The simple fact is they want people playing on Holodeck, NOT Tribble. Even I'm aware that some people play only on Tribble just so they don't have to pay ANYTHING to upgrade or make any effort to farm Marks. Disabling the C-Store was a wise and sound move for their finances. It was costing them money to have the C-Store enabled.
There is only one way they 'could' have C-Store ships in Tribble for a 'test-drive' and that's to put the ships on a one time, time-constrained purchase of say 30 minutes, and then the ship is locked out and deleted from the Character, with all the equipment returned to the player's inventory.
However, it's clear policy that Tribble is a test-server for content only, not including ships. If you want to know how a ship performs, ask the players, but be aware that views will be varied.
"You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
The simple fact is they want people playing on Holodeck, NOT Tribble. Even I'm aware that some people play only on Tribble just so they don't have to pay ANYTHING to upgrade or make any effort to farm Marks. Disabling the C-Store was a wise and sound move for their finances. It was costing them money to have the C-Store enabled.
There is only one way they 'could' have C-Store ships in Tribble for a 'test-drive' and that's to put the ships on a one time, time-constrained purchase of say 30 minutes, and then the ship is locked out and deleted from the Character, with all the equipment returned to the player's inventory.
However, it's clear policy that Tribble is a test-server for content only, not including ships. If you want to know how a ship performs, ask the players, but be aware that views will be varied.
It's far more than a test-server for content only. It can be a test-server for your character's build as well. Cryptic has kindly provided all you need with this clearly in mind... unlimited free respecs, gear upgrades, instant leveling, rep gear, etc. Thinking about a build, respec or equipment purchase? Transfer your toon to Tribble today (and join a Tribble fleet as well) to test your build first... everything you need is right there at Drozana Station.
Meh, if Cryptic doesn't want to allow test drives for whatever reason (ex. managing a entirely separate C-store for tribble) I don't think there's much of an argument here in repeating "but I want it!"
I never said once said "but I want it!" I was trying to positively focus on what Tribble can provide to players, but did suggest they could show some innovation.
For this to be an innovation it has to be new. That's basic to the definition. It would be more descriptive to call ship testing a reversion though I think facilitation touches on the more pertinent context of this being a QoL feature intended to help some people make more informed purchasing decisions. To that:
You or me may simply not need test drives. "We" has you speaking for the entire player base. I agree completely with you that it would be nice feature for some people and that there's a lot in STO that fits under this same category.
This is a bit of a stock argument, focusing on the word "we," assuming that I was projecting my singular interests onto a population (which is done to give the appearance mob support for opinion, a common tactic on forums) as opposed to making a literal statement about the STO population given STO itself. What you should be more concerned with is the word "need." Ship testing is not a mechanical requirement of the game. A test can provide supplemental information but even in the context of someone for whom that info would be very useful, its not a reliable check against incorrectly estimating a ship's usefulness or long term appeal (especially in this context.)
A test cannot provide full replication for ownership, this is pretty basic. It only provides a limited suit of information that must be accurately processed (complete with an understanding for how that test was limited) in order to be useful.
The skills most vital to accurately assessing a potential ship purchase are the same as evaluating it from stats alone. Ie. considering build possibilities in the critical context of your knowledge about the game. If someone lacks sufficient knowledge then they are unlikely to be able to appreciate the full implications of their test driving experience. Thus, the test drive does little address the problem which ultimately precipitated the question.
So do we keep petitioning Cryptic to double back on a firm decision, in spite of the standing logic behind it, to advocate for something that can, at best, perform a validation on reasonable projections and, at worst, totally mislead someone about a ship's performance potential and long term appeal if their build was wrong in that critical moment of testing? Logic would say no, so hold onto the test driving idea as "something Cryptic has very likely seen through this thread and will make some determination on, if they haven't already" and dig into the broader problem of helping to educate players in how to best evaluate ships without major development action (which you can't guarantee for them.) Take them (ie. anyone needing a test drive) through your own logic, ask into their builds, respect their preferences, and work with them to arrive at a "yay/nay" more definitive than could be had from some limited toodling.
You may have done that in other cases, but you did not reach out to the OP like that here.
Uncritical support for a topic doesn't help its implementation except through chance convergence. Be more open to debating the weaknesses of an idea (it's fair to say you haven't earnestly engaged with most of what I've posted), as that will help deal with problems that may factor in higher level discussions, and think more critically about how best to help someone with a stated need (maybe there's more you can do for them. You gave general advice about the test console, good start, but there's still more to add to the productive topic of "should I buy a DSD?" if you have build help experience.)
It's far more than a test-server for content only. It can be a test-server for your character's build as well. Cryptic has kindly provided all you need with this clearly in mind... unlimited free respecs, gear upgrades, instant leveling, rep gear, etc. Thinking about a build, respec or equipment purchase? Transfer your toon to Tribble today (and join a Tribble fleet as well) to test your build first... everything you need is right there at Drozana Station.
They provided those services in time with system revamps that required them. To say "clearly in mind" regarding character testing is an unsubstantiated presumption using an antithetical qualification (you literally do not have that information.) You may be able to infer that by leaving these services in that Cryptic probably does not mind character testing, but that still shouldn't be immediately taken (without input from the devs) as an affirmative that can extend to other instances of testing (to which there is a much more definite negative: they removed c-store ship testing.)
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
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!
...nothing whatsoever. I've pointed out what can be achieved on Tribble twice, for those folks who may not be aware of what services the server offers. I suggested Cryptic could possibly show some innovation which is a pretty general term that was left open ended. I am not petitioning them in any way. That was the OP.
it's fair to say you haven't earnestly engaged with most of what I've posted
That's absolutely correct. At this point I'm sorry to have engaged at all. Look at your previous post. A fella could stay up past his bedtime trying to address all that and miss out on some game time as well. Perhaps you could you keep your responses shorter?
Take them through your own logic, ask into their builds, respect those choices, and work with them to arrive at a "yay/nay" more definitive than could be had from some limited toodling. You may have done that in other cases, but you did not reach out to the OP like that here.
This is not a ship build or advice thread. We are in the Tribble section of the forums. The OP is welcome to start a Dyson Ship opinion/build/viability thread.
Uncritical support for a topic doesn't help its implementation except through chance convergence. Be more open to debating the weaknesses of an idea [...], as that will help deal with problems that may factor in higher level discussions, and think more critically about how best to help someone with a stated need (maybe there's more you can do for them.
Perhaps you could be more open to not always assuming somebody wants to beat a topic to death? Sometimes folks just want to add their quick 2 EC and not analyze a topic down to it's finest nuance. Could you be seeing debate where none exists? Or are you just a master-debater?
They provided those services in time with system revamps that required them. To say "clearly in mind" regarding character testing is an unsubstantiated presumption (you literally do not have that information). You may be able to infer that by leaving these services there that Cryptic probably does not mind character testing, but that still shouldn't be taken (without input from the devs) as an affirmative that can extend to other instances of testing (to which there is a much more definite negative: they removed c-store ship testing.)
I was simply stating how a player could take advantage of what is offered in case they weren't aware of said services. Unlimited respecs, upgrades, instant leveling, quick completion of reps, and the latest rep's gear being outright available is still something you can make use of. This is the important part. Debating whether "the availability of these character testing services is or is not an affirmative that can extend to other instances of testing" or other "unsubstantiated presumptions" is the unimportant part, to me at least.
*Looks at watch in horror with the dawning realization that over a dozen toons are now over 45 minutes out of sync with the latest event*
"Innovation" is, by simple definition, not what a policy reversion is and the chances of it happening are very low considering that the logic behind disabling the c-store is probably still intact. Simply supporting the idea without critical analysis is not likely to help the OP, which is why I suggested reaching out with alternative suggestions in light of a clearly stated need. Thus, they may be able to get some help relevant to their OP irrespective of what the devs choose to do.
It's ultimately your choice to provide that kind of help on top of discussion (best I could do was refer him to build threads), but there's better alternatives than simply trying to contradict someone who's laid out some simple points which you've made the choice of not replying to (though you have chosen to reply to me as an individual never the less. Note the disconnect and try to learn from it. You have the choice of not replying back to someone if you don't want to enter into a particular discussion. You may want to have your two cents but that is in the context of a forum, where others may want to give as much or more to discussion. The operative phrase is "pick your battles." Points can very evidently stand without seeing to those who disagree with it.)
Not going to engage with the rest, I think my last post plus the little addendum here is as much as could be reasonably said by me on this tangent.
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
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!
Simply supporting the idea without critical analysis is not likely to help the OP
I can't rightly recall supporting the idea. Critical analysis is something that forum posters don't necessarily want to always engage in. Other types of input are valid, even if they may not meet your particular standards. We've been down this road before.
It's ultimately your choice to provide that kind of help on top of discussion[...], but there's better alternatives than simply trying to contradict someone who's laid out some simple points which you've made the choice of not replying to (though you have chosen to reply to me as an individual never the less. Note the disconnect and try to learn from it. You have the choice of not replying back to someone if you don't want to enter into a particular discussion. You may want to have your two cents but that is in the context of a forum, where others may want to give as much or more to discussion. The operative phrase is "pick your battles." Points can very evidently stand without seeing to those who disagree with it.)
How about incentivizing the bean counters to allow us to test drive ships from the C-Store? Using holodeck technology, a captain could preform a "combat trial" in a new ship, with the ability to fit it out how they want, for the cost of a token obtained from the C-store.
Buy tokens as a single, or pack of ten, like how they do keys. Each token can be redeemed, let's say at the shipyard for the Klingons, the holodeck training center at the academy for the Feds, and the flotilla for the Roms. It would allow you to choose one C-store ship per token, and you could drag and drop gear from your inventory. Alternately, allow clicking on an empty gear slot to open the usual menu, and you can choose from any item from all mission and reputation sets. Once fitted out, with bridge officers assigned, you can start the mission. Want to fly the same ship with a different fit or bridge officer selection, it will cost you a token.
There is a sub-Reddit dedicated to STO builds, and you can consult it for ideas before dropping tokens. You could even submit your findings there to help others.
They make a wondrous mess of things. Brave amateurs, they do their part.
Comments
There is only one way they 'could' have C-Store ships in Tribble for a 'test-drive' and that's to put the ships on a one time, time-constrained purchase of say 30 minutes, and then the ship is locked out and deleted from the Character, with all the equipment returned to the player's inventory.
However, it's clear policy that Tribble is a test-server for content only, not including ships. If you want to know how a ship performs, ask the players, but be aware that views will be varied.
This is a bit of a stock argument, focusing on the word "we," assuming that I was projecting my singular interests onto a population (which is done to give the appearance mob support for opinion, a common tactic on forums) as opposed to making a literal statement about the STO population given STO itself. What you should be more concerned with is the word "need." Ship testing is not a mechanical requirement of the game. A test can provide supplemental information but even in the context of someone for whom that info would be very useful, its not a reliable check against incorrectly estimating a ship's usefulness or long term appeal (especially in this context.)
A test cannot provide full replication for ownership, this is pretty basic. It only provides a limited suit of information that must be accurately processed (complete with an understanding for how that test was limited) in order to be useful.
The skills most vital to accurately assessing a potential ship purchase are the same as evaluating it from stats alone. Ie. considering build possibilities in the critical context of your knowledge about the game. If someone lacks sufficient knowledge then they are unlikely to be able to appreciate the full implications of their test driving experience. Thus, the test drive does little address the problem which ultimately precipitated the question.
So do we keep petitioning Cryptic to double back on a firm decision, in spite of the standing logic behind it, to advocate for something that can, at best, perform a validation on reasonable projections and, at worst, totally mislead someone about a ship's performance potential and long term appeal if their build was wrong in that critical moment of testing? Logic would say no, so hold onto the test driving idea as "something Cryptic has very likely seen through this thread and will make some determination on, if they haven't already" and dig into the broader problem of helping to educate players in how to best evaluate ships without major development action (which you can't guarantee for them.) Take them (ie. anyone needing a test drive) through your own logic, ask into their builds, respect their preferences, and work with them to arrive at a "yay/nay" more definitive than could be had from some limited toodling.
You may have done that in other cases, but you did not reach out to the OP like that here.
Uncritical support for a topic doesn't help its implementation except through chance convergence. Be more open to debating the weaknesses of an idea (it's fair to say you haven't earnestly engaged with most of what I've posted), as that will help deal with problems that may factor in higher level discussions, and think more critically about how best to help someone with a stated need (maybe there's more you can do for them. You gave general advice about the test console, good start, but there's still more to add to the productive topic of "should I buy a DSD?" if you have build help experience.)
They provided those services in time with system revamps that required them. To say "clearly in mind" regarding character testing is an unsubstantiated presumption using an antithetical qualification (you literally do not have that information.) You may be able to infer that by leaving these services in that Cryptic probably does not mind character testing, but that still shouldn't be immediately taken (without input from the devs) as an affirmative that can extend to other instances of testing (to which there is a much more definite negative: they removed c-store ship testing.)
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!
That's absolutely correct. At this point I'm sorry to have engaged at all. Look at your previous post. A fella could stay up past his bedtime trying to address all that and miss out on some game time as well. Perhaps you could you keep your responses shorter?
This is not a ship build or advice thread. We are in the Tribble section of the forums. The OP is welcome to start a Dyson Ship opinion/build/viability thread.
Perhaps you could be more open to not always assuming somebody wants to beat a topic to death? Sometimes folks just want to add their quick 2 EC and not analyze a topic down to it's finest nuance. Could you be seeing debate where none exists? Or are you just a master-debater?
I was simply stating how a player could take advantage of what is offered in case they weren't aware of said services. Unlimited respecs, upgrades, instant leveling, quick completion of reps, and the latest rep's gear being outright available is still something you can make use of. This is the important part. Debating whether "the availability of these character testing services is or is not an affirmative that can extend to other instances of testing" or other "unsubstantiated presumptions" is the unimportant part, to me at least.
*Looks at watch in horror with the dawning realization that over a dozen toons are now over 45 minutes out of sync with the latest event*
"Innovation" is, by simple definition, not what a policy reversion is and the chances of it happening are very low considering that the logic behind disabling the c-store is probably still intact. Simply supporting the idea without critical analysis is not likely to help the OP, which is why I suggested reaching out with alternative suggestions in light of a clearly stated need. Thus, they may be able to get some help relevant to their OP irrespective of what the devs choose to do.
It's ultimately your choice to provide that kind of help on top of discussion (best I could do was refer him to build threads), but there's better alternatives than simply trying to contradict someone who's laid out some simple points which you've made the choice of not replying to (though you have chosen to reply to me as an individual never the less. Note the disconnect and try to learn from it. You have the choice of not replying back to someone if you don't want to enter into a particular discussion. You may want to have your two cents but that is in the context of a forum, where others may want to give as much or more to discussion. The operative phrase is "pick your battles." Points can very evidently stand without seeing to those who disagree with it.)
Not going to engage with the rest, I think my last post plus the little addendum here is as much as could be reasonably said by me on this tangent.
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!
The term "it's a two way street" comes to mind.
I agree.
Buy tokens as a single, or pack of ten, like how they do keys. Each token can be redeemed, let's say at the shipyard for the Klingons, the holodeck training center at the academy for the Feds, and the flotilla for the Roms. It would allow you to choose one C-store ship per token, and you could drag and drop gear from your inventory. Alternately, allow clicking on an empty gear slot to open the usual menu, and you can choose from any item from all mission and reputation sets. Once fitted out, with bridge officers assigned, you can start the mission. Want to fly the same ship with a different fit or bridge officer selection, it will cost you a token.
There is a sub-Reddit dedicated to STO builds, and you can consult it for ideas before dropping tokens. You could even submit your findings there to help others.
They make a wondrous mess of things. Brave amateurs, they do their part.