how big was the dominion alliance fleet that attacked DS9 again? moreover, how big was the AQA fleet sent to retake DS9? and that's just star trek - hundreds of ships against one target is COMMON in sci-fi
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Cherry picking again? Not a Lore issue, it is a stupid mechanic issue. They don't know what to do so they invent or use something out in left field and then have to neuter it in other ways.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Who says they actually are? STO is a video game, and has video game mechanics. Gameplay =/= lore.
Actually games work best when gameplay and lore compliment each other. Sometimes compromises are necessary but such should be taken as a fallback rather than a general rule to minimize criticisms (because regardless of how much handwaving a developer may invoke through "it's a game" the fact is there's a literal presentation which at the very least isn't acting in service of a story telling experience. The basic point there being: the TFO doesn't work as well as it could if either gameplay or story were changed to avoid the unleveraged disconnect between them [STO probably best opting for the latter. Ie. writing scenarios with greater imperative or with different villains or villain ship types which promote hording tactics. See as a counterpoint: the Hur'Q TFO's and battlezone in ViL.] If such is [hyperbolically] absolutely impossible then other scenarios which better compliment faction tactics should be selected instead [exhibiting lore through gameplay to augment the story telling. Ie. make the game function better.])
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!
If it's a good one and people love it, why would they they make it not do what it's supposed to do - give XP? Patrols give a varying amount of XP per ship destroyed depending on the type of ship (you know what they are supposed to do because that's what Starship Mastery is about). They also give (Argala) about 5K XP for Patrol completion.
For TFOs they either have to give a small amount (but some) of XP per ship destroyed or a larger amount of XP for TFO completion, preferably both.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
The Argala Patrol farming works via an exploit as well. Cryptic should really change the way patrol timers are done so it triggers regardless of if you complete the patrol or not, maybe by tying it to entering the patrol in the first place, but not having the timer actually start until you leave the map? Not sure what the best way to close that loophole would be.
'Loophole / exploit' ? We must be living on different planets...
'Loophole / exploit' ? We must be living on different planets...
Playing the patrol, then leaving before you turn it in, order to get it to reset so you can play it again without having to wait for the 30 minute cooldown is an exploit. Period.
Confirmed: we actually are living on different planets.
Well, when a Featured TFO is not Featured it is subject to the 30 Minute Lockout. If this leaving and reentering was deemed to be an exploit by Cryptic they would have banned people and fixed it by now. People have been talking about it for years.
By the way, for Mastery, I finish a Patrol and do other things and let the timer reset. The last ship I was in, a Walker, it took me over 3 weeks to finish up to Tier V.
Besides which, in the case of Argala, each round has about 5 ships that give between some 39 and 179 XP each. For simplicities sake, let's say 4 small and 1 large ship per round so 335 XP per round. For the ~5200 XP you get for Patrol completion you'd have to run almost 16 waves, or 4 incomplete runs. Doesn't seem a very efficient way of doing things to me.
I think that this reset is not consistent. The other night I had Destroy Destructible Torpedoes for a Hard Endeavor. I did Carraya, went into Undine BZ, and Carraya again. The problem is the Republic Ships destroy the Torps too, and they DON'T count. On the second run in Carraya, I left after 4 rounds looking to find another Patrol in the Wiki. No others had Romulans. Went back in and it was still at 4/5. I ended with 18/19 Torpedoes for the night (a fail) and had to quit.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Actually games work best when gameplay and lore compliment each other.
Generally no. Gameplay is fundamentally limited by technology, while lore can be whatever you want since its just information. Making gameplay and lore compliment each other requires neutering your lore to fit the limits of gameplay which just creates a more bland and uninspired game world to play in.
It is one of the most fundamental principles of design that one uses gameplay in ways which are complimentary to lore (ie. setting) to create an interactive experience which in some way immerses the player (per feeling) into what they're doing. The operative term you probably want to refer to is ludonarrative dissonance, you're suggesting games work best when it's total. TBH that narrows you down to the likes of Tetris. This is not a functional argument with respect to STO.
Because of technical limitations one cannot replicate an immersive reality but this by no means whatsoever (per fallacy of the extreme, which is what your point comes down to) suggests that one cannot use different elements of a video game in ways which compliment one another. Take for an easily digestible example: combat in fantasy RPG's. Weapon choice is grounded in the available tools set by lore and so quite directly established elements of that lore without extensive lectures on why this pocket dimension happened to arrive at the mid-medieval period. Complex worldbuilding dynamics are simply conveyed through how the game works and this extends through all aspects of gameplay design. Take for example: ships in STO. They do not command like "real" starships (though that would hardly be immersive to the experience of Star Trek in other media...) but their presence in the game is used to help communicate points of lore, ie. the setting. See also. weapons, shields and combat (integrated with lore while optimized for gameplay.) When done well gameplay and story work together to build the perceived experience of the video game.
What you state as a requirement simply seems disconnected from practices in the industry and the game we're playing now (which references lore to inform gameplay design. Remember what you said about "bland and uninspired.") I think you're simply trying to set a standard for all elements being isolated unto themselves and thus problems of integration have no place in discussion (a non-entity can't be criticized.)
Except there is no literal presentation in video games.
Simple correction here: the literal presentation of a video game is what is literally depicted by that game. Ie. what it directly entails. Video games themselves aren't literal but one can examine the presentation (within conceits and mechanics) and its direct effects. Ex. if a ship is seen to explode, one can infer that it has exploded. How it explodes isn't real but that state change can be inferred by what you see on screen.
STO doesn't exist in a convenient miasma where any given action can be taken to mean whatever you want it to per convenience. See. below.
Except it does make sense that the Terrans or Klingons would send this many ships to Pahvo, given its ability to be turned into a plant sized super-weapon akin to the Deathstar(you know, the whole reason we stopped Killy in the story missions, and the Terrans in the other Pahvo TFO)
Except that it was very directly established by specific plot points in the Mirror of Discovery episodes that neither side was able to do this. The Terrans were unsuccessful in sending reinforcements to Pahvo (at least without taking massive losses) and the Klingon attack force consisted of those ships in the region which were accidentally transported by the original incident. They didn't have the capability to dimension hop themselves. This is important because it provided the mechanics to resolve the episode.
The TFO's doubled back on that to continue the fighting but that at once overcomplicates and simplifies the scenario to a simple invasion. Cutting the exposition RE. Klingon origin and Terran troubles with spore drive would have arrived at the intended destination more simply. In this, the game is not using its lore effectively. It can be improved. Now lets look at the mechanics. The simplified wave structure depicts quite directly that while the Terran Empire and DSC Klingons have opted to send more ships (somehow with ease enough to supply the number) they're doing so through isolated waves aimed squarely at the most defensible position at the system. They have opted to overcome 25th century technical superiority in the same way that was demonstrated not to work in the original encounter. This doesn't demonstrate the tactics for which both sides are said to possess (and exhibited in some fashion during the MoD episodes) and undermines the appreciation of lore/setting through gameplay (ie. an integral component of effective game design.)
These are definitely gameplay conceits but taken to the extreme of not referencing story or setting beyond nominal elements. Ie. it's not very good. To make use of the scenario to its fullest a new queue would have been required. That wasn't possible though, so this is what we have. But one can still examine the dynamics for why Peril over Pahvo doesn't work as well as other TFO's (if you're willing to maintain that there's some basis to discussion, ie. the potential for comparative analysis) in spite of being the product of forced circumstances (though that's eschewing further critical analysis about how to make better content even under limited timelines.) See: learning. The lesson here is that reskinning a TFO which originally stated as a highly generalized invasion scenario doesn't make the most of its story telling potential when applied more specifically. It thereby presents a reduced gameplay experience to one where gameplay elements and lore were more in sync (ex. Battle at Binary.)
Go figure.
In future the problem can be addressed by choosing queues for reskins from STO's large library which present less of a narrative disconnect with gameplay. When Cryptic designs new queues they're typically very good at weaving setting (ie. lore) into the gameplay scenario.
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!
One CAN compliment the lore via the gameplay, and, if it makes for good gameplay, then do it. But in a video game, gameplay comes before everything else. Be it graphics, sound, lore, etc. One should never attempt to sacrifice better gameplay to make the gameplay more fitting with the lore, one should only meld the two when necessarily appropriate. The gameplay shouldn't be designed to fit the lore as a necessity, or as a benchmark, but only when it makes for better gameplay.
Let me stop you here for a moment, this is a very personal belief (counter to what you just said but let's roll with it) and one wide of the thread. There are times where designers might (and indeed do) sacrifice elements of gameplay for the sake of immersion (ie. internal world building and lore.)
The original issue isn't that Peril Over Pahvo might has sacrifice some element of its gameplay for the sake of lore, it's that gameplay and lore are disconnected. Ie. that there are hordes of terran/Klingon ships which for all intents and purposes are presenting an arbitrary combat challenge to nominally fit within the Pahvo invasion scenario.
There are better ways of handling this in writing, in gameplay, or both.
Except Mirror of Discovery only has us kicking Killy out. As we see in the second mission of Mirror of Discovery, her actions opened portals to the past, and the Mirror Universe, and fragments of a very large ship, aka the Charon, began falling through. These pieces, post mission, crashed on the planet, and the Terrans still in them are now attempting to take over Pahvo to turn it into a base like Killy was, leading to "Pahvo Dissension". Likewise, these same portals to the past, and the Mirror Universe, are how these Klingon and Terran forces are coming into Pahvo during the TFO. This is a direct continuation of plot points established in the episode itself that you seemed to miss despite them beating you over the head with them.
The Styx dreadnaught cruisers (you see one crashed in the background of the ground queue) were Killy's reinforcements but she was ultimately unsuccessful in replicating with them what Discovery was able to do (see. specific writing regarding that ship and its function.) This explains why despite holding onto Pahvo her reinforcements were greatly limited and focused planet-side (leaving the residual Klingon armada to be the major threat in space.)
The first Pahvo queue fit within that remit (hey, we missed some down there!) but the second works by mechanics which run counter to what was established by the episodes. It took the additional conceit of residual weakness in space/time that allowed Terrans and Klingons (who had only been incidentally dragged through Killy's anomaly before, note their absence with the ground queue) to come back for an arbitrary space-born invasion scenario. Considering that this queue wasn't listed on the roadmap, it's reasonable to speculate that the original writing plan did not include Peril over Pahvo and it was the need to fill time in the calendar that spurred Cryptic to repurpose another queue for a fight where one didn't need to be. Enter doubling back on the premise, limiting reskin (not even the lighting was changed), and the story/gameplay disconnect.
The necessary compromises to get this queue out as a reskin resulted in direct drawbacks, described variously and here in terms of the integration of core elements. As it turns out, Cryptic does better when they have more time (though there's ways they can better economize in future, if need be.)
Your second paragraph shows your inability to separate good gameplay from presentation and lore. No, it doesn't make sense that all the shield generators would be in one small spot, nor that the Klingons or Terrans would only attack that one spot, which happens to be the most defensible. However, the only other alternatives would create gameplay situations that would make the TFO impossible.
Alternatives such as flipping the invasion scenario to a fortified Terran/Klingon beachhead some distance away from the planet which we 1. take (see. first combat encounter) and then 2. defend while science teams disable the generators allowing for reinforcements to hop dimensions. This was just off the top of my head and would have only required moving the scenario forward, flipping the assets of the defense targets to ships, and playing with a few portal FX. The hordes would also fit under the category of desperation which could be referenced (and made use of for tone and context) in character dialog. It would have also allowed on some innovation over Dranuur Gauntlet by changing attack angles between waves (front and back would be viable routes of attack.)
You're talking in extremes of convenience and I don't think that's likely to produce productive discourse.
Not really. The gameplay and story points in both the original Dranuur Gauntlet, and the Peril over Pahvo, work equally as well in both situations because it is the same story, and the means by which the enemy attacks, and the best way to defend the planet, would still be the same in both situations. At least in the best way for a game to depict such an attack.
They function the same because each is presenting a faction-agnostic combat encounter. They don't work well though per the benchmark set by other queues (see. complimenting gameplay with lore.) For example: Undine Assault, the Swarm, and Defense of Starbase One (Note your words: "best way." Demonstrably from STO itself, there are viable alternatives to Dranuur's particular planetary defense scenarios.)
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!
You seem to enjoy arguing with everyone about anything and everything. I made a point that this TFO stinks for Starship Mastery and you turn it into an Exploitopalooza discussion.
There is NOTHING you can conjur up to convince me that a 15 or so Minute slugfest should net you about 10% of Mastery on TIER I DURING A DOUBLE XP WEEKEND. PERIOD.
They seem to not be able to do or consider things consistently. If the number of ships and their 'quality' is important to leveling Mastery, then the number of ships and 'quality' should be important. This shouldn't be a Papa, Moma, or Baby Bear situation.
If the number of ships is low, as in Crystalline, you don't get much Mastery out of it. If you have a sh*t-ton of ships, as we have here, then you should get much. A target is a target; adjust the XP if you need to some lesser level, but you'd better be giving XP for killing a ship because that's what it's suppose to do. Otherwise, you've incompetently set the thing up to begin with.
Look at what has been going on with the Endeavors. Constant adjustments. Oh, Kill Herald Ships, oops only Raiders count. Go through 'Delta Flight' for the Kill Herald Ship Endeavor and NONE count. Allied Benham Crusier Tetryon damage counts for your Endeavor, but Allied Republic Warships killing destructible Torpedoes does not. Kill Anthropods on Nimbus III and they count, kill them on New Romulus and they don't, or vice versa.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
'Loophole / exploit' ? We must be living on different planets...
Playing the patrol, then leaving before you turn it in, order to get it to reset so you can play it again without having to wait for the 30 minute cooldown is an exploit. Period.
If you call that an exploit then buying booster packs (XP, etc) in that perspective are definitely exploits. Because people can level faster etc.
Do you now understand the no-sense in your remarks, or still not?
Repeatedly patrolling Argola is not an exploit, period!
You dont get the marks when aborting, just the xp you rightfully earned.
The constant 14 day grind once a month is becoming a major problem, grind grind grind. not good for players who cant do this EVERY month. I will be soooo happy when wednesday is over.
Change these to 7 days - They would be far more tolorable!.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Except Defense of Starbase One works in the exact same narrative manner as Peril over Pahvo, and makes just as much sense as the other.... what on bloody Earth are you even going on about?
If you can't keep things to a civil tone there's really not point in carrying on with attempted discussion. You may not agree with the criticisms of this TFO but arguing for an ever-shifting negation of those criticisms, their underlying perspective, and their principles is not productive.
I went back to the blogs, I did err with the Cheron (never considered that they'd try linking the two events, mission dialog I simply assumed was referring to the Styx as being massive.) That said this only changes the ship type (Charon v. Styx), NOT the mechanics of the original writing (Pahvo Dissent is still an encounter dealing with planet-side remnants). Note that...
"The entire scenario you present makes no sense. Even Mirror Leeta was only able to establish a fortified holding in our universe by using an Orb to cross dimensions. Where would the Disco era Terrans, or the Klingons, get such a power source to drag something to Pahvo?"
...would also invalidate Peril over Pahvo. Per the blog:
The planet Pahvo has been a flashpoint of late, particularly after a recent trans-dimensional temporal event. Forces from the year 2256 (and two universes) have found their way to Pahvo through spatial aftershocks, and are hell-bent on conquering the enigmatic world.
These fleets have found a way back to Pahvo despite the resolution and limitations found in previous episodes. A new mechanic (spatial aftershocks) have been invoked to justify this combat encounter. As an aside, any mechanism that would let the Terrans or Klingons exploit this power would fit the needs of my hypothetical alternative queue just fine (which you lept at for the sake of reflexive contradiction but I'll let that exchange speak for itself.) This presents an immediate disconnect between story telling and gameplay (see. doubling back for an arbitrary combat scenario which is a literal reskin of a separate encounter to fill a hole in a schedule which may not have been originally planned for) which you say either doesn't exist or isn't important (whatever lets you stamp down on folks and minimize their concerns most easily.)
PS. Saying that Defense of Starbase One is the same narrative manner is quite frankly incorrect. The defense objectives have different functions in each queue, different distributions, different cadence, different modes of enemy deployment, and different strategies which work together to cause these queues to not only play quite differently to each other (fundamentally) but also tell different stories through those mechanics (a point for synergistic gameplay/lore integration in the case of DoSO.) One is holding the line in a siege by displaced (ie. context-less) forces while the other is defending an evacuation in the style of a realized combat encounter, emphasizing priorities between factions (very different contexts within the umbrella of a defense scenario. Perhaps by overgeneralizing you can wash out these differences but such is counter to critical analysis.)
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!
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!
Thank you for the info! Let's hope the fix will come in time for the next featured stf.
While I may agree that it shouldn't give you a massive amount of XP per kills, it's also totally unfair to give none.
Not agreeing with someone doesn't give you the right to be an TRIBBLE.
Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
- quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;
Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.
I'm just glad i'm only 1 day off from the reward.
These 14- day featured TFO are draining. Let it run for two weeks and 7 tickets or 3 weeks/10 tickets.
Running a TFO across all levels 14 times with the many afk-er "time efficient" players and leveling players is simply not a fun ride.
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
Except it does make sense that the Terrans or Klingons would send this many ships to Pahvo, given its ability to be turned into a plant sized super-weapon akin to the Deathstar(you know, the whole reason we stopped Killy in the story missions, and the Terrans in the other Pahvo TFO)
Even with Cryptic giving the Disco Terrans/klingons a way to enter the 25th century at will, it makes absolutely no sense for them to pointlessly waste their ships against a prepared 25th century defense force that hilariously outguns them.
And then there's the temporal repercussions of the scenario. As long as it was just Killy who got here by accident and presumably never makes it back to the 23rd century to tell anyone, all is good. But if the Disco Terrans and klingons know about Pahvo, why don't they go take it over in their own time when nobody's there to guard it, instead of mounting an attack in the future that's about as effective as the Pirates of the Caribbean taking on a modern carrier group?
Also make a note, as noted in the original series and on discovery, every time one of us went to their alternate reality our counterparts came here. so every time they send a ship to us the counterparts in our reality get shifted to their reality unless they found a way to counteract this effect.
Not agreeing with someone doesn't give you the right to be an TRIBBLE.
Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
- quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;
Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.
Comments
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Actually games work best when gameplay and lore compliment each other. Sometimes compromises are necessary but such should be taken as a fallback rather than a general rule to minimize criticisms (because regardless of how much handwaving a developer may invoke through "it's a game" the fact is there's a literal presentation which at the very least isn't acting in service of a story telling experience. The basic point there being: the TFO doesn't work as well as it could if either gameplay or story were changed to avoid the unleveraged disconnect between them [STO probably best opting for the latter. Ie. writing scenarios with greater imperative or with different villains or villain ship types which promote hording tactics. See as a counterpoint: the Hur'Q TFO's and battlezone in ViL.] If such is [hyperbolically] absolutely impossible then other scenarios which better compliment faction tactics should be selected instead [exhibiting lore through gameplay to augment the story telling. Ie. make the game function better.])
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!
For TFOs they either have to give a small amount (but some) of XP per ship destroyed or a larger amount of XP for TFO completion, preferably both.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
By the way, for Mastery, I finish a Patrol and do other things and let the timer reset. The last ship I was in, a Walker, it took me over 3 weeks to finish up to Tier V.
Besides which, in the case of Argala, each round has about 5 ships that give between some 39 and 179 XP each. For simplicities sake, let's say 4 small and 1 large ship per round so 335 XP per round. For the ~5200 XP you get for Patrol completion you'd have to run almost 16 waves, or 4 incomplete runs. Doesn't seem a very efficient way of doing things to me.
I think that this reset is not consistent. The other night I had Destroy Destructible Torpedoes for a Hard Endeavor. I did Carraya, went into Undine BZ, and Carraya again. The problem is the Republic Ships destroy the Torps too, and they DON'T count. On the second run in Carraya, I left after 4 rounds looking to find another Patrol in the Wiki. No others had Romulans. Went back in and it was still at 4/5. I ended with 18/19 Torpedoes for the night (a fail) and had to quit.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
It is one of the most fundamental principles of design that one uses gameplay in ways which are complimentary to lore (ie. setting) to create an interactive experience which in some way immerses the player (per feeling) into what they're doing. The operative term you probably want to refer to is ludonarrative dissonance, you're suggesting games work best when it's total. TBH that narrows you down to the likes of Tetris. This is not a functional argument with respect to STO.
Because of technical limitations one cannot replicate an immersive reality but this by no means whatsoever (per fallacy of the extreme, which is what your point comes down to) suggests that one cannot use different elements of a video game in ways which compliment one another. Take for an easily digestible example: combat in fantasy RPG's. Weapon choice is grounded in the available tools set by lore and so quite directly established elements of that lore without extensive lectures on why this pocket dimension happened to arrive at the mid-medieval period. Complex worldbuilding dynamics are simply conveyed through how the game works and this extends through all aspects of gameplay design. Take for example: ships in STO. They do not command like "real" starships (though that would hardly be immersive to the experience of Star Trek in other media...) but their presence in the game is used to help communicate points of lore, ie. the setting. See also. weapons, shields and combat (integrated with lore while optimized for gameplay.) When done well gameplay and story work together to build the perceived experience of the video game.
What you state as a requirement simply seems disconnected from practices in the industry and the game we're playing now (which references lore to inform gameplay design. Remember what you said about "bland and uninspired.") I think you're simply trying to set a standard for all elements being isolated unto themselves and thus problems of integration have no place in discussion (a non-entity can't be criticized.)
Simple correction here: the literal presentation of a video game is what is literally depicted by that game. Ie. what it directly entails. Video games themselves aren't literal but one can examine the presentation (within conceits and mechanics) and its direct effects. Ex. if a ship is seen to explode, one can infer that it has exploded. How it explodes isn't real but that state change can be inferred by what you see on screen.
STO doesn't exist in a convenient miasma where any given action can be taken to mean whatever you want it to per convenience. See. below.
Except that it was very directly established by specific plot points in the Mirror of Discovery episodes that neither side was able to do this. The Terrans were unsuccessful in sending reinforcements to Pahvo (at least without taking massive losses) and the Klingon attack force consisted of those ships in the region which were accidentally transported by the original incident. They didn't have the capability to dimension hop themselves. This is important because it provided the mechanics to resolve the episode.
The TFO's doubled back on that to continue the fighting but that at once overcomplicates and simplifies the scenario to a simple invasion. Cutting the exposition RE. Klingon origin and Terran troubles with spore drive would have arrived at the intended destination more simply. In this, the game is not using its lore effectively. It can be improved. Now lets look at the mechanics. The simplified wave structure depicts quite directly that while the Terran Empire and DSC Klingons have opted to send more ships (somehow with ease enough to supply the number) they're doing so through isolated waves aimed squarely at the most defensible position at the system. They have opted to overcome 25th century technical superiority in the same way that was demonstrated not to work in the original encounter. This doesn't demonstrate the tactics for which both sides are said to possess (and exhibited in some fashion during the MoD episodes) and undermines the appreciation of lore/setting through gameplay (ie. an integral component of effective game design.)
These are definitely gameplay conceits but taken to the extreme of not referencing story or setting beyond nominal elements. Ie. it's not very good. To make use of the scenario to its fullest a new queue would have been required. That wasn't possible though, so this is what we have. But one can still examine the dynamics for why Peril over Pahvo doesn't work as well as other TFO's (if you're willing to maintain that there's some basis to discussion, ie. the potential for comparative analysis) in spite of being the product of forced circumstances (though that's eschewing further critical analysis about how to make better content even under limited timelines.) See: learning. The lesson here is that reskinning a TFO which originally stated as a highly generalized invasion scenario doesn't make the most of its story telling potential when applied more specifically. It thereby presents a reduced gameplay experience to one where gameplay elements and lore were more in sync (ex. Battle at Binary.)
Go figure.
In future the problem can be addressed by choosing queues for reskins from STO's large library which present less of a narrative disconnect with gameplay. When Cryptic designs new queues they're typically very good at weaving setting (ie. lore) into the gameplay scenario.
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 original issue isn't that Peril Over Pahvo might has sacrifice some element of its gameplay for the sake of lore, it's that gameplay and lore are disconnected. Ie. that there are hordes of terran/Klingon ships which for all intents and purposes are presenting an arbitrary combat challenge to nominally fit within the Pahvo invasion scenario.
There are better ways of handling this in writing, in gameplay, or both.
The Styx dreadnaught cruisers (you see one crashed in the background of the ground queue) were Killy's reinforcements but she was ultimately unsuccessful in replicating with them what Discovery was able to do (see. specific writing regarding that ship and its function.) This explains why despite holding onto Pahvo her reinforcements were greatly limited and focused planet-side (leaving the residual Klingon armada to be the major threat in space.)
The first Pahvo queue fit within that remit (hey, we missed some down there!) but the second works by mechanics which run counter to what was established by the episodes. It took the additional conceit of residual weakness in space/time that allowed Terrans and Klingons (who had only been incidentally dragged through Killy's anomaly before, note their absence with the ground queue) to come back for an arbitrary space-born invasion scenario. Considering that this queue wasn't listed on the roadmap, it's reasonable to speculate that the original writing plan did not include Peril over Pahvo and it was the need to fill time in the calendar that spurred Cryptic to repurpose another queue for a fight where one didn't need to be. Enter doubling back on the premise, limiting reskin (not even the lighting was changed), and the story/gameplay disconnect.
The necessary compromises to get this queue out as a reskin resulted in direct drawbacks, described variously and here in terms of the integration of core elements. As it turns out, Cryptic does better when they have more time (though there's ways they can better economize in future, if need be.)
Alternatives such as flipping the invasion scenario to a fortified Terran/Klingon beachhead some distance away from the planet which we 1. take (see. first combat encounter) and then 2. defend while science teams disable the generators allowing for reinforcements to hop dimensions. This was just off the top of my head and would have only required moving the scenario forward, flipping the assets of the defense targets to ships, and playing with a few portal FX. The hordes would also fit under the category of desperation which could be referenced (and made use of for tone and context) in character dialog. It would have also allowed on some innovation over Dranuur Gauntlet by changing attack angles between waves (front and back would be viable routes of attack.)
You're talking in extremes of convenience and I don't think that's likely to produce productive discourse.
They function the same because each is presenting a faction-agnostic combat encounter. They don't work well though per the benchmark set by other queues (see. complimenting gameplay with lore.) For example: Undine Assault, the Swarm, and Defense of Starbase One (Note your words: "best way." Demonstrably from STO itself, there are viable alternatives to Dranuur's particular planetary defense scenarios.)
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!
There is NOTHING you can conjur up to convince me that a 15 or so Minute slugfest should net you about 10% of Mastery on TIER I DURING A DOUBLE XP WEEKEND. PERIOD.
They seem to not be able to do or consider things consistently. If the number of ships and their 'quality' is important to leveling Mastery, then the number of ships and 'quality' should be important. This shouldn't be a Papa, Moma, or Baby Bear situation.
If the number of ships is low, as in Crystalline, you don't get much Mastery out of it. If you have a sh*t-ton of ships, as we have here, then you should get much. A target is a target; adjust the XP if you need to some lesser level, but you'd better be giving XP for killing a ship because that's what it's suppose to do. Otherwise, you've incompetently set the thing up to begin with.
Look at what has been going on with the Endeavors. Constant adjustments. Oh, Kill Herald Ships, oops only Raiders count. Go through 'Delta Flight' for the Kill Herald Ship Endeavor and NONE count. Allied Benham Crusier Tetryon damage counts for your Endeavor, but Allied Republic Warships killing destructible Torpedoes does not. Kill Anthropods on Nimbus III and they count, kill them on New Romulus and they don't, or vice versa.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
If you call that an exploit then buying booster packs (XP, etc) in that perspective are definitely exploits. Because people can level faster etc.
Do you now understand the no-sense in your remarks, or still not?
Repeatedly patrolling Argola is not an exploit, period!
You dont get the marks when aborting, just the xp you rightfully earned.
Change these to 7 days - They would be far more tolorable!.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
If you can't keep things to a civil tone there's really not point in carrying on with attempted discussion. You may not agree with the criticisms of this TFO but arguing for an ever-shifting negation of those criticisms, their underlying perspective, and their principles is not productive.
I went back to the blogs, I did err with the Cheron (never considered that they'd try linking the two events, mission dialog I simply assumed was referring to the Styx as being massive.) That said this only changes the ship type (Charon v. Styx), NOT the mechanics of the original writing (Pahvo Dissent is still an encounter dealing with planet-side remnants). Note that...
"The entire scenario you present makes no sense. Even Mirror Leeta was only able to establish a fortified holding in our universe by using an Orb to cross dimensions. Where would the Disco era Terrans, or the Klingons, get such a power source to drag something to Pahvo?"
...would also invalidate Peril over Pahvo. Per the blog:
These fleets have found a way back to Pahvo despite the resolution and limitations found in previous episodes. A new mechanic (spatial aftershocks) have been invoked to justify this combat encounter. As an aside, any mechanism that would let the Terrans or Klingons exploit this power would fit the needs of my hypothetical alternative queue just fine (which you lept at for the sake of reflexive contradiction but I'll let that exchange speak for itself.) This presents an immediate disconnect between story telling and gameplay (see. doubling back for an arbitrary combat scenario which is a literal reskin of a separate encounter to fill a hole in a schedule which may not have been originally planned for) which you say either doesn't exist or isn't important (whatever lets you stamp down on folks and minimize their concerns most easily.)
PS. Saying that Defense of Starbase One is the same narrative manner is quite frankly incorrect. The defense objectives have different functions in each queue, different distributions, different cadence, different modes of enemy deployment, and different strategies which work together to cause these queues to not only play quite differently to each other (fundamentally) but also tell different stories through those mechanics (a point for synergistic gameplay/lore integration in the case of DoSO.) One is holding the line in a siege by displaced (ie. context-less) forces while the other is defending an evacuation in the style of a realized combat encounter, emphasizing priorities between factions (very different contexts within the umbrella of a defense scenario. Perhaps by overgeneralizing you can wash out these differences but such is counter to critical analysis.)
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!
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!
Thank you for the info! Let's hope the fix will come in time for the next featured stf.
While I may agree that it shouldn't give you a massive amount of XP per kills, it's also totally unfair to give none.
Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
- quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;
Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.
These 14- day featured TFO are draining. Let it run for two weeks and 7 tickets or 3 weeks/10 tickets.
Running a TFO across all levels 14 times with the many afk-er "time efficient" players and leveling players is simply not a fun ride.
And then there's the temporal repercussions of the scenario. As long as it was just Killy who got here by accident and presumably never makes it back to the 23rd century to tell anyone, all is good. But if the Disco Terrans and klingons know about Pahvo, why don't they go take it over in their own time when nobody's there to guard it, instead of mounting an attack in the future that's about as effective as the Pirates of the Caribbean taking on a modern carrier group?
Very glad about this!
Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
- quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
- quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;
Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.