test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Cryptic, Why only Task Force raid endgame?

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
STO has a very short and swift questing/leveling game narrative mechanic. I think I got to RA5 in about three weeks of pretty casual game play speed. I’m not criticizing the speed of leveling. Every MMORPG has varying speed of leveling. Admittedly STO, like CO, is pretty short in comparison to other MMORPGs but that is the intended design of these games.

The problem is once you reach RA5 (soon to be 10), as many people have pointed out, there really is nothing to do. Thus far is the solution put forward by the development staff is TF raid style content. How many raids are there going to be?

I’m asking this question because that is really not sufficient. The TF content is terminal, meaning it only has so much replayability value, and not everyone wants to do TF as endgame. Where is the meat? Where is the noncombat end game?

STO has a chance to make a major “statement” about how MMORPGs are made and what constitutes endgame. I like the whole space/ground combat thing. It is fun. It is what keeps me playing. However, as I play I keep asking myself “what if this, what if that”.

What if Cryptic developed a whole alternate form of game play. Something that would let the “ship captain” game-play be what it is, which is fine and getting better. I don’t want to see that sidetracked in any way. What I am asking Cryptic is why don’t you develop a system of game-play that is not “ship captain” game-play. Something that could fill that gap in “social” integration so many people are screaming about.

The claim is STO is not a MMORPG because there is nothing indoctrinating grouping outside of the TF content. People are saying that because STO is so solo friendly there is no reason to group. Which I completely disagree with. The pleasure of grouping should be sufficient. There is no reason to FORCE grouping.

Why not develop an alternative to being a “ship captain” for players to partake in during and after reaching level cap in the form of other types of vocations. I have become involved in threads that discuss separate crafting vocations as a form of endgame content. I have, in other threads, highlighted the concept of “empire building” as a form of alternative endgame content. These things would work well given the IP but I have to wonder... is there something else. Is there something more that can be done? I’m positive there is. I positive there are forms of game play that can stand alone from but integrate “ship captain” game-play into its ludologic construction.

I still think STO should have a more dynamic crafting system separate from the MA item enhancement that leads to a broader form of game-play. I also still think that “empire building” also should be included in the later design and development of STO. Is that all there is? Can Cryptic develop something more, something new. Perhaps that something is in the intersection of adventuring, crafting, and “empire building”. If that is the case then perhaps a forth vocation type is not needed. What do you think, cryptic. What does your player population have to say?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I think the better question is, why did they make STFs so pointless? The loot doesn't match the difficulty. None of it is really that much better than anything else you can get.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    The reason they have it as 'pointless' as it is, is because it was a stop gap solution to the end game problem. People were yelling about harder content and things to do in game so they thew this in there. Give it time I'm sure they will expand on it, if you want quality endgame your not gonna get it by it getting rushed out the door.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I think the better question is, why did they make STFs so pointless? The loot doesn't match the difficulty. None of it is really that much better than anything else you can get.

    Even if Cryptic made the mistake of instituting grindcore elitist endgame TF rewards creating a divide between players similar to that which is found in EQ, EQ2, and WoW causing a major social rift, which is really against Cryptic's design philosophy as evidenced by their design history, there would remain a major absence in attractive game-play options that would attract more players.

    Please do not divert the intent of the thread to pursue your own agenda.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Ayenn wrote:
    even if Cryptic made the mistake of instituting grindcore elitist endgame TF rewards creating a divide between players similar to that which is found in EQ, EQ2, and WoW causing a major social rift, which is really against Cryptic's design philosophy as evidenced by their design history, there would remain a major absence in attractive game-play options that would attract more players.

    Please do not divert the intent of the thread to fulfill your own agenda.

    I'm curious what pet that is in your avatar? I'm curious if you would marry me, after your quoting him and pwning? :-)

    Oh and yes, I agree with what you posted.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    That is a rabbit.

    I'm Not available. My wife might hurt you ;)

    And, thank you for your support.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Endgame content= 4 hours
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I'd be happy with what we have if we can get some more ranks and bigger ships.

    I need to "Captain" a Battleship.

    It is my Destiny.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Endgame content= 4 hours

    And each additional TF would be another 4ish hours. that is problematic for continued sustainability, obviously.

    I'm talking about the generation of endgame that is theoretically limitless. what I have discussed in other threads is the creation of a system that puts endgame in the hands of players. that which I have mentioned in the past is one option, a proven option. If that were included in the development of STO down the line it would go a long way to forming social game-play. Acknowledging that potential, can something more, something other than that, be formulated.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Ayenn wrote:
    That is a rabbit.

    I'm Not available. My wife might hurt you ;)

    And, thank you for your support.

    I'll share you with your wife.. Who knows.. might be betetr then her /wink :p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    to be honest all cryptic is doing is putting band-aids on a massive wound... and they think their customer base are a bunch of morons that one 4hour quest represents good end game.. they have so many areas that could have been end game Id still love the idea of going into the delta quadrant and using it as an area to explore push klingon/federation interests and turning it into a massive player area of combat trading and diplomacy.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    ajac09 wrote: »
    to be honest all cryptic is doing is putting band-aids on a massive wound... and they think their customer base are a bunch of morons that one 4hour quest represents good end game.. they have so many areas that could have been end game Id still love the idea of going into the delta quadrant and using it as an area to explore push klingon/federation interests and turning it into a massive player area of combat trading and diplomacy.

    I do not think Cryptic has the view you attribute to them of their Customers. This late in the game for them it is hard to believe they would be so short sighted. I would put money on the fact that there are issues behind the scenes we as players are not privy to that has forced Cryptic's hand in launching both CO and STO when they did. Cryptic is not an independent company. They are owned by another company that has its own interests. As a studio under Atari I would bet that Atari has forced Cryptic's hand with several issues.

    The Delta Quadrant is probably being reserved for future expansions, but not of the nature you mention. The Delta Quadrant has its own political bodies and civilizations. Looking at Voyager we can see that it is far from an untamed open wilderness ripe for the taking by Alpha Quadrant interests.

    For the record, though a lot of people are demanding it, diplomacy as a form of game-play would be incredibly difficult to develop. Diplomacy is an inherently organic process that really cannot be reduced to a codified set of scripted action. Time and again I have seen diplomacy game-play characterized as a "dialogue choice" system. That just would not cut it. I say institute diplomacy as the organic beast it is in the hands of players.

    What I mean by this is players should be given tools and forms of game-play that lead to diplomatic action between players in the form of "empire building" content based around the concept of the fleet mechanic already in the game in a rudimentary form. Though there are political bodies in almost every part of the galaxy there are some spaces that are vacant and there are also places within established borders that are essentially unclaimed. Let fleets establish outposts in the unoccupied parts of existing political boundaries as well as in the spaces in between. In that we could the begin to see diplomatic actions being taken by fleets to establish and maintain stations and colonies between players.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Yondame26 wrote: »
    I'm curious what pet that is in your avatar? I'm curious if you would marry me, after your quoting him and pwning? :-)

    Oh and yes, I agree with what you posted.

    You never freaking learn, do you? You're the biggest troll on the forum, and everyone knows it. Stop harassing me you piece of TRIBBLE!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    You never freaking learn, do you? You're the biggest troll on the forum, and everyone knows it. Stop harassing me you piece of TRIBBLE!

    maybe he is just mad that being a man( and I vaguely use that term in a guy that stalks women online) of his "smaller" statcher has been pwned by a woman so mcuh on a forum that his only goal in life is to stalk and follow you around in a forum while pondering the meaning of why god made him in the smaller variety.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Please maintain civility and stay on topic. If someone is troubling you, use the forum "report poster/post" function. I would like constructive thread pertinent discussion here

    Thank you
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Ayenn wrote:
    Please maintain civility and stay on topic. If someone is troubling you, use the forum "report poster/post" function. I would like constructive thread pertinent discussion here

    Thank you

    report dont do nutin unless you report someone that hates the game gives them a good reason to silence more haters.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    This is not true. "repeat offenders" do receive infraction points for inappropriate behavior, including forum stalking.

    Now, back to our regularly scheduled thread :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I think that there is so much they can do with the game. Like let a ship carry an away team of real players to board the other factions ships in a PVP/Fleet action zone. One team defends a space station. Let the away team take the bridge of a ship. With capture and hold timer after killing NPC's and players if they defended it. After holding the bridge 2 minute or around that they ship is removed. Or just allow ships to be destroyed.

    The space station defending team is beamed to the space station if they lose there ship. After so many ships are defeated by the attackers with a time limit. The attacking team tries to take the space station. The defending team could fire laser turrets. Away teams could try to capture it or the ships could destroy it.

    Let the fleet action zone be able to be completed just with starships. In case no on wanted to be on an away team. I would like to see both parts of the game used together.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I have never played a Cryptic game before STO, but I have quite a bit of experience with others like AoC, WoW, and EQ.

    STO presents the federation player a very single player oriented style for the entire leveling up process. Almost none of the PvE content forces grouping, infact the game came with a built in group, your bridge crew. Very casual, very user friendly content. Then the player reaches level cap, the episodes missions and patrol missions (best type for getting groups and meeting people) end abruptly and the player is presented with The Infected.

    The Infected bares no resemblance at all to the previous content. Grouping is Forced. Content is not user friendly. Bridge crew is not allowed. Without having a gradual learning curve, this system has set up many players to fail horribly and become discouraged. With only the Exploration missions and an impossible PvP system to fall back on, it would not surprise me to see a dramatic decline in renewing subscriptions.

    I have been very vocal on these forums about the state of STO and the direction the game is going. To me its on a collision course with disaster. The only type of player that really cares about this game is the Star Trek fan, and I see that type of player utterly ignored by Cryptic. Star Trek fans want immersion, they want canon, and whatever type of content Cryptic makes, be it group based or solo, if it lacks those two ingredients those star trek fans will leave. What Cryptic will have left is the people flying around in ships with names like the USS PEW PEW. They don't care about Star Trek. They have no passion for it. They surf from MMO to MMO looking for the next big thrill.

    I no longer believe STO will be the roleplayers MMO for I have come to the conclusion that it's creators have about as much passion for Star Trek as the Amish do. I would love to be proved wrong, I really do, but Cryptic is targeting the wow audience and that is just a fatal mistake.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Thrax73,

    I cold go into the counter argument diatribe to match your diatribe. I won't because this thread is intended to explore options that could flesh out STO to be more of what many players like you want. There are limitations to any game and any system. Those limitations in STO are very clear to people who understand how such systems work as they are designed.

    Four of the things that cannot be done but people ask for are:
    • intuitive interactive NPC oriented diplomacy
    • NPC ships being inhabited and controlled by BOs
    • sector block oriented capture and hold type PvP
    • Player bride crews (a regrettable impossibility at this point)

    Cannon? This game takes place 30 years after Nemesis. It is not the same situation the TV shows or movies were set in. In fact, the political situation is actually the logical conclusion of events from Nemesis and the Prime universe events from the recent Star Trek.Given the nature of all civilizations involved the situation in STO would last for more than a decade. If you are asking for the comparatively bright and cheery atmosphere of TNG or VOY, that time has passed.

    I'm saying we need to move beyond those expectations. We need to look at what IS possible. we need to look at what can be done with the world that has been presented and figure out realistic extensions of the existing system. There is quite a bit of room to move. the "pew pew" game that is criticized so much is only the basic frame. There are actually more functions in the system that have not been capitalized on. There are existing assets that can be redeployed to supplement and enable new game play forms with in STO that will fall in line with some desires in game-play many people want. It is just a matter of developing and deploying them.

    So, rather than pointing an accusing finger at Cryptic, why not help by talking about realistic changes in the game, not pie-in-the-sky impossibilities? If you perceive the direction STO going as something you don't like, rather than expressing greif, step up and offer suggestions, realistic suggestions. That is the EXACT point of this tread. I have my ideas, Ideas that partially have come out thus far in this thread and may, depending on what happens here, become far more clarified. Join in this discussion rather than derail it with angst, valid or not.

    So, what are your ideas, Thrax73 or anyone else.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Good thoughtful post from the OP and a couple of others. I see a fundamental disconnect that Cryptic are struggling to address between two different groups of gamers.

    On the one hand there is a group that operate based on a principle of 'I must be rewarded, preferably repeatedly and with shiny loot I can wave at other people'. On the other hand, there's a group that operate on the principle 'well as long as I'm having fun, that surely is the point?'.

    People come into the forums and demand forced grouping. To me that demonstrates merely that those people lack the social skills to form groups themselves. People demand unique or really rare loot. To me that demonstrates merely that they need some additional sense of self-worth. I am probably being harsh and unfair, but that's what those attitudes say to me.

    As you might gather, I fall into the latter category where I play a game for the fun and satisfaction I can derive from it, not from gaining loot item Y that someone else doesn't have. Don't get me wrong; I like nice loot, but I couldn't care less whether everyone else has it. I'm playing a virtual game with virtual objects that have no intrinisic value (the emotional attachment is a different kettle of tuna).

    I think we see the attempt to address this fundamental disconnect in how Cryptic created these raids. It's as though they actually believed it when people said 'well you have to have raids, it's not an MMO if you don't have raids'. Next we'll have bosses; monster-only powers; spawn camping; and so on.

    Grouping can work in STO. It doesn't need to be forced. I can understand if you create content that making content tailored to a specific group size is easier. People talk about the game community and how instancing doesn't allow a community to form. It's nonsense. Look at the entirely open games; how do groups form? Social skills, good leaders, and friendly people. Instancing has no impact on those factors. You can be in an entirely open never-instanced game and still feel alone. Equally you can be in an instance with 4 friends and feel like you have one hell of a community.

    However, the entirely solo content does have some drawbacks. If you're not careful, you never bother with powers that help other teammates. You don't learn how to assist others. PvP helps; fleet actions help; what would really send the message is solo content drafted in a way that feels like team content.

    Consider - you're sent to help out a ship in distress. Now I used to pop Engineering Team and Extend Shields on them, until I noticed that they survived regardless. How about failing missions if you don't successfully keep the NPC ships alive? Escorts focus on destroying the enemy as quickly as possible and gaining aggro. Cruisers keep the NPC ship alive. Science vessels do both.

    Just a thought.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Askarr,

    I have seen you on the forums in several places and generally agree with your views. Your offering in this thread is spot on. However, how can this advance the idea of new forms of game-play that are not explicitly existent in the system as it stands to offer attractive forms within and around that system to draft new players and entertain the current players? There is a big blank spot in th4e game. this blank spot is either by design placed there with the intent to fill it or it was accidental and needs to be addressed.

    Given your continuing piercing assessments here and other places, I would like to know your thoughts on the subject. Please, do :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I was trying to come up with diplomacy style quest in the current system. With the random generator. Like mini episodes or daily quests with about 5 quest in a chain. It could be done once every day but wouldn't be the same. For example.

    You talk to a Vulcan embassador two factions are on the verge of conflict they need someone to mediate. You speak to one side of the faction find out their demands then the other. On the starbase. Travel to their system say like in the neutral zone. Sometimes when you get in the system you are attacked. You have to defeat say two squads. Not always. Then you can beam to the planet. You get attacked on ground but not every time . You then mediate the then meeting. If succesful they will ask you for more assitance like delivery of goods for trade between the two. Treat wounding. Sometimes you would have to gather materials to for them on ground sometimes space others. With attacks in there sometimes. If you failed at the negotiations one faction would attack randomly or storm out. The chain ends.

    Another could be an Admiral gives you information about a contact. He gives a description of the contact. With some type of hint about how to get the information. You go to DS9 and find him in Quark's or some other place in the game. Use the hint you got about him to get the information. If you did it wrong he would attack you sometimes or walk away. If successful you would have to attack a base you beam do too. Others space battles.

    Then some wounded at an outpost have been attacked or there is a sickness and you must offer aid. Sometime you have to gather materials on ground or space. Defend the outpost others. Have like 25 different dialogue quests so it's not the same every three days and the systems are random for them all. If you interact with the NPC's in the dialogue parts wrong and the chain ends. You could have rewards if you complete 10 you get a choice of an item. A really nice item. Or factioning later with like Humans, Vulcans and the other species.

    This would add more content that you must pay attention to with in the exsisting random quest generator. Basicly an on going quest line that never end's unless you don't want to do it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Why is it endgame only?? Because ungeared people WILL NOT be able to finish it yet get past the space battle.

    It is ment for hardcore players who just want to fight the hardest **** they can
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Englebert wrote:
    I was trying to come up with diplomacy style quest in the current system. With the random generator. Like mini episodes or daily quests with about 5 quest in a chain. It could be done once every day but wouldn't be the same. For example.

    First, I commend your effort! you put some good hard thinking into this. I have had and mentioned similar thoughts on the STO forum. I'll get to that later. what I would point out in you offering is that you have described a type of progenerative quest format. It is a system of pregenerated quest elements that are semi-randomly assembled to conform to a particular form. the form you present is, as you said, like mini episodes.

    The current episode quest construction is a combination of ground or space elements in five acts. you are presenting a there or four act system of generation pulled from a pool of dynamically assembling elements. That is a good idea.


    I have presented a similar idea that orients around the exploration zones but not in directly linked "sets" or episodes. They are one-offs that link together to form a chain of content with increasing reward. My idea also resembles the concept of diplomacy.

    As it stands the exploration missions are one of the following: aid the planet, defend the planet, fight bad guys in space, fight bad guys on the ground, liberate the planet, space resource gathering, ground resource gathering, investigate stuff on the ground, investigate stuff on the ground you have to fight to get to.

    three elements that have not been enabled in the game system or have been scrapped are: being able to return to a system previously visited and providing information to allow others to go to those same systems you have previously visited; being able to have members of cultures on planets in the exploration sectors join your crew; acquiring technology found in exploration missions for personal use on ships or away teams.

    The proposal I have put forward is to enable/complete the "revisit the planet" system, link that to the aid the planet, defend the planes in space, defend the planet on the ground, and enable the "acquire crew from civilizations in the exploration sectors". the outcome would be the ability to establish relationships with civilizations in the exploration sectors who would then become tentative members of The federation of Allied Planets or The Klingon Empire.

    The system would work as follows: you enter an expiration system. Upon entering you are possibly presented with an Aid the planet, space defend the planet, ground defend/liberate the planet scenario. you complete the scenario and acquire the "system location code" so you may return to it. when you return to it you get another of those missions randomly. after you have completed a specified number of those quests in a timely fashion that civilization offers you one of their people as a crew candidate. these crew candidates have a chance of being uncommon rare or very rare.

    Those civilizations also would have strengths in technology or know-how that may cause a consistency in higher ranked BO abilities. You can then can use them to train existing BOs or you can have them join your crew. If you turn down or default on a mission for one of these civilizations you have to start the process over. any one you provide the system access code to will have a chance to get those BOs or their abilities going through the same process you have.


    Both of our systems could be called "diplomacy", to a degree but both lack one key element... organic manifestation. They are both essentially linear and predictable. Diplomacy is inherently not. This is why I say that Diplomacy probably should be something that occurs between players, not between player and NPC. You could think of it as a kind of inverted PvP.

    In standard PvP the objective is to destroy the other player through superior tactics and force. in diplomacy as inverted PvP the objective should be to acquire something from another player in trade for something else.
    This could take the form of a formal at-the-negotiating-table type of game play or it could be far more dynamic with less visible mechanics.

    The first option, formal at-the-negotiating-table type of game play, would need to be between large administrative systems, like between fleets. the second more dynamic conception could be between individuals. The most logical outcrop is the development of a resource based crafting system and a more in-depth market system.

    The single player to single player format could be more selling goods and resources on smaller personal use scales in which a limit would be set through the marketing system. the second fleet based system could take many forms from a special market for fleets to sell masses of goods required for building or maintaining colonies or starbases to a necessary face to face meeting of fleet representatives to hammer out median term contracts of exchange.

    then again, the fleet diplomacy could simply be free-form with no inherent mechanic. If an inherent mechanic were introduced it would mean a cascade of functions with needed game system support, which could get REALLY interesting of we choose to fully explore it.

    In this, an interesting concept develops... a potential need for a specific noncombat focused class that is "the diplomat". This vocation would of course need a macro function (being a diplomat outside of the fleet function and ways to level in that macro function) and a micro function (ways to gain levels between fleets and such). This is all pure speculation but not necessarily a bad rout to meander down.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Kudach wrote: »
    Why is it endgame only?? Because ungeared people WILL NOT be able to finish it yet get past the space battle.

    It is ment for hardcore players who just want to fight the hardest **** they can

    friend, I think you misunderstand the intent of this thread. We are not talking about WHY there is the type of endgame that exists in STO now, or even changing what exists. We are looking at alternatives in game-play that constitutes end game by exploring possible additions to the game system that currently exists.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    You never freaking learn, do you? You're the biggest troll on the forum, and everyone knows it. Stop harassing me you piece of TRIBBLE!

    First, his comment was not even remotely directed at you at all. DGL, you have some serious "the-world-revolves-around-me" issues... and I will resist the comedic follow-up to that statement...
    Ayenn wrote:
    First, I commend your effort! you put some good hard thinking into this. I have had and mentioned similar thoughts on the STO forum. I'll get to that later. what I would point out in you offering is that you have described a type of progenerative quest format. It is a system of pregenerated quest elements that are semi-randomly assembled to conform to a particular form. the form you present is, as you said, like mini episodes.

    The current episode quest construction is a combination of ground or space elements in five acts. you are presenting a there or four act system of generation pulled from a pool of dynamically assembling elements. That is a good idea.


    I have presented a similar idea that orients around the exploration zones but not in directly linked "sets" or episodes. They are one-offs that link together to form a chain of content with increasing reward. My idea also resembles the concept of diplomacy.

    As it stands the exploration missions are one of the following: aid the planet, defend the planet, fight bad guys in space, fight bad guys on the ground, liberate the planet, space resource gathering, ground resource gathering, investigate stuff on the ground, investigate stuff on the ground you have to fight to get to.

    three elements that have not been enabled in the game system or have been scrapped are: being able to return to a system previously visited and providing information to allow others to go to those same systems you have previously visited; being able to have members of cultures on planets in the exploration sectors join your crew; acquiring technology found in exploration missions for personal use on ships or away teams.

    The proposal I have put forward is to enable/complete the "revisit the planet" system, link that to the aid the planet, defend the planes in space, defend the planet on the ground, and enable the "acquire crew from civilizations in the exploration sectors". the outcome would be the ability to establish relationships with civilizations in the exploration sectors who would then become tentative members of The federation of Allied Planets or The Klingon Empire.

    The system would work as follows: you enter an expiration system. Upon entering you are possibly presented with an Aid the planet, space defend the planet, ground defend/liberate the planet scenario. you complete the scenario and acquire the "system location code" so you may return to it. when you return to it you get another of those missions randomly. after you have completed a specified number of those quests in a timely fashion that civilization offers you one of their people as a crew candidate. these crew candidates have a chance of being uncommon rare or very rare.

    Those civilizations also would have strengths in technology or know-how that may cause a consistency in higher ranked BO abilities. You can then can use them to train existing BOs or you can have them join your crew. If you turn down or default on a mission for one of these civilizations you have to start the process over. any one you provide the system access code to will have a chance to get those BOs or their abilities going through the same process you have.


    Both of our systems could be called "diplomacy", to a degree but both lack one key element... organic manifestation. They are both essentially linear and predictable. Diplomacy is inherently not. This is why I say that Diplomacy probably should be something that occurs between players, not between player and NPC. You could think of it as a kind of inverted PvP.

    In standard PvP the objective is to destroy the other player through superior tactics and force. in diplomacy as inverted PvP the objective should be to acquire something from another player in trade for something else.
    This could take the form of a formal at-the-negotiating-table type of game play or it could be far more dynamic with less visible mechanics.

    The first option, formal at-the-negotiating-table type of game play, would need to be between large administrative systems, like between fleets. the second more dynamic conception could be between individuals. The most logical outcrop is the development of a resource based crafting system and a more in-depth market system.

    The single player to single player format could be more selling goods and resources on smaller personal use scales in which a limit would be set through the marketing system. the second fleet based system could take many forms from a special market for fleets to sell masses of goods required for building or maintaining colonies or starbases to a necessary face to face meeting of fleet representatives to hammer out median term contracts of exchange.

    then again, the fleet diplomacy could simply be free-form with no inherent mechanic. If an inherent mechanic were introduced it would mean a cascade of functions with needed game system support, which could get REALLY interesting of we choose to fully explore it.

    In this, an interesting concept develops... a potential need for a specific noncombat focused class that is "the diplomat". This vocation would of course need a macro function (being a diplomat outside of the fleet function and ways to level in that macro function) and a micro function (ways to gain levels between fleets and such). This is all pure speculation but not necessarily a bad rout to meander down.

    tl;dr

    But seriously, great points. However, I don't think what you are suggesting can easily be incorporated within the scope of the game design as it exists now... to bad, though.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Ayenn wrote:
    friend, I think you misunderstand the intent of this thread. We are not talking about WHY there is the type of endgame that exists in STO now, or even changing what exists. We are looking at alternatives in game-play that constitutes end game by exploring possible additions to the game system that currently exists.

    Ahh... my bad just sall the title and a wall of txt an assumed that it was one of the usual complaint threads.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    But seriously, great points. However, I don't think what you are suggesting can easily be incorporated within the scope of the game design as it exists now... to bad, though.

    Thanks for the sentiment. Too bad? Why? I see no stone to set things in around here... yet.

    Kudach wrote: »
    Ahh... my bad just sall the title and a wall of txt an assumed that it was one of the usual complaint threads.

    Nah, I'm not that type of chap. I don't blindly support things either. I let the complainers and the complainers of complainers be. they do the nasty work for me. And thanks for coming back in here to check up. It is much appreciated. Also, I'm glad this thread ended up not being a source of irritation for you. That brings a little ray of sun into my wind-driven rain Midwestern world.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Ayenn wrote:
    First, I commend your effort! you put some good hard thinking into this. I have had and mentioned similar thoughts on the STO forum. .... This is all pure speculation but not necessarily a bad rout to meander down.

    good stuff. I fully endorse content that is not related to go and bring back 10 gnoll paws...

    :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Ayenn wrote:
    Thrax73,

    I cold go into the counter argument diatribe to match your diatribe. I won't because this thread is intended to explore options that could flesh out STO to be more of what many players like you want. There are limitations to any game and any system. Those limitations in STO are very clear to people who understand how such systems work as they are designed.

    Four of the things that cannot be done but people ask for are:
    • intuitive interactive NPC oriented diplomacy
    • NPC ships being inhabited and controlled by BOs
    • sector block oriented capture and hold type PvP
    • Player bride crews (a regrettable impossibility at this point)

    Cannon? This game takes place 30 years after Nemesis. It is not the same situation the TV shows or movies were set in. In fact, the political situation is actually the logical conclusion of events from Nemesis and the Prime universe events from the recent Star Trek.Given the nature of all civilizations involved the situation in STO would last for more than a decade. If you are asking for the comparatively bright and cheery atmosphere of TNG or VOY, that time has passed.

    I'm saying we need to move beyond those expectations. We need to look at what IS possible. we need to look at what can be done with the world that has been presented and figure out realistic extensions of the existing system. There is quite a bit of room to move. the "pew pew" game that is criticized so much is only the basic frame. There are actually more functions in the system that have not been capitalized on. There are existing assets that can be redeployed to supplement and enable new game play forms with in STO that will fall in line with some desires in game-play many people want. It is just a matter of developing and deploying them.

    So, rather than pointing an accusing finger at Cryptic, why not help by talking about realistic changes in the game, not pie-in-the-sky impossibilities? If you perceive the direction STO going as something you don't like, rather than expressing greif, step up and offer suggestions, realistic suggestions. That is the EXACT point of this tread. I have my ideas, Ideas that partially have come out thus far in this thread and may, depending on what happens here, become far more clarified. Join in this discussion rather than derail it with angst, valid or not.

    So, what are your ideas, Thrax73 or anyone else.

    I did not ask for any of the issues you have highlighted. I asked why 99% of the game plays one way, and did decently in my opinion, only to drop that format and nosedive into a very narrow style of gameplay. A style that the game never tried to teach to its playerbase as they leveled up.

    I will point my finger at Cryptic and say you dropped the ball! People have no meaningful character progression at the level cap. B'tran cluster daily, PvP Daily, and Infected. That is it. break it down. Exploration missions are horribly written and executed. PvP daily, those one hour queues are alot of fun. And Infected, nothing like the content the players experienced leveling up.

    Cryptic dropped the ball.
Sign In or Register to comment.