fava beans.
Okay, let's talk about the curve. Let's talk about the sharp turn it takes after level 50 and how the Delta Quadrant missions don't have enough content to proceed smoothly along that increased curve without resorting to grinding via patrols (an early option and an epic drama in its own right), repeating older missions or DOffing. This breaks up any flow the game-play may have had and introduces a high annoyance factor to the player-base.
Now let me be clear on this: I don't particularly care how long it takes to go from 50 to 60 as long as there is sufficient mission content for the entire trip. Currently there is not and, to add insult to injury, the missions are sharply level-gated which practically forces a player to go back and grind before getting another couple missions to play.
[Emphasis Mine] THIS IS BAD DESIGN. The increased curve and the lack of smooth progression post-level-50 is at the root of a lot of the ill-will that's been running around since Delta Rising was released ... among other things that we are specificially not discussing here.
*Sigh* ... what's the point if you're just going to ignore the last 28 pages ...
Actually I did. I'm here because instead of simply closing this thread down due to the posts that served no value except inflamming the situation, I want to keep the discussion going in a positive manner. I think this is an important discussion.
But hey, let's try making an off topic comment against me under your assumption.
Actually I did. I'm here because instead of simply closing this thread down due to the posts that served no value except inflamming the situation, I want to keep the discussion going in a positive manner. I think this is an important discussion.
But hey, let's try making an off topic comment against me under your assumption.
The problem is that it looks like the developer decisions are being made based on factually inaccurate information (in particular, Heretic's intent for the system as originally designed), and are adjusting things based on the back-end appearance, rather than the front-end results.
It is difficult to call something a true 'outlier' when the per-minute rewards are what you'd expect them to be from similar missions (with the expected longer mission efficiency dropoff).
You can understand that - to the players - it seems like a very shortsighted move based on what the developers see as looking good behind the scenes, rather than what the players see when completing the missions.
People aren't annoyed that the xp got fixed (not nerfed) for a few missions. But that, regardless if the devs say they will, xp will NOT be reviewed or looked at in favour of releasing new content.
What we want is a global xp overhaul (as in, increase). But thats not going to happen because that takes away time from developing new lockboxes and ships to sell. It keeps resources away from new content that apparently is desperately needed to attract more people.
Maybe focus on the reason people keep leaving after a month? Fix the damn neglected content of the past.
In case anyone missed the tribble patch notes, they are significantly nerfing XP from doffing in the next patch.
"Resolved an issue that was causing all assignments with durations between 12 hours and 15.9 hours to scale their rewards more aggressively than intended.
The Skillpoint, Expertise and CXP bonuses from these Assignments will be reduced accordingly."
What they mean by this is the 12 hour missions that yield decent xp, like Suppress Gorn Uprising, the 12-hour delta quadrant missions, etc.
Do you guys think this is a good idea? Should xp be nerfed even more, to make spec points take even longer to get than they do now?
: The lead designer Al Rivera is talking about this on twitter
Bort and Geko, please consider the history of these assignments.
Originally, the only 12 hour assignments were Suppress Gorn Uprising, they were hard to find and needed 5 officers plus two kinds of commodities, and they were an incentive to play kdf, something special to balance the lack of kdf content relative to the Feds like ships, costumes, and team mates that is still a real thing.
This got forgotten about, and you guys added more and more 12 hour missions, first in the dyson sphere and then in the delta quadrant. The high xp on these missions is not unintentional, what was unintentional was adding more and more missions to the previously unique and special purpose 12 hour section.
If you don't want there to be so many 12 hour xp missions, you can just change the delta quadrant and dyson sphere ones to a different duration.
This is a huge blow to the kdf in the game, these missions, like kdf contraband missions, are a central incentive for playing kdf toons, they are a way to balance the lower amount of content like ships and costumes and teammates vis a vis the fed faction.
The higher XP was -not- a bug and -not- unintentional. Please consider why, previous to Dyson and delta 12 hr missions, the only ones in the game were kdf specific Gorn uprisings. It's always been the conventiona wisdom on STO that one of the reasons to play kdf is better doffing. Gorn uprisings and marauding, this has been true since dawn of the doff system.
Making more and more 12 hour missions was a bug, and the fix is to fix those missions which were put in the 12 hour slot by mistake.
Don't waste your time and energy. Unlike a few other STO Devs in the past CaptainGeko CLAIMS to listen to player feedback - but honestly DOESN'T. By his own admission, he only reads the forum to play his game of counting "how many posts 'til Hitler."
And the 12 hour assignment rewards were never broken as he claims, they were originally DESIGNEDF that way (IE those with less time to actually sit online at a computer and play could take the longer assignments and still get a comparable reward to those that were online/in game a lot and were taking shorter stuff and re-taking others to maximize their time online.
^^^
this was STATED by both the main designer (Heretic, who has since moved on from Cryptic Studios); and Daniel Stahl, a former EP of STO at the time the Doff system was first introduced.
^^^
And not surprisingly, a fact conveniently FORGOTTEN by Mr. Al Rivera (Hey, he also claims to be one of a few Devs that have been on STO since day one; so I guess he must have selective amnesia with regard to the above.)
Also have to love a Lead Designer who concentrates on NERFING rewards and wholesale REMOVING existing content from STO on a regular basis, instead of just adding and diversifying content. But hey, at least he hasn't thrown the current EP 'under the bus' the way he did to Daniel Stahl way back prior to the release of Season 4. Mr. Stahl had stated the rework KDF first city map WOULD release with the initial launch Season 4 in multiple media interviews at the time; yet a couple days later Al Rivera went on a STOked (the #1 STO podcast in it's day - since changed in many ways and may be gone for good) and stated that Daniel Stahl was incorrect/didn't really know the day to day situation, and said the revamped KDF First City map would NOT release with the initial launch of Season 4 - creating a s**tstorm on the forums by KDF players and requiring Mr. Stahl to come out and re-state what he had said - and in fact the revamped KDF City map DID release with the initial launch of Season 4.
^^^
But to me this (and his other comments from his own mouth) shows why Captain Geko is a substandard Lead Dev for STO. He routinely throws others (including his superiors on the STO Dev team at Cryptic) under the bus - never really takes ownership of his own decisions good or bad, (unless they are wildly popular - but I can't think of one in recent memory that really was that was all his); and often displays open contempt for the playerbase that populates his game and keeps him employed.
I think the fact is: PWI/PWE is seeing that STO's concurrency metrics are down in general (bumps from events and Season updates not withstanding) and somehow Al Rivera believes thios change will up said concurrency metrics.
But in the end, (IMO) appealing to Captain Geko for anything is like appealing to a stone wall, and will yeald the same results.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Actually I did. I'm here because instead of simply closing this thread down due to the posts that served no value except inflamming the situation, I want to keep the discussion going in a positive manner. I think this is an important discussion.
But hey, let's try making an off topic comment against me under your assumption.
I've been staying out of this, mostly because I don't really have a dog in the fight. STO is the only MMO I've reached level cap in, because - even with the higher XP requirements post-50 - it's still far faster and less grindy to max out in STO than any othet MMO I've played, and because I don't feel a need to cap out all my specs. They'll increase as I play stuff for other purposes, a small occasional bit of lagniappe while I go for gear or play story or just run Dyson space battlezone over and over because for some reason I really enjoy that mission.
That said, there's serious issues with cost-to-reward ratios, and I do think they're hurting the game as a whole. That is the core of the empty queue problem (when I can do The Cure in 5 minutes and it pops immediately, vs. 15-20 for The Breach after waiting an hour, and they both give about the same reward, I will never play The Breach). With DOff missions, the 12-hour ones DO sit as outliers, and that needs to be fixed - but the peole chasing spec points need to know that when they're fixed the XP stream they provide now will be matched with new sources within the DOff system. This could be increased rewards to other missions - cutting the 12-hours by less than is currently planned, for instance, and setting them as the standard to which all the other missions are pegged - or through more, more interesting, and more rewarding Uncommon, Rare, and Very Rare missions.
I'm not with the "Klingons should have better DOffing than Feds" argument. When I play my KDF characters, it's because I want to play them, not to take advantage of DOffing or even Contraband. Klingons not getting cool stuff should be resolved by Klingons getting cool stuff, not by unrelated bonuses.
Also? DOff mission rewards should account for morr than rarity and duration.
Honestly, I'd be more inclined to care if not for the fact that it's apparently a small piece of a bigger revamp. If this leads to doff missions having some sort of logic to their rewards, GREAT! It's kinda random right now.
I'm not against that. I am just worried that 'logic to DOFFing rewards = screwed over players'.
What the conversation should be steered to (and I'm doing it with this post) is to a conversation about balance of XP, the balance of DOFFs, and the overall curve. That is the true nature of what the underlying concern is, so trying to use the outlier isnt the best approach. Let's have a constructive conversation about the balance including positive ways we can work without throwing extremes into the scenario. None of this "well increase everything by 10x otherwise it's a slap in the face noob get rekt ****".
Ok, well, here's a big concern then for you Trendy:
How do we know anything we say will make the slightest iota of difference? Seriously, 99.9% of the time, anything spoken here, good or bad, useful or not, is ignored.
But whatever, I'll put in my bits and see what happens:
Now, I think ya'll (as in: Devs) are overthinking it. you need to treat it like R&D a bit and keep to some standardized numbers. Pick something, say...
100 XP for a one hour common DOFF mission that doesn't crit or fail, and only using white DOFFs.
(To compare, the common 30 minute medical assignments you can do give like 54 XP right now)
So that means, a mission that lasts 15 minutes would give 25 XP, a 30 minute 50, and 45 minutes 75. Anything over an hour would be multiplying that 100 XP instead.
There should be five other factors in regards to what should improve XP gains for a DOFF mission:
1. DOFF quality. which they already do.
2. Critting or not, again, which they already do.
3. Assignment rarity.
4. Unique requirements and/or rewards
5. Location and length
To go over those in more detail:
1. Like I said, DOFF missions already take in the quality of the DOFFs for their reward. So nothing needed here.
2. Same thing with crits. BUT you'd best not use the excuse of people critting DOFF missions as a reason to justify leaving XP rewards low, as crits are NEVER guaranteed!
3. This one doesn't apply atm. I think that difference rarity assignments, without adding in other things, should give different XP amounts. Like say...5% for an uncommon, 10% for a rare, 15% for a very rare. So a one hour very rare assignment, without anything else, would give you 115 XP to a one hour common assignment giving you 100.
BUT, that difference would become more pronounced as you do factor in other things. Which is why the bonus is so small.
4. This is a big one. A lot of assignments either have requirements outside of merely DOFFs, or need unique DOFFs (like say needing a DOFF with Shroud), OR they have other rewards outside of the standard norm (like giving Contraband).
I think that, if an assignment needs more than just everyday DOFFs, then it should reward more XP. Like there are missions that can give Contraband (so I feel those should give less XP in turn), those that REQUIRE Contraband (that aren't turning it into dil), should give a fairly large boost to XP in turn.
I don't really have any numbers for this one, just more that if missions need something more, they should give more, and if they give something out, they should give less XP.
5. Length I already went over in that longer missions should understandably give more XP. Location however I feel applies more to the general conversation. If something is very easy to find, it shouldn't really be given any kind of bonus. To use a general example, if I can just fly around the Beta Quadrant and find the same mission in the Alpha or Delta Quadrant, chances are I don't think it should get a bonus. But if I can ONLY find a mission in the Delta Quadrant and not in the Alpha or Beta Quadrants, then perhaps that mission means I had to take time to find it in the first place, and thus should be worth while.
I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
Ya know, considering just how damnably difficult the Devs want Spec point acquisition to be, I am wondering why they even bothered working it up in the first place. Seems like a great deal of time and expense to go to just to hamstring it, does it not? The continual downsizing of rewards all throughout this game is discouraging. It makes me want to spend less time in game rather than more.
Most people have a reasonable expectation of play more = get more or higher rewards. Most people have a reasonable expectation of accomplishing something in game inside a reasonable time frame. I absolutely do not want my grandchildren to finally complete one Specialzation Tree just after the turn of the next century.
Why are you people at Cryptic making it more and more difficult to like this game every day? Getting people to spend money on something Star Trek based ought to be like shooting fish in barrel. Yet somehow, all of you seem to go out of your way to do the opposite. And then you go that one step further to ensure you really anger people.
Is this your intent? It's working far better than you obviously hoped.
A six year old boy and his starship. Living the dream.
I've seen a lot of people throwing the terms 'bug' and 'balance'.
Something to keep in mind is that with a predetermined sequential series of data, when you see something that is extremely offset, an outlier that is so obtuse, you will look at that as a single 'bug'. That is expected in trying to maintain said dataset.
What the conversation should be steered to (and I'm doing it with this post) is to a conversation about balance of XP, the balance of DOFFs, and the overall curve. That is the true nature of what the underlying concern is, so trying to use the outlier isnt the best approach. Let's have a constructive conversation about the balance including positive ways we can work without throwing extremes into the scenario. None of this "well increase everything by 10x otherwise it's a slap in the face noob get rekt ****".
Either that or you talk about fava beans.
I think a valid concern is the quotes people have from the designer of the DOff system explaining why the bump is there.
I recognize Cryptic is small and that documentation of old design intent is difficult. In this case, Heretic actually has posts which are archived explaining his rationales for the bumps. Now, part of it is that the 12 hour missions were designed to be built a certain player resource intensive way which devs since he left didn't necessarily keep up with on new assignments. Heretic had some intricate fine tuning.
The larger point was that 12 hour assignments were supposed to be the primary intended DOff assignments. Longer assignments are a form of "autopiloting" for very casual players. Shorter assignments were penalized for favoring someone who was grinding excessively. The goal was to get people to circle the quadrant loading up 12 hour missions twice a day with longer and shorter assignments being sub-optimal, penalized gameplay. It's not a bump in the floor. It's level. Greater than or less than 12 hours basically had penalties attached (and lighter resource requirements relative to payout).
Now, I don't care much. Your last effective DOffing nerf (scaling XP 3x without scaling DOffing) meant that I don't DOff anymore except to hand-in contraband and level crafting. In addition, I never would have designed the system like Heretic did to begin with. Some of the complaints Geko had about the system were complaints I had before the system went live in feedback threads with Heretic. I would be up for a fairly comprehensive revamp where the DOffs feel more like proper trading cards and are more closely integrated into the game.
My concern is strictly speaking that this isn't a bug and that people understand, including at Cryptic, that the changes being made are a departure from design and that players who are happy or unhappy with it because it is a departure from design are correct. And that what is being fixed is not a bug. This is actually a change to the design intent and with that comes all the attendant issues of a change in intent. Furthermore, DOffing was intended as an alternative to combat missions altogether and an alternative form of leveling altogether so concerns about "leveling only through DOffing" or "not needing to play missions" also missed the design intent -- which was for people to have a pacifist option for playing STO, without firing a shot.
What the conversation should be steered to (and I'm doing it with this post) is to a conversation about balance of XP, the balance of DOFFs, and the overall curve. That is the true nature of what the underlying concern is, so trying to use the outlier isnt the best approach. Let's have a constructive conversation about the balance including positive ways we can work without throwing extremes into the scenario.
With all due respect, the issue of XP balance and the curve you hit past Level 50 has been a constant topic of complaint for well over six months. We have voiced it over and over, given feedback, offered solutions and discussed how it is harming the game and turning it into a really unrewarding gaming experience with terrible progression.
Are we now to believe that doing it all over again for the 100th time will finally be listened to and something done? I'm all up for it if so but excuse the bitterness of players who have been doing exactly what you're suggesting for months to no avail.
Asking for a doff revamp is like asking darth vader not to alter the deal any further.
I really have no dog in this show either. I consider 3 of 6 characters done and the other 3 can take their time until servers close. Yet I can guarantee a doffing revamp will not end well in many different ways.
As I also said about the queues, complaining is no longer relevant. We are walking the path we are on now and there is no changing. This is the whales' path and it will keep us going for as long as it can. I suspect someone will be able to convince the new owner that the 50th anniversary will be a huge cash cow so I'm sure we have another year to enjoy - so I advise get out there and enjoy it.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
With all due respect, the issue of XP balance and the curve you hit past Level 50 has been a constant topic of complaint for well over six months. We have voiced it over and over, given feedback, offered solutions and discussed how it is harming the game and turning it into a really unrewarding gaming experience with terrible progression.
Are we now to believe that doing it all over again for the 100th time will finally be listened to and something done? I'm all up for it if so but excuse the bitterness of players who have been doing exactly what you're suggesting for months to no avail.
Thank you. That is exactly the point.
If you have an underlying concern that you feel has been waylaid in regards to the leveling curve and XP, then I need to discuss that. I cannot assume nor exact the actions of my predecessors, but if there's an underlying concern that is longstanding with this then I mean to address it with people, not shy from it.
Meh sounds more like metrics say to many people are levelling via doffing rather than playing content, so lets fix that wagon and make players play content rather than set a mission on a timer to receive a xp reward.
I'll admit i've received a small number of Specs points via doffing, beats the hell out of flying patrol after patrol after patrol after patrol or replaying 15 or more FE to gain one.
If you have an underlying concern that you feel has been waylaid in regards to the leveling curve and XP, then I need to discuss that. I cannot assume nor exact the actions of my predecessors, but if there's an underlying concern that is longstanding with this then I mean to address it with people, not shy from it.
Let's work on this together, eh?
I actually feel like this as well Trendy. I think that a good philosophy for leveling is for there to be enough unique content at each level so that one playthrough gets you to the next level. I have no issue with the missions or patrols in Delta Rising, but I think that, for example, if there is two missions and a round of patrols at level 52, one playthrough of that ought to get me to level 53. Right now that is not happening. You get through those two missions and one patrol round and you still have a huge chunk of xp left to get. It leaves the player wondering "uh, wait what do I do now?" They want to play the next thing and they are prevented from doing so.
I have no issue with spec points taking a while to get after level 60. That kind of horizontal progression is fine by me (if it were a little faster that wouldn't bother me, lol), but I think as it is, 50-60 progression really needs to come smoothly from unique, single playthroughs of the story missions and patrols
If you have an underlying concern that you feel has been waylaid in regards to the leveling curve and XP, then I need to discuss that. I cannot assume nor exact the actions of my predecessors, but if there's an underlying concern that is longstanding with this then I mean to address it with people, not shy from it.
Let's work on this together, eh?
I'm confident you will get a lot of very good detailed (more than I could offer) on the math and scaling side for DOFFing. Some are already in this thread. However, the fact that we're in for another way to reduce XP (and you must understand, we've endured many and even been victim of lies from the devs in order to sneak them in) is going to create a lot of hostility.
For the good of the player/dev relationship, this further XP reduction should be halted until Cryptic can balance out other ways to offer XP progression as a replacement, be it via the DOFF system or perhaps from enemy kills in STF's.
The relentless nerfing over any other kind of other action has to stop.
If you have an underlying concern that you feel has been waylaid in regards to the leveling curve and XP, then I need to discuss that. I cannot assume nor exact the actions of my predecessors, but if there's an underlying concern that is longstanding with this then I mean to address it with people, not shy from it.
Let's work on this together, eh?
But you see this is the real heart of the problem, your "predecessors", especially Heretic, listened to us when we provided feedback while testing on Tribble and pointed out bugs and tweaks that would make things better. Now many of us have stopped bothering to even log onto Tribble anymore, let alone post feedback, because for the most part we are ignored or in some cases actually insulted by people on your end for not being happy with what is being forced through full of bugs. From beta testing through the first 3.5 (or so) years of this game I very actively helped to test this game, now I don't feel it is worth my time anymore. When people on the Dev side of things are ready to follow through with your suggestion of "Let's work together on this, eh?" please let us know and I am sure you will get plenty of worthwhile and useful feedback, until then, threads like this are all you are likely to see.
Asking for a doff revamp is like asking darth vader not to alter the deal any further.
I really have no dog in this show either. I consider 3 of 6 characters done and the other 3 can take their time until servers close. Yet I can guarantee a doffing revamp will not end well in many different ways.
As I also said about the queues, complaining is no longer relevant. We are walking the path we are on now and there is no changing. This is the whales' path and it will keep us going for as long as it can. I suspect someone will be able to convince the new owner that the 50th anniversary will be a huge cash cow so I'm sure we have another year to enjoy - so I advise get out there and enjoy it.
Well, like half the players and most of the current devs, I think it would go swimmingly and raise big money if *I* got a voice in reworking it. We might ALL be wrong. Being humans, there's a very good chance of that. This is a case where I agree with Geko A LOT.
That's VERY common if you're talking about anything that isn't STO. Politics, society, culture, favorite episodes of Star Trek, pop culture. I'm on the same team as Geko fairly often there.
Actually, I'm on the same team as Geko generally in defining the problems in STO. It's the remedies where my opinions tend to vary a lot.
If I had three wishes and a genie's lamp, I'd put them all to fairly productive use in life and the world. If I had more than three wishes, I think I actually might expend one on sitting in a room with a whiteboard, a limitless coffee pot and game developers where I could both understand their perspective and actually give feedback without the annoying limitations of forum communication.
The most effective way to express a nuanced stance in a forum is a wall of text. Unfortunately, expressing and communicating are at odds (the better you express, the more resistance there is to a message getting through) and you have to leapfrog past and speak over people who repeat the same non-sequiturs and personal appeals.
My experience is, you can never build nuanced consensus from more than a group of 3-5 people. Life has to be split up into groups of that size to be manageable. You can only get very broad, vague consensus from larger groups and any conversation that involves more than 5 people works best with 1-5 people directing the discussion from a stage. You can have one person communicating to another four. But if you have open discussion with a larger group, it's chaos.
I would completely redesign forums to operate more like convention panels. That doesn't mean devs would be in charge always (fans can run panels at a convention) but if I designed forums, you would more or less have small groups in charge of threads with limited access to non-organizers, maybe require people to be recognized to speak and they'd get limited posts in a thread. Like a con panel. I could start a panel, you could, Geko could, anyone could. But it would be more panel than forum based. A thread with 3-5 participants where other people could request to make replies and could be recognized by any of the participants to create questions or replies. And then they get one reply following their question.
And that person can start their own virtual panel.
It would save on hair loss and ulcers all throughout the internet.
I understand why people rage about this XP nerf even it is just for several doff missions but honestly all that grind is not priority one problem for me. In fact at least I can somehow improve my toon and her gear.
What bother me much more are tons of bugs, inbalances and non working stuff and mechanics you can read over the forums or reddit for months and years... I would love to see better balance of various weapon types to make them all interesting, useful and competitive without need to be ultrahardcore build nerd. I would like to see repaired broken abilities. I would have no problem if it would mean nerf some abilities.
But I am afraid current status of game, over the top anger of players and inability to listen of some leading devs do not make this ever happen.
Wow... i could understand it if they want to reduce the XP for chars under lvl 50 or 60, but with the endless grind treadmill for specialization we have now, the nerf of DOFFing XP as a halfway decent source of XP after all quests are done, into obilivion is the last thing we need.
Beta, LTA, CE, Multiple preorder Versions, all Addon Packs except AoY, nearly all KDF/Rom and ~50% of all Fedships, over 25 LockboxShips, Endurer of Atari's "Year of Hell", but...
Ignoring all the SFD and Dev hate in here, I am against this new set of changes coming. Sure, I can understand the devs wanting you to actually play the game to get rewards, not just doff missions. But getting exp at 50+ is really annoying and way too tedious. So because of that I would really love these missions to keep their exp rewards as is.
Ideally a nice change to exp requirements would be if you could get enough exp to almost fill out one specialization relatively easily, like almost one point per story mission, and then have it scale up to what we currently have as you earn enough for a second or third spec line.
_____________________________________________________
Anyone want to give me a Temporal Heavy Dreadnought pack? I'll be your friend
Comments
Yeah missing the context here ... are we back to everyone who is complaining is a "Doomsayer" (with multiple Accounts) ?, and should be dismissed ? ... Q.E.D. ...
I've seen a lot of people throwing the terms 'bug' and 'balance'.
Something to keep in mind is that with a predetermined sequential series of data, when you see something that is extremely offset, an outlier that is so obtuse, you will look at that as a single 'bug'. That is expected in trying to maintain said dataset.
What the conversation should be steered to (and I'm doing it with this post) is to a conversation about balance of XP, the balance of DOFFs, and the overall curve. That is the true nature of what the underlying concern is, so trying to use the outlier isnt the best approach. Let's have a constructive conversation about the balance including positive ways we can work without throwing extremes into the scenario. None of this "well increase everything by 10x otherwise it's a slap in the face noob get rekt ****".
Either that or you talk about fava beans.
When is the point whn we will say "enough" and walk? How many nerfs, how many recockulous nerfs and "fixes" will it take for us to gtfo?
Adjusting the 12 hour missions is one thing; missions that had an intentionally higher payout...but then nerfing many NON-12 hour missions (ones that happen to pay well xp-wise) Is bullsh!t.
SO how much obfuscation, ignoring and reticence do we need to endure from a gaming company to leave?
Because at this point, I'm tired of everything being a fight all the time. If it wasn't for the tangential relationship with the IP, id' been gone.
Hey, could you take a quick look at the rewards per minute?
http://i.imgur.com/0KMlESf.png
The 12 hours missions were already scaled to take the multiplier into account. There'd be less pushback, I think, if the base (pre-timemultiplier) rewards were slid up to leave them as they are.
For the most part, things have been balanced with the Duty Officer system until now.
A 12 hour mission rewards more XP than a 1 hour mission. That's pretty natural, given that the duration is 12 times longer than then 1 hour mission. The way it's been working for the past 3 years has been as intended by it's designer (Heretic), seeing as one of the features of the Duty Officer system was to allow players an alternate route to level up, besides the constant combat missions (which is far removed from the spirit of Trek).
The way you guys have now haphazardly nerfed the 12 hour missions, throws the entire balance out of whack. The duration is still 12 hours, but the rewards are now less than the aforementioned 1 hour missions.
You guys need to look at a complete overhaul of your reward structure in this game. Ever since Delta Rising, the XP requirements have been absurdly high, and the XP gain from various activities have been nerfed again and again. It's only natural then, that people would resort to a bit of anger and pitchforks, when a source of XP that has been around for over 3 years is now being slashed by over 90%.
On top of that, you guys call it a "bug". Your Lead Content Designer on Twitter, has been actively blocking anyone who has commented against the change. How does one have any kind of meaningful conversation with the devs, when devs block your access from communicating whenever they see a hint of negativity?
This change (if it goes through) will all but kill my incentive to continue Doff grinding, until a better solution has been put in place. My Delta "alt" is at level 54 so far, and I've been pushing through the storyline episodes pretty hard (about to head into the Borg storyline). Buying an XP boost in the C-Store is meaningless, when you've nerfed the value of those as well.
*Sigh* ... what's the point if you're just going to ignore the last 28 pages ...
When people come here to complain about a fix, especially when it's labeled as a "nerf", they are part of the problem. It's not helping at all. The devs know fully that the DOFF system isn't that good. All of it. But they can't review it if it isn't smoothed out first.
Instead of complaining about "nerfs" and the like, threatening to leave if the devs don't listen to the same things they've been hearing since they got the job, suggest things that do not appeal to keeping bugs and exploits. Hell, the devs probably want the Mall Santa treatment over the complaints. Tell them what you want them to do in the future instead of complaining about what they're doing now.
About DOFFing - it's getting a revamp anyway. Soon. One of the main reasons are that the rewarding for it is too low in general. It's brainstorming time for it, and it's a good time to post some suggestions.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Okay, let's talk about the curve. Let's talk about the sharp turn it takes after level 50 and how the Delta Quadrant missions don't have enough content to proceed smoothly along that increased curve without resorting to grinding via patrols (an early option and an epic drama in its own right), repeating older missions or DOffing. This breaks up any flow the game-play may have had and introduces a high annoyance factor to the player-base.
Now let me be clear on this: I don't particularly care how long it takes to go from 50 to 60 as long as there is sufficient mission content for the entire trip. Currently there is not and, to add insult to injury, the missions are sharply level-gated which practically forces a player to go back and grind before getting another couple missions to play.
[Emphasis Mine] THIS IS BAD DESIGN. The increased curve and the lack of smooth progression post-level-50 is at the root of a lot of the ill-will that's been running around since Delta Rising was released ... among other things that we are specificially not discussing here.
But hey, let's try making an off topic comment against me under your assumption.
The problem is that it looks like the developer decisions are being made based on factually inaccurate information (in particular, Heretic's intent for the system as originally designed), and are adjusting things based on the back-end appearance, rather than the front-end results.
It is difficult to call something a true 'outlier' when the per-minute rewards are what you'd expect them to be from similar missions (with the expected longer mission efficiency dropoff).
You can understand that - to the players - it seems like a very shortsighted move based on what the developers see as looking good behind the scenes, rather than what the players see when completing the missions.
What we want is a global xp overhaul (as in, increase). But thats not going to happen because that takes away time from developing new lockboxes and ships to sell. It keeps resources away from new content that apparently is desperately needed to attract more people.
Maybe focus on the reason people keep leaving after a month? Fix the damn neglected content of the past.
sig
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/5451/om71.jpg
It is a peculiar phenomenon that we can imagine events that defy the laws of the universe.
Don't waste your time and energy. Unlike a few other STO Devs in the past CaptainGeko CLAIMS to listen to player feedback - but honestly DOESN'T. By his own admission, he only reads the forum to play his game of counting "how many posts 'til Hitler."
And the 12 hour assignment rewards were never broken as he claims, they were originally DESIGNEDF that way (IE those with less time to actually sit online at a computer and play could take the longer assignments and still get a comparable reward to those that were online/in game a lot and were taking shorter stuff and re-taking others to maximize their time online.
^^^
this was STATED by both the main designer (Heretic, who has since moved on from Cryptic Studios); and Daniel Stahl, a former EP of STO at the time the Doff system was first introduced.
^^^
And not surprisingly, a fact conveniently FORGOTTEN by Mr. Al Rivera (Hey, he also claims to be one of a few Devs that have been on STO since day one; so I guess he must have selective amnesia with regard to the above.)
Also have to love a Lead Designer who concentrates on NERFING rewards and wholesale REMOVING existing content from STO on a regular basis, instead of just adding and diversifying content. But hey, at least he hasn't thrown the current EP 'under the bus' the way he did to Daniel Stahl way back prior to the release of Season 4. Mr. Stahl had stated the rework KDF first city map WOULD release with the initial launch Season 4 in multiple media interviews at the time; yet a couple days later Al Rivera went on a STOked (the #1 STO podcast in it's day - since changed in many ways and may be gone for good) and stated that Daniel Stahl was incorrect/didn't really know the day to day situation, and said the revamped KDF First City map would NOT release with the initial launch of Season 4 - creating a s**tstorm on the forums by KDF players and requiring Mr. Stahl to come out and re-state what he had said - and in fact the revamped KDF City map DID release with the initial launch of Season 4.
^^^
But to me this (and his other comments from his own mouth) shows why Captain Geko is a substandard Lead Dev for STO. He routinely throws others (including his superiors on the STO Dev team at Cryptic) under the bus - never really takes ownership of his own decisions good or bad, (unless they are wildly popular - but I can't think of one in recent memory that really was that was all his); and often displays open contempt for the playerbase that populates his game and keeps him employed.
I think the fact is: PWI/PWE is seeing that STO's concurrency metrics are down in general (bumps from events and Season updates not withstanding) and somehow Al Rivera believes thios change will up said concurrency metrics.
But in the end, (IMO) appealing to Captain Geko for anything is like appealing to a stone wall, and will yeald the same results.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
I've been staying out of this, mostly because I don't really have a dog in the fight. STO is the only MMO I've reached level cap in, because - even with the higher XP requirements post-50 - it's still far faster and less grindy to max out in STO than any othet MMO I've played, and because I don't feel a need to cap out all my specs. They'll increase as I play stuff for other purposes, a small occasional bit of lagniappe while I go for gear or play story or just run Dyson space battlezone over and over because for some reason I really enjoy that mission.
That said, there's serious issues with cost-to-reward ratios, and I do think they're hurting the game as a whole. That is the core of the empty queue problem (when I can do The Cure in 5 minutes and it pops immediately, vs. 15-20 for The Breach after waiting an hour, and they both give about the same reward, I will never play The Breach). With DOff missions, the 12-hour ones DO sit as outliers, and that needs to be fixed - but the peole chasing spec points need to know that when they're fixed the XP stream they provide now will be matched with new sources within the DOff system. This could be increased rewards to other missions - cutting the 12-hours by less than is currently planned, for instance, and setting them as the standard to which all the other missions are pegged - or through more, more interesting, and more rewarding Uncommon, Rare, and Very Rare missions.
I'm not with the "Klingons should have better DOffing than Feds" argument. When I play my KDF characters, it's because I want to play them, not to take advantage of DOffing or even Contraband. Klingons not getting cool stuff should be resolved by Klingons getting cool stuff, not by unrelated bonuses.
Also? DOff mission rewards should account for morr than rarity and duration.
I'm not against that. I am just worried that 'logic to DOFFing rewards = screwed over players'.
Ok, well, here's a big concern then for you Trendy:
How do we know anything we say will make the slightest iota of difference? Seriously, 99.9% of the time, anything spoken here, good or bad, useful or not, is ignored.
But whatever, I'll put in my bits and see what happens:
Now, I think ya'll (as in: Devs) are overthinking it. you need to treat it like R&D a bit and keep to some standardized numbers. Pick something, say...
100 XP for a one hour common DOFF mission that doesn't crit or fail, and only using white DOFFs.
(To compare, the common 30 minute medical assignments you can do give like 54 XP right now)
So that means, a mission that lasts 15 minutes would give 25 XP, a 30 minute 50, and 45 minutes 75. Anything over an hour would be multiplying that 100 XP instead.
There should be five other factors in regards to what should improve XP gains for a DOFF mission:
1. DOFF quality. which they already do.
2. Critting or not, again, which they already do.
3. Assignment rarity.
4. Unique requirements and/or rewards
5. Location and length
To go over those in more detail:
1. Like I said, DOFF missions already take in the quality of the DOFFs for their reward. So nothing needed here.
2. Same thing with crits. BUT you'd best not use the excuse of people critting DOFF missions as a reason to justify leaving XP rewards low, as crits are NEVER guaranteed!
3. This one doesn't apply atm. I think that difference rarity assignments, without adding in other things, should give different XP amounts. Like say...5% for an uncommon, 10% for a rare, 15% for a very rare. So a one hour very rare assignment, without anything else, would give you 115 XP to a one hour common assignment giving you 100.
BUT, that difference would become more pronounced as you do factor in other things. Which is why the bonus is so small.
4. This is a big one. A lot of assignments either have requirements outside of merely DOFFs, or need unique DOFFs (like say needing a DOFF with Shroud), OR they have other rewards outside of the standard norm (like giving Contraband).
I think that, if an assignment needs more than just everyday DOFFs, then it should reward more XP. Like there are missions that can give Contraband (so I feel those should give less XP in turn), those that REQUIRE Contraband (that aren't turning it into dil), should give a fairly large boost to XP in turn.
I don't really have any numbers for this one, just more that if missions need something more, they should give more, and if they give something out, they should give less XP.
5. Length I already went over in that longer missions should understandably give more XP. Location however I feel applies more to the general conversation. If something is very easy to find, it shouldn't really be given any kind of bonus. To use a general example, if I can just fly around the Beta Quadrant and find the same mission in the Alpha or Delta Quadrant, chances are I don't think it should get a bonus. But if I can ONLY find a mission in the Delta Quadrant and not in the Alpha or Beta Quadrants, then perhaps that mission means I had to take time to find it in the first place, and thus should be worth while.
Most people have a reasonable expectation of play more = get more or higher rewards. Most people have a reasonable expectation of accomplishing something in game inside a reasonable time frame. I absolutely do not want my grandchildren to finally complete one Specialzation Tree just after the turn of the next century.
Why are you people at Cryptic making it more and more difficult to like this game every day? Getting people to spend money on something Star Trek based ought to be like shooting fish in barrel. Yet somehow, all of you seem to go out of your way to do the opposite. And then you go that one step further to ensure you really anger people.
Is this your intent? It's working far better than you obviously hoped.
I think a valid concern is the quotes people have from the designer of the DOff system explaining why the bump is there.
I recognize Cryptic is small and that documentation of old design intent is difficult. In this case, Heretic actually has posts which are archived explaining his rationales for the bumps. Now, part of it is that the 12 hour missions were designed to be built a certain player resource intensive way which devs since he left didn't necessarily keep up with on new assignments. Heretic had some intricate fine tuning.
The larger point was that 12 hour assignments were supposed to be the primary intended DOff assignments. Longer assignments are a form of "autopiloting" for very casual players. Shorter assignments were penalized for favoring someone who was grinding excessively. The goal was to get people to circle the quadrant loading up 12 hour missions twice a day with longer and shorter assignments being sub-optimal, penalized gameplay. It's not a bump in the floor. It's level. Greater than or less than 12 hours basically had penalties attached (and lighter resource requirements relative to payout).
Now, I don't care much. Your last effective DOffing nerf (scaling XP 3x without scaling DOffing) meant that I don't DOff anymore except to hand-in contraband and level crafting. In addition, I never would have designed the system like Heretic did to begin with. Some of the complaints Geko had about the system were complaints I had before the system went live in feedback threads with Heretic. I would be up for a fairly comprehensive revamp where the DOffs feel more like proper trading cards and are more closely integrated into the game.
My concern is strictly speaking that this isn't a bug and that people understand, including at Cryptic, that the changes being made are a departure from design and that players who are happy or unhappy with it because it is a departure from design are correct. And that what is being fixed is not a bug. This is actually a change to the design intent and with that comes all the attendant issues of a change in intent. Furthermore, DOffing was intended as an alternative to combat missions altogether and an alternative form of leveling altogether so concerns about "leveling only through DOffing" or "not needing to play missions" also missed the design intent -- which was for people to have a pacifist option for playing STO, without firing a shot.
With all due respect, the issue of XP balance and the curve you hit past Level 50 has been a constant topic of complaint for well over six months. We have voiced it over and over, given feedback, offered solutions and discussed how it is harming the game and turning it into a really unrewarding gaming experience with terrible progression.
Are we now to believe that doing it all over again for the 100th time will finally be listened to and something done? I'm all up for it if so but excuse the bitterness of players who have been doing exactly what you're suggesting for months to no avail.
I really have no dog in this show either. I consider 3 of 6 characters done and the other 3 can take their time until servers close. Yet I can guarantee a doffing revamp will not end well in many different ways.
As I also said about the queues, complaining is no longer relevant. We are walking the path we are on now and there is no changing. This is the whales' path and it will keep us going for as long as it can. I suspect someone will be able to convince the new owner that the 50th anniversary will be a huge cash cow so I'm sure we have another year to enjoy - so I advise get out there and enjoy it.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
If you have an underlying concern that you feel has been waylaid in regards to the leveling curve and XP, then I need to discuss that. I cannot assume nor exact the actions of my predecessors, but if there's an underlying concern that is longstanding with this then I mean to address it with people, not shy from it.
Let's work on this together, eh?
I'll admit i've received a small number of Specs points via doffing, beats the hell out of flying patrol after patrol after patrol after patrol or replaying 15 or more FE to gain one.
I actually feel like this as well Trendy. I think that a good philosophy for leveling is for there to be enough unique content at each level so that one playthrough gets you to the next level. I have no issue with the missions or patrols in Delta Rising, but I think that, for example, if there is two missions and a round of patrols at level 52, one playthrough of that ought to get me to level 53. Right now that is not happening. You get through those two missions and one patrol round and you still have a huge chunk of xp left to get. It leaves the player wondering "uh, wait what do I do now?" They want to play the next thing and they are prevented from doing so.
I have no issue with spec points taking a while to get after level 60. That kind of horizontal progression is fine by me (if it were a little faster that wouldn't bother me, lol), but I think as it is, 50-60 progression really needs to come smoothly from unique, single playthroughs of the story missions and patrols
From 50-60, it takes a week to get a level, this is too slow. It feels bad, like we're not making any progress.
Either lower the XP required per level, or go the more difficult route and raise XP everywhere.
In the current setting, any XP reduction, call it a bug fix, call it a nerf, call it a change of plan, whatever, feels additionally punishing.
That's it really.
I'm confident you will get a lot of very good detailed (more than I could offer) on the math and scaling side for DOFFing. Some are already in this thread. However, the fact that we're in for another way to reduce XP (and you must understand, we've endured many and even been victim of lies from the devs in order to sneak them in) is going to create a lot of hostility.
For the good of the player/dev relationship, this further XP reduction should be halted until Cryptic can balance out other ways to offer XP progression as a replacement, be it via the DOFF system or perhaps from enemy kills in STF's.
The relentless nerfing over any other kind of other action has to stop.
But you see this is the real heart of the problem, your "predecessors", especially Heretic, listened to us when we provided feedback while testing on Tribble and pointed out bugs and tweaks that would make things better. Now many of us have stopped bothering to even log onto Tribble anymore, let alone post feedback, because for the most part we are ignored or in some cases actually insulted by people on your end for not being happy with what is being forced through full of bugs. From beta testing through the first 3.5 (or so) years of this game I very actively helped to test this game, now I don't feel it is worth my time anymore. When people on the Dev side of things are ready to follow through with your suggestion of "Let's work together on this, eh?" please let us know and I am sure you will get plenty of worthwhile and useful feedback, until then, threads like this are all you are likely to see.
Well, like half the players and most of the current devs, I think it would go swimmingly and raise big money if *I* got a voice in reworking it. We might ALL be wrong. Being humans, there's a very good chance of that. This is a case where I agree with Geko A LOT.
That's VERY common if you're talking about anything that isn't STO. Politics, society, culture, favorite episodes of Star Trek, pop culture. I'm on the same team as Geko fairly often there.
Actually, I'm on the same team as Geko generally in defining the problems in STO. It's the remedies where my opinions tend to vary a lot.
If I had three wishes and a genie's lamp, I'd put them all to fairly productive use in life and the world. If I had more than three wishes, I think I actually might expend one on sitting in a room with a whiteboard, a limitless coffee pot and game developers where I could both understand their perspective and actually give feedback without the annoying limitations of forum communication.
The most effective way to express a nuanced stance in a forum is a wall of text. Unfortunately, expressing and communicating are at odds (the better you express, the more resistance there is to a message getting through) and you have to leapfrog past and speak over people who repeat the same non-sequiturs and personal appeals.
My experience is, you can never build nuanced consensus from more than a group of 3-5 people. Life has to be split up into groups of that size to be manageable. You can only get very broad, vague consensus from larger groups and any conversation that involves more than 5 people works best with 1-5 people directing the discussion from a stage. You can have one person communicating to another four. But if you have open discussion with a larger group, it's chaos.
I would completely redesign forums to operate more like convention panels. That doesn't mean devs would be in charge always (fans can run panels at a convention) but if I designed forums, you would more or less have small groups in charge of threads with limited access to non-organizers, maybe require people to be recognized to speak and they'd get limited posts in a thread. Like a con panel. I could start a panel, you could, Geko could, anyone could. But it would be more panel than forum based. A thread with 3-5 participants where other people could request to make replies and could be recognized by any of the participants to create questions or replies. And then they get one reply following their question.
And that person can start their own virtual panel.
It would save on hair loss and ulcers all throughout the internet.
What bother me much more are tons of bugs, inbalances and non working stuff and mechanics you can read over the forums or reddit for months and years... I would love to see better balance of various weapon types to make them all interesting, useful and competitive without need to be ultrahardcore build nerd. I would like to see repaired broken abilities. I would have no problem if it would mean nerf some abilities.
But I am afraid current status of game, over the top anger of players and inability to listen of some leading devs do not make this ever happen.
Ideally a nice change to exp requirements would be if you could get enough exp to almost fill out one specialization relatively easily, like almost one point per story mission, and then have it scale up to what we currently have as you earn enough for a second or third spec line.
Anyone want to give me a Temporal Heavy Dreadnought pack? I'll be your friend