test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

They start offing my bridge officers I quit.

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
http://kotaku.com/5475207/cryptic-considering-a-more-meaningful-death-penalty-for-star-trek-online

Only death penalty you could put in this game that is "meaningful" would be bridge officer losses.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    What is it about losing bridge officers that makes you want to quit ? There is no limit to the # of SP for boffs so you can 'rebuild' them in time. I would suggest that any sort of DP should probably be optional and reward those who avoid death with a bonus rather than penalize people.

    For example of a quest could result in the loss of a BOFF it should say in red letters 'This is a dangerous mission' or some such so that you know and can avoid it if you wish.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Another example would be a 'Bravery award' for finishing up X amount of 'Dangerous Missions' even if you failed or succeeded. Could be in the form of a special sash for you or your crew, or a medal or some other such trinket or knick-knack. Nothing unabalancing but at least something to show off.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    kanid wrote:
    What is it about losing bridge officers that makes you want to quit ? There is no limit to the # of SP for boffs so you can 'rebuild' them in time. I would suggest that any sort of DP should probably be optional and reward those who avoid death with a bonus rather than penalize people.

    For example of a quest could result in the loss of a BOFF it should say in red letters 'This is a dangerous mission' or some such so that you know and can avoid it if you wish.

    In time? Hell I've only been 45 3 days and I could off all of my BOs right now and rebuild them from the points laying around doing nothing.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Summers wrote: »
    http://kotaku.com/5475207/cryptic-considering-a-more-meaningful-death-penalty-for-star-trek-online

    Only death penalty you could put in this game that is "meaningful" would be bridge officer losses.

    If I want permanent loss of items/equipment, I'll play EvE.

    If such a DP is put into play than I also wish for properly trained replacements of the appropriate rank and skills from the requisition officer at SB1.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Not a bad idea Roach. You should be able to requisitioin well trained officers of any rank below yours.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    kanid wrote:
    Not a bad idea Roach. You should be able to requisitioin well trained officers of any rank below yours.

    Even with extra BO points laying around, I would not want to retrain a new BO from scratch. Like any military/psuedo-military orginization- replacements should be availible.
    Sadly some may wish to make it more realistic and create a virtual collection of red tape and time sinks.:p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    you guys are reading it wrong. Cryptic may or may not be thinking of dead BO's as a penalty. but if you read the link, there is no mention of that.

    it is only the op's statement. which wouldn't make sense, i'm sure we can find something better than that...
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Roach would you feel the same way about losing your ship if you could simply purchase a replacement ?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Well, instead of a "perma-BO-death" scenario, an "acceptable" penalty would be disabling the BO (sort of like the cooldown needed for Devices). Not an issue late in the game when you have multiple BOs to slot into your officer stations and they "get better" after the cooldown expires.

    Although I do see the humor in the above scenario.

    McCoy: "He's dead Jim."
    Random Redshirt: "No I'm not! I got better!"
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    If I want permanent loss of items/equipment, I'll play EvE.

    Yes, yes. But Eve is not Star Trek, is it?

    The Bridge Officer idea could be good... BOff xp is one of the things we keep getting and by Admiral+ we should have tons spare so rebuilding an officer should be possible without causing "extra work" for the player.

    Actually, from the RP perspective I like the idea of BOffs dieing permanently - even the purple ones.

    But that's just me.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Primarily Id like to see equipment wear as a form of DP with a repair/refit fee required at a space station. Would make it so you would have to carry some spare equips for combat and function as a gold sink.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Yes, yes. But Eve is not Star Trek, is it?

    The Bridge Officer idea could be good... BOff xp is one of the things we keep getting and by Admiral+ we should have tons spare so rebuilding an officer should be possible without causing "extra work" for the player.

    Actually, from the RP perspective I like the idea of BOffs dieing permanently - even the purple ones.

    But that's just me.

    I think you'd see a massive number of people walk away from the game if bridge officers were destroyed.

    I mean massive. I know many players who put a lot of time into the details of them (even though I'm not real particular myself).

    Even I'd probably get annoyed with it and end up saying the heck with it. Better things to entertain than allocating the same skill points over and over to recreate officers.

    Actually, any kind of destructive death penalty at this stage in the game will likely result in a significant population loss.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    kanid wrote:
    Roach would you feel the same way about losing your ship if you could simply purchase a replacement ?


    Only about the equipment I would have to replace. I would prefer a time sink for repairs if my ship is lost.
    Once again, if I wanted harsh loss of equipment/supplies I would play Eve online where I accept the risk by playing.
    Yes, yes. But Eve is not Star Trek, is it?
    .

    I agree, which is why I don't play Eve currently.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Summers wrote: »
    http://kotaku.com/5475207/cryptic-considering-a-more-meaningful-death-penalty-for-star-trek-online

    Only death penalty you could put in this game that is "meaningful" would be bridge officer losses.
    And would you leave the game even if Cryptic did their Death Penalty like my offering? :D

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    off'ing Bridge officer's is an aweful idea. I put some time into creating the look and feel of my bridge officers. Actually I have no idea how people level so fast that they warrent a death penalty. Played this game since the start, only lvl 11. Then again, I have two jobs.

    Only death penalty I'd go for is something like 'dread' in Lotro. Where your Health is decreased for like so many minutes in-game.

    I like how things are .. but that's me.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Roach wrote: »

    I agree, which is why I don't play Eve currently.

    Aw, go on! There's always time for more Eve... ;)
    SFade wrote:
    I think you'd see a massive number of people walk away from the game if bridge officers were destroyed.

    Probably true, unfortunately.

    How about death results in immediate demotion - busted to Ensign...

    /makes hasty exit...

    :p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    My opinion is DP should be mission based or perhaps PVP based only. In other words, make it on only certain missoins and make it clear that it is what it is so people can avoid that mission if they want. In PVP I think DP is important no matter what.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Aw, go on! There's always time for more Eve... ;)

    Eve is more like a job than a game if you play it long enough. Though it was/is fun to smuggle goods to low-sec in a cloaked gatejumper for profit - I needed a break.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Roach wrote: »
    Sadly some may wish to make it more realistic and create a virtual collection of red tape and time sinks.:p

    Well don't you know, that's already in place: Cryptic! :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    To those proposing a "no death bonus" instead of a death penalty, it's really just semantics.

    For example, say you got an extra 100 skill points if you win a mission without dying. ie: a bonus, not a penalty.

    How is that any different than having a 100 skill point debt when you die? Clearly, it's not any different, it's just candy coated to be a 'bonus' instead of a 'penalty', but if the bonus is the 'norm' then not getting the bonus is, in fact, a penalty.

    Of course, either way, I'm for it. Players should be rewarded for playing with skill and using tactics and teamwork. Or they should be penalized for not doing so. It's all semantics either way, but the current 'god mode' setting needs to go if STO is going to ever build a player community and hold subscriptions long-term.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Just have reduced ship power levels+boff abilities until you either

    1. Retrieve escape pods at death point
    2. Stop at a starbase
    3. Use a module to restore ship to nominal status, the cost of which to buy increments for the ship type.

    for 3,

    T1 ships the module costs 1000 EC
    T2-T3= 10000 EC
    T4-5= 100000 EC

    There. Now we have a money sink, and a completely negotiable penalty.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Cezero wrote: »
    To those proposing a "no death bonus" instead of a death penalty, it's really just semantics.

    For example, say you got an extra 100 skill points if you win a mission without dying. ie: a bonus, not a penalty.

    How is that any different than having a 100 skill point debt when you die? Clearly, it's not any different, it's just candy coated to be a 'bonus' instead of a 'penalty', but if the bonus is the 'norm' then not getting the bonus is, in fact, a penalty.

    Of course, either way, I'm for it. Players should be rewarded for playing with skill and using tactics and teamwork. Or they should be penalized for not doing so. It's all semantics either way, but the current 'god mode' setting needs to go if STO is going to ever build a player community and hold subscriptions long-term.

    Its not just semantics at all.

    Assuming in both cases all else is equal and the normal reward for the mission is X then the two scenarios are:

    Scenario A:

    You Win, Reward is X
    You Lose, Reward is -100 for each time you lose but you get X if you eventually win it.

    Scenario B:

    You Win, Reward is X+100
    You Lose, Reward is X when you finally win it.

    So clearly scenario B is more beneficial to players overall. Scenario A is actually slightly insulting because it adds insult (penalty) to injury (not winning)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Opaserv wrote: »
    Well don't you know, that's already in place: Cryptic! :D

    lol oh well. Now virtual truelly does mimic RL.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Bridge Officer deaths occuring randomly after a party/ship wipe with a small chance to happen (say, 1-5%) would be acceptable to me. Just as long as I can reclaim my Borg Bridge Officer if the one I have dies. It's not like BOffs are difficult at all to get... I have three waiting as rewards for me even now that I can't claim due to already having a full crew.

    Also might be more acceptable if it only happened (or was more probable to happen) to those of lower ranks, as you don't often see anyone above Lt. die in the show, while Ensigns die quite often.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    If you guys want games that are overly difficult and penalize it's players for not clicking buttons fast enough, go play FFXI and leave this game alone to the people who don't want to have to spend another hour or more at their computer for every death they have.

    Catering to Casual Gamers made WoW great... cater to the hardcore, and you'll just stay as another sub 500k subscriber based game in a year...
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Yeah I am definitely against BO deaths - I like the other ideas put forward here though, as we do need some kind of penality enforced in the game. I'm fine dealing with temporary problems like getting my ship fixed etc.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I don't know about BO death, but incapacitation. A given amount of time to recover after a incapacitation unhealed in ground combat, or assigned bridge officers on a ship.

    It doesn't have to be permanent, but should require x amount of time or y amount of credits to recover them.

    And it should NOT be energy credits, they flow way too freely. Merit points to speed recovery.

    It doesn't have to be permanent or debilitating, just annoying. Afterall, we do have bench strength in reserve officers to bring forward, so in order to be REALLY put out, you REALLY have to be TRIBBLE up.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    kanid wrote:
    Its not just semantics at all.

    Assuming in both cases all else is equal and the normal reward for the mission is X then the two scenarios are:

    Scenario A:

    You Win, Reward is X
    You Lose, Reward is -100 for each time you lose but you get X if you eventually win it.

    Scenario B:

    You Win, Reward is X+100
    You Lose, Reward is X when you finally win it.

    So clearly scenario B is more beneficial to players overall. Scenario A is actually slightly insulting because it adds insult (penalty) to injury (not winning)

    I didn't say you lose 100 skill points every time you die. I said you earned 100 xp debt. In most XP debt scenarios, it's capped. In other words, if you die once, you have 100 xp debt (ie: you have to earn 100 xp to get rid of your debt before you start earning 'real XP' again.) If you die a second time before you earn back your debt, you still just have 100 xp debt. In other words, you can die a bunch of times, but it only costs you 100 xp total, unless you've earned back the debt in between deaths (presumably by completing the mission and earning the 'win' XP). So it really is the same thing...

    Either everyone who doesn't die earns 100 xp more (bonus) or everyone who dies earns 100 xp less (penalty). It's semantics, as the actual net XP at the end of the day is the same with either system. A bonus that everyone gets unless they TRIBBLE up is not a bonus, it's a penalty for TRIBBLE up.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    kanid wrote:
    What is it about losing bridge officers that makes you want to quit ? There is no limit to the # of SP for boffs so you can 'rebuild' them in time. I would suggest that any sort of DP should probably be optional and reward those who avoid death with a bonus rather than penalize people.

    For example of a quest could result in the loss of a BOFF it should say in red letters 'This is a dangerous mission' or some such so that you know and can avoid it if you wish.

    Losing rare high level skills that may take months of random luck to get.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    greymond wrote:
    If you guys want games that are overly difficult and penalize it's players for not clicking buttons fast enough, go play FFXI and leave this game alone to the people who don't want to have to spend another hour or more at their computer for every death they have.

    Catering to Casual Gamers made WoW great... cater to the hardcore, and you'll just stay as another sub 500k subscriber based game in a year...

    500k subs is quite alot for an mmo. POTBS eve and darkfall, all known for their harsh DPs wish they had that many subs, in darkfall and potbs's case, even 1/5 of that number would be an improvement.
Sign In or Register to comment.