i would like the maintenance times to reflect the type of mission they did, if they just ferried some folks to shore leave there should be barely any maintenance period but if ya just did a patrol of the sector or fought some pirates and also a varying factor of how the mission went. also ship stats should really be more relevant to the role and type of ship they are rather than there tier and rarity
oh and also missions should be a tad longer themselves most are only 45 mins to 2 hours i would like some that are about 20 hours so i dont feel like the whole system is just idle longer for more than ships are doing something i mean come on, i have my guys go out for 15 misn but they are out of commision for half a day and useualy by that point i gotta wait till tommorow cause id be asleap by the time they are out of maintenance.
I just don't get it.
1 - the E T S numbers are so random and change for so many different reasons. it should just be simplified. you need E=45 T=70 S=50 than just add up and go. not, ya but now for no reason what so ever you now need E=100 T=70 S=50.
That "no reason whatsoever" would be the random Event (that thing in the little box on the right side of the mission) that says "Warp Core Breach: +55 Eng, +some bonus" (or whatever event you get. It's random, after all.)
Many of them increase the difficulty but give a reward. Some of them decrease the difficulty.
Greatly extend mission times while reducing maintenance.
Hum i have to admit ihavnt noticed the heavey sci requirment for KDF but then again i haven't bothered with it much due to how disappointing it is.
I do agree that the system gives the advantage to players that have a lot of ships (I have 37 on one character), and there needs to be a way for people with low numbers to gain an equal footing. Maybe a doff mission that grants a x10 or something type of ship.
prehaps they need a system like the requirement for do/offs where you can request additional ships, you wouldn't get the actual ship but the ship cards.
"It appears we have lost our sex appeal, captain."- Tuvok
I am not saying to copy/paste, but just inspire from doff missions. Extend mission timers to 6-8 and even 12 hours while ofc increasing the rewards. Or better yet add new ones with 6-12 hours timers with increased payments accordindly.
Also not in the pool, give/switch kdf and roms to more tac focus requirements since atm sci ones are very bad for them.
I wouldn't want them to be too inspired from doff missions. I don't do any doff missions because the rewards are not nearly worth it.
I do back a switch in focus for KDF/Roms to tac or at least eng. Until these two can get a more fair amount of science ships, science emphasized missions should be replaced.
Although I would replace the word "maintenance" with "cooldown," if only because it would help avoid the stupid debate on whether it "makes sense" for ships to undergo maintenance after every mission.
I'm not disappointed with the system, quite the contrary. The rewards make it well worth the time to manage yet another system beside Doffing, reputation systems, R&D etc.
One change I'd like to see, however, is that maintenance timers for all Tiers are more equal. Yes, Lobi ships and Z-store ships already have better stats than a Miranda and therefore there's already some benefit of using a JH Dread vs. that Miranda, but that JH Dread is, obviously, harder to get so it's only logical that it performs better in the system.
Increasing the maintenance required per tier/rarity greatly reduces the usefulness of certain ships in this system, while they don't become easier to acquire of course. Players usually have to work hard or pay a lot of money to get those rarer/higher tier ships.
I'm not saying that the timers should be completely the same for all ships, but making them a bit more equal would be nice.
IMO this is one of those rare occasions where Cryptic has put something out that's actually pretty decent right out of the gate. Other than KDF and Rom Science being a bit slim compared to Fed options, I can't really think of a glaring fault or anything I would change.
I'm not disappointed with the system, quite the contrary. The rewards make it well worth the time to manage yet another system beside Doffing, reputation systems, R&D etc.
One change I'd like to see, however, is that maintenance timers for all Tiers are more equal. Yes, Lobi ships and Z-store ships already have better stats than a Miranda and therefore there's already some benefit of using a JH Dread vs. that Miranda, but that JH Dread is, obviously, harder to get so it's only logical that it performs better in the system.
Increasing the maintenance required per tier/rarity greatly reduces the usefulness of certain ships in this system, while they don't become easier to acquire of course. Players usually have to work hard or pay a lot of money to get those rarer/higher tier ships.
I'm not saying that the timers should be completely the same for all ships, but making them a bit more equal would be nice.
I disagree. The maintenance system as it stands actually de-incentivizes shelling out for ships, which is something this system desperately needs to keep lest it become simply another selling point for ships. These rare ships are incredibly effective, so the reward for having them is already present and potent.
There's no need for a change in the basic mechanics, they're there to justify have a large number of ships- and the current system does that just fine.
What I would change is all the ships with "X when Alone". It's very difficult to imagine a ship made *worse* by the presence of allied ships. About the only ones I can think of is the Intel ships (with their passive masking) being 'ghosted' by normal ships.
Most, especially the Command Ships should have that trait replaced with something proper for their class. Command Ships for example for get a bonus for other ships, especially tactical ones.
I chose Other, as I'd rather they buff the ships themselves to have better stats than they have right now.
Promo ships (Annorax, Sheshar, Bulwark) and ultra-rare Lockbox ships (Vonph) should have higher stats than regular lockbox ships (the usual grand prize ship like the Quas or Temporal ships).
And lockbox and Lobi ships would have higher stats than equivalent tier Fleet ships (which are easier to obtain).
Of course, T6 Fleet ships would be on the level of T5 Lobi/Lockbox ships in the Admiralty system, but lower than T6 Lobi/Lockbox ships.
A net benefit for both Cryptic (more incentive to sell Lobi/Lockbox/Promo ships) and players (the ones who actually bother to collect such ships).
I wouldnt change the system itself i am thoroughly enjoying it, even doing it on some alts I havent used in forever. Looking forward to more campaign options for sure but thats about it
Reading some comments, quite a few players are still struggling and haven't yet understood how it works (I happily include myself in that crowd). Maintenance starts when collected? No reason for number changes? These are wrong assumptions. We all have some until we really get into it. People not realizing they can "skip" missions with a hopeless small ship, or they can gamble on the below 100%. Which means, it is too early for the players to understand what would be sensible changes. (And I certainly don't want any "get everything now" change). Oh yeah, my mistakes and misunderstandings are missing here, because I do not know them - otherwise they wouldn't be. I am not trying to come over as a know-it-all.
A few things in particular: even though they have less "assignment point minutes", the larger ships are still better, because you can only field three per mission and cannot meet the larger requirements with a Miranda/Obarth/NX combo. Also often you will start a mission and then leave the game for a certain amount of time for things like sleep, work, social life etc.
IF the mission time/maintenance balance were to be shifted (more mission time, less maintenance) that should NOT award higher rewards. These are already pretty high as it is, and while more is always welcome, I'd rather not be incentivized to spend more time on it compared to other activities here. It should stay a nice bonus for a few minutes without action, but the main thing should stay actual gameplay (missions, queues, battlezones).
And I would be against inflating the stats of very rare lockbox ships above the level of (theoretically) comparable ships of the same tier. No need to inflate the difference between those who can afford them (or have the luck to get them) and those who can't even more. Of course I don't own a single lockbox ship, so take this with a grain of salt.
But these are first opinions as well. As it is: too soon to tell.
My mother was an epohh and my father smelled of tulaberries
What I would change is all the ships with "X when Alone".
Second.
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
To those saying that the maintenance begins when you collect the rewards, @borticuscryptic has said that the time starts as soon as the mission is done, not when you collect the rewards. It's easy to test: Do a 15 minute mission, use a tier 1 ship. come back after at least an hour (or whenever the t1 ship maintenance would be done) and see the tier 1 ship ready to go.
i have noticed this is true, if you happen to claim the rewards just as a mission ends then the ships will go into maintenance mode however if you claim the reward a fair bit later ships will quite often go strait back into service and those that do go for maintenance the duration time has substantially expired based on obviously how long it is since the time the mission ends and the time you collect the rewards.
i would like the maintenance times to reflect the type of mission they did, if they just ferried some folks to shore leave there should be barely any maintenance period but if ya just did a patrol of the sector or fought some pirates and also a varying factor of how the mission went. also ship stats should really be more relevant to the role and type of ship they are rather than there tier and rarity
oh and also missions should be a tad longer themselves most are only 45 mins to 2 hours i would like some that are about 20 hours so i dont feel like the whole system is just idle longer for more than ships are doing something i mean come on, i have my guys go out for 15 misn but they are out of commision for half a day and useualy by that point i gotta wait till tommorow cause id be asleap by the time they are out of maintenance.
maintenance times are based on the ship and not the mission, I guess this is to encourage you to use low tier ships with shorter maintenance times on short duration low requirement low reward missions and save your high tier ships for longer missions with higher requirements and rewards wherever possible.
basically so you will consider your choices more carefully and not just slap the best ships in every mission regardless.
Although I would replace the word "maintenance" with "cooldown," if only because it would help avoid the stupid debate on whether it "makes sense" for ships to undergo maintenance after every mission.
maintenance/cooldown whats the difference it is what it is, I guess they chose maintenance in an attempt to make it seem more realistic for emersion, I dare say when a passenger airplane lands they don't say you will have to let that cool down before you can fly it again however they probably might say we will need to do some maintenance before you take off again, in that respect I guess it does make sense but at the end of the day its just a word, think of it as you like, if you prefer to think of it as cooldown then do so.
and believe it or not all passenger airplanes do go for a maintenance or transit check between each flight, obviously the time this takes is dependent on the size of the plane and the length of the flight.
Post edited by bobbydazlers on
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
i like it as is. If you do a 15 minute mission in a ship that requires 18 hours of maintenance between missions, then the player who uses a ship that requires 15 minutes of maintenance has an advantage.
Greatly extend mission times while reducing maintenance.
Longer missions would be better for me because I refuse to buy ships just to get game cards for the system so even with 30 odd ships I can realistically only run missions for a few hours before I run out of operational ships. Longer missions, possibly with slightly better rewards would make it more effective. Reduced cool down or maintenance would mean I could slot those ships sooner after they'd finished a task but with longer mission times it would still be limited in how much could be farmed or exploited.
I mean you can slot all the 15 min tasks you want but you'll quickly run out of ship after only a few hours. So longer times would not actually negatively affect most players, only those with tonnes of ships.
I like the system the way it currently is. It forces you to put some thought in it and not just accept every mission. Putting 3 tier 5/6 ships into a mission for some EC or some prisoners (at least on the fed side they have little to no purpose) is probably not a good idea. If you don't think a mission is worth that some of your ships are not available for a long time, it is probably because the mission reward is not enough and you probably should send your tier 1 boat for that mission and get rid of it. The AdSys is very rewarding, especially if you compare it with the DOFFSys. But only if you manage your resources with some thought.
Maybe change the wording from maintenance to traveling back to Starbase or something like that.
Although I would replace the word "maintenance" with "cooldown," if only because it would help avoid the stupid debate on whether it "makes sense" for ships to undergo maintenance after every mission.
maintenance/cooldown whats the difference it is what it is, I guess they chose maintenance in an attempt to make it seem more realistic for emersion, I dare say when a passenger airplane lands they don't say you will have to let that cool down before you can fly it again however they probably might say we will need to do some maintenance before you take off again, in that respect I guess it does make sense but at the end of the day its just a word, think of it as you like, if you prefer to think of it as cooldown then do so.
and believe it or not all passenger airplanes do go for a maintenance or transit check between each flight, obviously the time this takes is dependent on the size of the plane and the length of the flight.
The difference is several threads complaining about it for no good reason. Some people are not capable of imagining "maintenance" as anything but the ship sitting in drydock even when advised by more creative individuals. Simply not using the word "maintenance" would take the wind out of their sails.
While that certain thread complains that Voyager went 7 years without "maintenance" (read:drydock), nobody can contest that it was also 7 years on cooldown before the admiralty got it back.
It has a kind of balance. Rewards are really great (I can get more stuff from a single assignment there than from a full 23 batch of doff assignments), so I can't really say much about high maintenance times.
It kinda follows a 24h schedule for the highest tier ships, so you can use your best cards once a day and then do lesser tasks more often with your leftover lower tier ships.
If anything, I'd recommend a series of usability improvements (i.e. view card info in ship info somewhere, so you can check the card before buying the ship), an "available/on mission/in maintenance" filter, and a "permanent/consumable" filter in the roster (i'd REALLY like to avoid accidentally using consumable cards when I don't need to, so I can keep them for the tough tasks). Maybe make T1 ships not count towards "alone" bonus (so you can i.e. use a dreadnought, with its own bonus, along with a small ship for extra crit chance).
I've seen this asked for on more than 1 occasion. I don't think adding shuttles to admirality will be a good idea. KDF only have 3 (2 you can buy for EC and 1 from the c-store). They would get totally screwed over.
Romulans would have 1 more shuttle than either faction they all with (scorpion fighter in the c-store) since they can use all of their allied faction's shuttles as they're tier 2 ships.
Federation have a lot of shuttles.
Lobi store shuttles aren't worth the cost, especially since there is so little shuttle content to use them in and even the EC shuttles are more than enough for it.
I've seen this asked for on more than 1 occasion. I don't think adding shuttles to admirality will be a good idea. KDF only have 3 (2 you can buy for EC and 1 from the c-store). They would get totally screwed over.
Shuttles would have to have less than T1 stats, so they would end up pretty useless. That's probably why they weren't included in the system in the first place.
The problem isn't maintenance as such, the problem is that sooner or later you end up with all 10 available assignments requiring 200/200/200 before the event, half of those being Doomsday Machines or something else silly.
If instead of fixed 2 upcoming assignments we had a choice of, say, one likely to be low-risk, low-reward one, one that's has a chance to fail even with the best ships but high-reward, and one "specialized" (high in one stat, low in two others) there would always be something you can do even if all your T6s and T5s are in maintenance. Oh, and some form of notification for completed maintenance.
- Display of „event“ rewards on the initial mission list field.
- Hard cap of requirements to make them theoretically possible to fulfill under consideration the current ships available.
Other than that I begin to like the system more each time I tend to it.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
The problem isn't maintenance as such, the problem is that sooner or later you end up with all 10 available assignments requiring 200/200/200 before the event, half of those being Doomsday Machines or something else silly.
This isn't a big issue. As soon as I see an assignment I can't or won't commit to, i'll just send a T1 ship to fail it. These are usually short ones.
TRIBBLE the game stats. THe Exploration Cruiser should be a ship with a bigger science value, because it's an explorer.
The Command Cruisers should grant bonuses when teamed, not get a bonus when alone. Stuff like that.
I agree. The Galaxy ships (and Negh'Var and possibly D'Ds) for example should get boni when they're alone as the Explorers are designed to operate without support and as you said command cruisers thrive in company as do frigates and raiders.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
The problem isn't maintenance as such, the problem is that sooner or later you end up with all 10 available assignments requiring 200/200/200 before the event, half of those being Doomsday Machines or something else silly.
If instead of fixed 2 upcoming assignments we had a choice of, say, one likely to be low-risk, low-reward one, one that's has a chance to fail even with the best ships but high-reward, and one "specialized" (high in one stat, low in two others) there would always be something you can do even if all your T6s and T5s are in maintenance. Oh, and some form of notification for completed maintenance.
the thing is as many players cant see is there are going to be some missions that are a sure thing regardless of the ships you use, some missions that using the right ships is going to be crucial to the success of the mission and some missions where its up to chance whether you win or loose.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
It has a kind of balance. Rewards are really great (I can get more stuff from a single assignment there than from a full 23 batch of doff assignments), so I can't really say much about high maintenance times.
It kinda follows a 24h schedule for the highest tier ships, so you can use your best cards once a day and then do lesser tasks more often with your leftover lower tier ships.
If anything, I'd recommend a series of usability improvements (i.e. view card info in ship info somewhere, so you can check the card before buying the ship), an "available/on mission/in maintenance" filter, and a "permanent/consumable" filter in the roster (i'd REALLY like to avoid accidentally using consumable cards when I don't need to, so I can keep them for the tough tasks). Maybe make T1 ships not count towards "alone" bonus (so you can i.e. use a dreadnought, with its own bonus, along with a small ship for extra crit chance).
you should not be buying the ships just because the cards more favourable but because you want the ship and if you do want the ship the stats on the card should make very little difference but at the end of the day be just an added bonus.
having said that keep your eyes on stowiki, theres bound to be a rundown of ship cards and their stats very soon.
actually ship cards open up a whole new avenue of potential event rewards and random giveaways, I foresee permanent versions of the 1Xcard you sometimes get from admiralty rewards now, so players could end up with quite large collections of cards without the need to buy any ships at all.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
Comments
oh and also missions should be a tad longer themselves most are only 45 mins to 2 hours i would like some that are about 20 hours so i dont feel like the whole system is just idle longer for more than ships are doing something i mean come on, i have my guys go out for 15 misn but they are out of commision for half a day and useualy by that point i gotta wait till tommorow cause id be asleap by the time they are out of maintenance.
That "no reason whatsoever" would be the random Event (that thing in the little box on the right side of the mission) that says "Warp Core Breach: +55 Eng, +some bonus" (or whatever event you get. It's random, after all.)
Many of them increase the difficulty but give a reward. Some of them decrease the difficulty.
"It appears we have lost our sex appeal, captain."- Tuvok
I wouldn't want them to be too inspired from doff missions. I don't do any doff missions because the rewards are not nearly worth it.
I do back a switch in focus for KDF/Roms to tac or at least eng. Until these two can get a more fair amount of science ships, science emphasized missions should be replaced.
"live long enough to be assimilated, resistance is futile"
Although I would replace the word "maintenance" with "cooldown," if only because it would help avoid the stupid debate on whether it "makes sense" for ships to undergo maintenance after every mission.
One change I'd like to see, however, is that maintenance timers for all Tiers are more equal. Yes, Lobi ships and Z-store ships already have better stats than a Miranda and therefore there's already some benefit of using a JH Dread vs. that Miranda, but that JH Dread is, obviously, harder to get so it's only logical that it performs better in the system.
Increasing the maintenance required per tier/rarity greatly reduces the usefulness of certain ships in this system, while they don't become easier to acquire of course. Players usually have to work hard or pay a lot of money to get those rarer/higher tier ships.
I'm not saying that the timers should be completely the same for all ships, but making them a bit more equal would be nice.
I disagree. The maintenance system as it stands actually de-incentivizes shelling out for ships, which is something this system desperately needs to keep lest it become simply another selling point for ships. These rare ships are incredibly effective, so the reward for having them is already present and potent.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
What I would change is all the ships with "X when Alone". It's very difficult to imagine a ship made *worse* by the presence of allied ships. About the only ones I can think of is the Intel ships (with their passive masking) being 'ghosted' by normal ships.
Most, especially the Command Ships should have that trait replaced with something proper for their class. Command Ships for example for get a bonus for other ships, especially tactical ones.
Promo ships (Annorax, Sheshar, Bulwark) and ultra-rare Lockbox ships (Vonph) should have higher stats than regular lockbox ships (the usual grand prize ship like the Quas or Temporal ships).
And lockbox and Lobi ships would have higher stats than equivalent tier Fleet ships (which are easier to obtain).
Of course, T6 Fleet ships would be on the level of T5 Lobi/Lockbox ships in the Admiralty system, but lower than T6 Lobi/Lockbox ships.
A net benefit for both Cryptic (more incentive to sell Lobi/Lockbox/Promo ships) and players (the ones who actually bother to collect such ships).
My character Tsin'xing
A few things in particular: even though they have less "assignment point minutes", the larger ships are still better, because you can only field three per mission and cannot meet the larger requirements with a Miranda/Obarth/NX combo. Also often you will start a mission and then leave the game for a certain amount of time for things like sleep, work, social life etc.
IF the mission time/maintenance balance were to be shifted (more mission time, less maintenance) that should NOT award higher rewards. These are already pretty high as it is, and while more is always welcome, I'd rather not be incentivized to spend more time on it compared to other activities here. It should stay a nice bonus for a few minutes without action, but the main thing should stay actual gameplay (missions, queues, battlezones).
And I would be against inflating the stats of very rare lockbox ships above the level of (theoretically) comparable ships of the same tier. No need to inflate the difference between those who can afford them (or have the luck to get them) and those who can't even more. Of course I don't own a single lockbox ship, so take this with a grain of salt.
But these are first opinions as well. As it is: too soon to tell.
Second.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
i have noticed this is true, if you happen to claim the rewards just as a mission ends then the ships will go into maintenance mode however if you claim the reward a fair bit later ships will quite often go strait back into service and those that do go for maintenance the duration time has substantially expired based on obviously how long it is since the time the mission ends and the time you collect the rewards.
maintenance times are based on the ship and not the mission, I guess this is to encourage you to use low tier ships with shorter maintenance times on short duration low requirement low reward missions and save your high tier ships for longer missions with higher requirements and rewards wherever possible.
basically so you will consider your choices more carefully and not just slap the best ships in every mission regardless.
maintenance/cooldown whats the difference it is what it is, I guess they chose maintenance in an attempt to make it seem more realistic for emersion, I dare say when a passenger airplane lands they don't say you will have to let that cool down before you can fly it again however they probably might say we will need to do some maintenance before you take off again, in that respect I guess it does make sense but at the end of the day its just a word, think of it as you like, if you prefer to think of it as cooldown then do so.
and believe it or not all passenger airplanes do go for a maintenance or transit check between each flight, obviously the time this takes is dependent on the size of the plane and the length of the flight.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
Longer missions, possibly with slightly better rewards would make it more effective.
Reduced cool down or maintenance would mean I could slot those ships sooner after they'd finished a task but with longer mission times it would still be limited in how much could be farmed or exploited.
I mean you can slot all the 15 min tasks you want but you'll quickly run out of ship after only a few hours. So longer times would not actually negatively affect most players, only those with tonnes of ships.
Maybe change the wording from maintenance to traveling back to Starbase or something like that.
The difference is several threads complaining about it for no good reason. Some people are not capable of imagining "maintenance" as anything but the ship sitting in drydock even when advised by more creative individuals. Simply not using the word "maintenance" would take the wind out of their sails.
While that certain thread complains that Voyager went 7 years without "maintenance" (read:drydock), nobody can contest that it was also 7 years on cooldown before the admiralty got it back.
It kinda follows a 24h schedule for the highest tier ships, so you can use your best cards once a day and then do lesser tasks more often with your leftover lower tier ships.
If anything, I'd recommend a series of usability improvements (i.e. view card info in ship info somewhere, so you can check the card before buying the ship), an "available/on mission/in maintenance" filter, and a "permanent/consumable" filter in the roster (i'd REALLY like to avoid accidentally using consumable cards when I don't need to, so I can keep them for the tough tasks). Maybe make T1 ships not count towards "alone" bonus (so you can i.e. use a dreadnought, with its own bonus, along with a small ship for extra crit chance).
Romulans would have 1 more shuttle than either faction they all with (scorpion fighter in the c-store) since they can use all of their allied faction's shuttles as they're tier 2 ships.
Federation have a lot of shuttles.
Lobi store shuttles aren't worth the cost, especially since there is so little shuttle content to use them in and even the EC shuttles are more than enough for it.
Shuttles would have to have less than T1 stats, so they would end up pretty useless. That's probably why they weren't included in the system in the first place.
If instead of fixed 2 upcoming assignments we had a choice of, say, one likely to be low-risk, low-reward one, one that's has a chance to fail even with the best ships but high-reward, and one "specialized" (high in one stat, low in two others) there would always be something you can do even if all your T6s and T5s are in maintenance. Oh, and some form of notification for completed maintenance.
- Hard cap of requirements to make them theoretically possible to fulfill under consideration the current ships available.
Other than that I begin to like the system more each time I tend to it.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
This isn't a big issue. As soon as I see an assignment I can't or won't commit to, i'll just send a T1 ship to fail it. These are usually short ones.
I agree. The Galaxy ships (and Negh'Var and possibly D'Ds) for example should get boni when they're alone as the Explorers are designed to operate without support and as you said command cruisers thrive in company as do frigates and raiders.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
the thing is as many players cant see is there are going to be some missions that are a sure thing regardless of the ships you use, some missions that using the right ships is going to be crucial to the success of the mission and some missions where its up to chance whether you win or loose.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.
you should not be buying the ships just because the cards more favourable but because you want the ship and if you do want the ship the stats on the card should make very little difference but at the end of the day be just an added bonus.
having said that keep your eyes on stowiki, theres bound to be a rundown of ship cards and their stats very soon.
actually ship cards open up a whole new avenue of potential event rewards and random giveaways, I foresee permanent versions of the 1Xcard you sometimes get from admiralty rewards now, so players could end up with quite large collections of cards without the need to buy any ships at all.
When I think about everything we've been through together,
maybe it's not the destination that matters, maybe it's the journey,
and if that journey takes a little longer,
so we can do something we all believe in,
I can't think of any place I'd rather be or any people I'd rather be with.