I am not sure how to write this article. I not sure if it is a complaint or a suggestion.
Overall, I love the new difficulty system. It has made the Exploration missions challenging. However, I kind of question the system in two areas: medical injuries and enemy numbers.
Medical Injuries:
It seems odd that people who are medically injured, and are doctors themselves will have to go all the way back to earth to see a doctor. Especially, if you are a Admiral and the doctor at the station is not an admiral.
I would recommend a solution here:
The game should allow for the different medical kits or science kits to be switchable in combat. It seems odd, that I have all the different kits, but I have to disengage in combat to grab a different tricorder. Also, doctors should have basic healing abilities themselves and separate from the medical kit. I have come across several situations, where having a geophysicist kit and medical kit and analyst kit would be useful. However, the current game requires a doctor to leave the engagement, wait for some time to go by and then change out a kit.
This is not what people would do in a combat situation. Also, the mechanics of the game makes it so when we are teamed up with other people, the chance of having more then one doctor is usually not desired, so multiple science kits seems such of waste, in the sense that you have to run out of combat to grab a different kit.
Also, as a captain with a ship in orbit with a transporter, can't I just call the ship to change out people to adjust to the tactical situation on the ground?
Enemy Numbers:
It seems odd that when your team is knocked out you come back weaker from the encounter, but the enemy comes back full of health. If the battle was a long engagement, the enemy should wear down too. If the goal is to be realistic then everyone gets fatigue, even machines.
Machines overheat after a while and so do animals. It also seems like the npc forces, can scale numbers up indefinitely, but your team is stuck with only five people. Surely a captain of 500 people should be able to cal down more security teams, even if they are NPC's.
Also, this may be an unintentional consequence, but the game seems to be promoting the ideal that people should just skip the ground engagement all together, since it offers the path of most resistance, and is often unnecessary to do. The ground missions seem to be taking way longer then they need to be. Often times it will take like 40 minutes to over come the final group, and then you end up paying for injuries that far out cost the amount of money you made from the adventure.
This also fosters the ideal that people should just pvp, because that combat is short and you make more money. If the ideal of a "roll" system was considered to complicated to do because it would turn the average game player off, then surely having to pay a high cost of injuries for a combat situation seems like a waste of time and will probably result in people not playing.
Here is the cycle:
(1) you fly all the way to B'Tran to do your daily missions, which is difficult to do at normal.
(2) you zone in to a area the NPC's always have superior numbers to you no matter if you have a team or not.
People say "hey, no sense in teaming that just cost me more money."
(3) Prior to the last boss, you rack up so much injuries that your choice is to continue on or go back and repair.
People say, "TRIBBLE, now I have to go all the way back to earth, but my trans-warp drive won't reset for 15 min"
People also say, "The heck with this, I can go do pvp right now make more money and not have to pay anything."
(4) if you stick around to the last boss, now they have a better ship then any in your fleet and in most cases they have superior numbers.
Your options as a commander are:
(a) call for back up
You cannot the game does not allow for that
(b) determine the cost of the engagement is to high for what it is you will gain
Hmmm. I can pay several thousands of energy credits for medical and ship injuries that will require me to go back to earth and lose any progression in the mission I have gained so far or go do pvp that does non of these things.
Most people after 30 minutes of dying over and over choice to go pvp.
The problem with the difficulty system is that it does simulate damage in affect well, but offers little to remedy the situation. The components you need are expensive, which makes them useless. You are better off just paying the energy credits or doing pvp. In the past days since the system went live, I have had a total of 2 components drop, and where quite useless to be of any aid. The ships replicators should be able to make the components for ground and space. If people have to go searching the whole galaxy looking for components, they will get inpatient and just say " to heck with this."
In my fleet with 92 people, most commanders have decided to shut the difficulty off to "normal" because it is just a waste of resources and time.
i like this idea specially since im a medical officer lol and my ground combat camera seems to be messing up a lot too after the 1.1 update... but im sure the devs already know about that one lol
The kit limitation is part of the intended balance. It's meant to force you into choosing a particular role. You have to decide whether your science captain is going to focus on the role of healing, crowd control, or damage dealing. This isn't the first MMO to use such a setup. It's actually quite common, and although the idea is implemented in a variety of ways the core usually remains the same.
Not being able to change out equipment in combat is a fairly common restriction as well. Sure, we can ask "is it realistic that I can't just grab a different tricorder to use a different skill?", but at the same time is it realistic to expect to be able to remove all the components from your current kit, locate your new one, and buckle on all the new components in a single second while under fire? People tend to use the realism argument right up to the point where it starts getting in the way. Regardless, in this case your choice of kit goes back to the point of balance, and the decisions you're supposed to make before the fighting starts. It's meant to be part of your tactics. Personally, I'm just glad we're able to change out our abilities between fights; some MMOs don't even allow you to do that.
As for the rest, there are tools available to repair injuries without having to return to a spacedock. You just have to invest in them beforehand. And it sounds like eventually they'll allow us to play a mini-game aboard our ship to repair our damage.
The kit limitation is part of the intended balance. It's meant to force you into choosing a particular role. You have to decide whether your science captain is going to focus on the role of healing, crowd control, or damage dealing. This isn't the first MMO to use such a setup. It's actually quite common, and although the idea is implemented in a variety of ways the core usually remains the same.
Not being able to change out equipment in combat is a fairly common restriction as well. Sure, we can ask "is it realistic that I can't just grab a different tricorder to use a different skill?", but at the same time is it realistic to expect to be able to remove all the components from your current kit, locate your new one, and buckle on all the new components in a single second while under fire? People tend to use the realism argument right up to the point where it starts getting in the way. Regardless, in this case your choice of kit goes back to the point of balance, and the decisions you're supposed to make before the fighting starts. It's meant to be part of your tactics. Personally, I'm just glad we're able to change out our abilities between fights; some MMOs don't even allow you to do that.
As for the rest, there are tools available to repair injuries without having to return to a spacedock. You just have to invest in them beforehand. And it sounds like eventually they'll allow us to play a mini-game aboard our ship to repair our damage.
Yes, but is unrealistic, a real team will come with all the different kits, since they do not know what they will encounter. And tricorder or kit like in the shows only weigh like 2 to 3 pounds. And if I am a commander in the field and I come up to a force of 10 or more Borg, I will call to the ship for reserves to even the odds. I would not even fight them individually. I would simply call for an orbital bombardment. why waste human resources?
On the ground we should be able to call up artillery support as the Admiral or Commanding officer.
Yes, but is unrealistic, a real team will come with all the different kits, since they do not know what they will encounter. And tricorder or kit like in the shows only weigh like 2 to 3 pounds. And if I am a commander in the field and I come up to a force of 10 or more Borg, I will call to the ship for reserves to even the odds. I would not even fight them individually. I would simply call for an orbital bombardment. why waste human resources?
On the ground we should be able to call up artillery support as the Admiral or Commanding officer.
Some captains can. Just not all of them. No, the limitation isn't realistic but it is part of the balance.
Realism and gameplay rarely go hand in hand. We could even argue that instantly changing out kits mid-fight is simply a matter of having the old kit and new kit swapped onto your person through transporter technology. But in the end it still comes down to a designer deciding whether or not he feels the idea does more harm than good. It may make things easier for you by removing the problem of having to make any pre-fight decisions, but that's probably contrary to what the designer wanted because he's after a certain style of gameplay. And what's easier for you is not necessarily easier for the developers to balance.
You suggest that you should be able to call in reserves when coming across a large force of Borg. And yet the whole point in pitting you against a large number of Borg is to raise the difficulty of that particular encounter. If you can simply counter it by calling in more units of your own then the entire point is lost. Why don't we just beam the enemy units off the surface of the planet and out into the vacuum of space and call it "mission complete" without leaving the comfort of the captain's chair? "Realism" has to take a backseat to gameplay sometimes. It sure got tossed out the window often enough in the television episodes in the name of storytelling.
Some captains can. Just not all of them. No, the limitation isn't realistic but it is part of the balance.
Realism and gameplay rarely go hand in hand. We could even argue that instantly changing out kits mid-fight is simply a matter of having the old kit and new kit swapped onto your person through transporter technology. But in the end it still comes down to a designer deciding whether or not he feels the idea does more harm than good. It may make things easier for you by removing the problem of having to make any pre-fight decisions, but that's probably contrary to what the designer wanted because he's after a certain style of gameplay. And what's easier for you is not necessarily easier for the developers to balance.
You suggest that you should be able to call in reserves when coming across a large force of Borg. And yet the whole point in pitting you against a large number of Borg is to raise the difficulty of that particular encounter. If you can simply counter it by calling in more units of your own then the entire point is lost. Why don't we just beam the enemy units off the surface of the planet and out into the vacuum of space and call it "mission complete" without leaving the comfort of the captain's chair? "Realism" has to take a backseat to gameplay sometimes. It sure got tossed out the window often enough in the television episodes in the name of storytelling.
If what you say is true, then why are we able to change out weapons in mid combat. A weapon has 3 preprogrammed skills. We are able to hit the "z" button in combat and change out the weapon. Why not have the same system for the kit. We should be able to at least have two preset kits, that we can change out in the field. In the science kit arena, some of the kits are offensive, some are defensive.
And if what you say is true "...realism and game-play rarely go hand and hand..." Then why did they add the difficulty system in the game to begin with? Also, if "balance" is the strive, I would argue that the balance has not been achieved. The NPC has become harder to kill and take less damage, while you become weaker as the encounter goes on. If you die, you do not refresh, you simply resume where you were and are weaker. The enemy npc, after you re-spawn, is back to full health. I think having the kit switchable in play like weapons would balance things out for you and your team, since you are the Commanding Officer.
Also, most Commanders decisions in combat is not based on what they think prior to the fight. A commander must understand and know the tactical situation on the ground. Also, the commander must in the plan account for the unknown and unpredictable. A preconscious decision would be to bring two kits to the fight. So if you are wrong, which most times is the case, you can adapt to the situation.
In essence, you say the whole combat strategy is based on someone who feels that people in combat do not do that, and that all plans in combat are done prior to the engagement. That may be how plans are done in TV or in the Movies, but that is not the way it is in combat at all.
As a commander in combat, we should be able to access the enemies position, then use the transporters to drop into the LZ, or have additional NPC's drop into the LZ as a reserve unit. We should also be able to set up an artillery battery or call in for an orbital bombardment to keep the enemy forces from massing in strength.
As a commander, you are tasked with trying to prevent your people from getting into unnecessary hand to hand engagement. That is why they have technology, even in close quarter combat, a real commander would send one lightly armed team to sweep the enemy one direction, and have a heavily armed squad in a fixed position do the actual elimination.
Also, the new system, although is really nice, and probably the best "death penalty" system I have seen in quite some time, it has a systematic way of making people avoid the combat all together. You are always fighting an "up-hill" battle as a Federation player. Although this is fun in some instances, if the Federation player is never allowed to have a point in the game where they have tactical advantage, which is not realistic to the show, then people will get tired of it really fast.
It feels to me in this game, whether pvp, pve, ground, or space...the Federation is always fighting the uphill battle. I find it unrealistic with all the personnel shields and armor designed to stop physical and kinetic damage, a hand-to-hand weapon can ignore all that, and in most instances is far more lethal then a rifle that can disintegrate people.
This systemic problem will eventually turn people off and just play on "normal." Before, the game gets to this state, I would recommend some changes to prevent this moment from occurring. It has already occurred in my fleet. And, if my fleet is a small sampling of the overall population of the game, I think the developers of the game should recognize it before it gets out-of-hand.
It seems odd that when your team is knocked out you come back weaker from the encounter, but the enemy comes back full of health. If the battle was a long engagement, the enemy should wear down too. If the goal is to be realistic then everyone gets fatigue, even machines.
Machines overheat after a while and so do animals. It also seems like the npc forces, can scale numbers up indefinitely, but your team is stuck with only five people. Surely a captain of 500 people should be able to cal down more security teams, even if they are NPC's.
Im not sure what you are trying to get at here. Injuries are totally optional. You only have to deal with them if you make the choice to have your combat more difficult. So whats the point of making that personal choice moot by zurg rushing battles or by increasing the size of your group to trivialize enemy numbers?
If ground combat is seen as an obstruction or a time sink. You as the player have the option to choose to make it easier or harder..Or in the case of your B-tran example. To simply skip over them completely.
If what you say is true, then why are we able to change out weapons in mid combat. A weapon has 3 preprogrammed skills. We are able to hit the "z" button in combat and change out the weapon. Why not have the same system for the kit.
I would imagine the simplest reason being that perhaps the developers wanted and were willing to balance the game around a player having access to two weapon options in combat, but only one kit.
And if what you say is true "...realism and game-play rarely go hand and hand..." Then why did they add the difficulty system in the game to begin with?
I think that had little to do with realism and everything to do with players complaining about the game being too easy, in addition to numerous requests on the forum asking for a difficulty slider (which Cryptic has used in other games they've developed). The only realism here is the reality that not everyone plays at the same skill level and a difficulty slider is a reasonable way of dealing with that hurdle.
Also, if "balance" is the strive, I would argue that the balance has not been achieved. The NPC has become harder to kill and take less damage, while you become weaker as the encounter goes on. If you die, you do not refresh, you simply resume where you were and are weaker. The enemy npc, after you re-spawn, is back to full health.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, because if you die and respawn you have full shields and full health. If you happen to have an injury you can cure it on the spot with the appropriate repair device. You're as good as new before you have to face your opponents again.
Now if someone decide to continue fighting with injuries, then obviously they're entering the fight with a disadvantage. But it raises the question of why they're doing that rather than using a repair device to heal themselves up. If they're dying so often that the repairs are causing financial problems then I think they probably need to fall back to one of the lower difficulty settings.
Also, most Commanders decisions in combat is not based on what they think prior to the fight. A commander must understand and know the tactical situation on the ground. Also, the commander must in the plan account for the unknown and unpredictable. A preconscious decision would be to bring two kits to the fight. So if you are wrong, which most times is the case, you can adapt to the situation.
In essence, you say the whole combat strategy is based on someone who feels that people in combat do not do that, and that all plans in combat are done prior to the engagement. That may be how plans are done in TV or in the Movies, but that is not the way it is in combat at all.
As a commander in combat, we should be able to access the enemies position, then use the transporters to drop into the LZ, or have additional NPC's drop into the LZ as a reserve unit. We should also be able to set up an artillery battery or call in for an orbital bombardment to keep the enemy forces from massing in strength.
As a commander, you are tasked with trying to prevent your people from getting into unnecessary hand to hand engagement. That is why they have technology, even in close quarter combat, a real commander would send one lightly armed team to sweep the enemy one direction, and have a heavily armed squad in a fixed position do the actual elimination.
As for the rest of this, it really sounds like you're looking for a completely different style of game, and I would honestly be surprised if STO ever went in that direction.
Im not sure what you are trying to get at here. Injuries are totally optional. You only have to deal with them if you make the choice to have your combat more difficult. So whats the point of making that personal choice moot by zurg rushing battles or by increasing the size of your group to trivialize enemy numbers?
If ground combat is seen as an obstruction or a time sink. You as the player have the option to choose to make it easier or harder..Or in the case of your B-tran example. To simply skip over them completely.
This is part of my point, the game should be trying to encourage people to play more and not discourage. The difficulty is fine in the game on advance or elite, but it seems only the NPC's are able to cal in reserves, transport around your forces and adjust to the combat. While your forces are stuck with what ever you beamed down to the planet with, and it is often when you beam down, you have no ideal what is on the planet.
I think as a commanding officer and an admiral, that being able to carry multiple kits into the combat and being able to change them out like weapons, would even the odds for the player character. I routinely see the npc forces doing all the normal things in combat which player characters are not allowed to do, and often the only reason is "that some beta tester did not think of it..."
In addition a captain of a starship should be able to cal in air support and orbital bombardments, and the commander should be able to cal in additional security forces. In the current mission I am on, there were 10 borgs in a squad. After we attacked and our offense was having success, the Borg were able to transport in reserve units right into the landing party to give them 5 more people.
This is really unfair under any difficulty system. If we as players can not call in reserves then npc's should not be able to either.
I would imagine the simplest reason being that perhaps the developers wanted and were willing to balance the game around a player having access to two weapon options in combat, but only one kit.
I think that had little to do with realism and everything to do with players complaining about the game being too easy, in addition to numerous requests on the forum asking for a difficulty slider (which Cryptic has used in other games they've developed). The only realism here is the reality that not everyone plays at the same skill level and a difficulty slider is a reasonable way of dealing with that hurdle.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, because if you die and respawn you have full shields and full health. If you happen to have an injury you can cure it on the spot with the appropriate repair device. You're as good as new before you have to face your opponents again.
Now if someone decide to continue fighting with injuries, then obviously they're entering the fight with a disadvantage. But it raises the question of why they're doing that rather than using a repair device to heal themselves up. If they're dying so often that the repairs are causing financial problems then I think they probably need to fall back to one of the lower difficulty settings.
As for the rest of this, it really sounds like you're looking for a completely different style of game, and I would honestly be surprised if STO ever went in that direction.
It is not true that you come back full of health and with shields maximized. Often, especially in space, the NPC camps the zone in spot. while your waiting on the sliders to get up to speed, the NPCS simple fly up to you and kill you before you re-spawn.
And to the part of injuries, why can I as a medical doctor be able to heal medical injuries to people? Or if anything get a discount on the cost of purchasing Minor Rejuvenations, and minor rejuvenations. As well, why can't engineers on the ship repair the ship from major and minor damage. Isn't the point of having 500 people in a crew to effect damage control.
I live on an aircraft carrier for five years, and we had a fire on-board one night which melted like 3 decks and warped deck plates, and the ship was able to effect repairs while floating in the water. Real naval ships do not go back to port to effect repairs. A tender just comes along side and helps with repairs, and you have people on board trained to do so.
Most ships do not even go back to port to resupply and replenish, we just did it at sea. one tender can resupply two ships at a time. They do have floating dry docks.
And your reasons oscillate, when you make a suggestion in favor of you, you say, "it is all about realism" then when I counter argue, you fall back onto "well that would be to realistic for the game" and I would argue that you cannot have it both ways. The game cannot be realistic for the NPC in offense and unrealistic for players in the defense. Which is what is happening at the moment. The player must have the same advantages and disadvantages as the NPC forces. The system does nothing to address this.
To ignore the situation and act like it doesn't exist is only going to make people upset. I am getting reports from all my commanders in my fleet of 92+ people. These complaints or suggestion are not my own sole issues. I have compiled a list and address the main ones and narrowed it down to what I think are core issues.
To simply just say, well you like it and it works for you, and that people who do not like it need to suck it up or learn to like it, is a mistake. The penalty system should encourage people to use it and not discourage people.
The difficulty is fine in the game on advance or elite......
In addition a captain of a starship should be able to cal in air support and orbital bombardments, and the commander should be able to cal in additional security forces. In the current mission I am on, there were 10 borgs in a squad. After we attacked and our offense was having success, the Borg were able to transport in reserve units right into the landing party to give them 5 more people.
This is really unfair under any difficulty system. If we as players can not call in reserves then npc's should not be able to either.
I guess I still dont see what you want here. You on one hand insist that you feel the higher difficulty settings are fine. Yet you continue to ask for options, changes, skills, or numbers that would do nothing but undermine or trivialize that very same difficulty.
More people, more abilities, more damage, and less hard choices about kits and crew. Can only equal easier.
The game should allow for the different medical kits or science kits to be switchable in combat. It seems odd, that I have all the different kits, but I have to disengage in combat to grab a different tricorder. Also, doctors should have basic healing abilities themselves and separate from the medical kit. I have come across several situations, where having a geophysicist kit and medical kit and analyst kit would be useful. However, the current game requires a doctor to leave the engagement, wait for some time to go by and then change out a kit.
.
I would like the crafting system to enable us to make our own kits and decide which skill combination we'd like to include. Still draw from the skills available to class kit types and limit the total number of skills according to Mk.
I guess I still dont see what you want here. You on one hand insist that you feel the higher difficulty settings are fine. Yet you continue to ask for options, changes, skills, or numbers that would do nothing but undermine or trivialize that very same difficulty.
More people, more abilities, more damage, and less hard choices about kits and crew. Can only equal easier.
You won't understand what I am saying because you are caught up "heuristics." You keep interpreting what I am writing as "I want more than they got" and "I want abilities that the NPC's cannot do."
Also, you keep parsing out my statement and only focusing on parts you think give your argument validity. You have to take that paragraph in context of the entire article I have written in the thread. If you only parse out what you want to read and fill in the blanks with whatever you want, this will only enable more confusion on your part.
This is not what I am saying or writing at all. I am writing that I want to be equal to the NPC's ability. If the NPC can call in reserves, the player character should be able to call in reserves. If the NPC's can call in forces of 20 or more people, then the player character should be able to do that too.
The purpose of the "death" penalty system in a game setting is to simulate that "death" has consequences. Also, it simulates that nothing in life is free. I like the aspect that if we die in the game or are "incapacitated." In a game "incapacitate" is equal to "dying" and hugging is equivalent to "sex."
When you die there should be a consequence, however that consequence does not have to be in the form of "the enemy gets to fight with superior numbers all the time" or "players always have to fight an uphill battle."
Yesterday, I went out and purchased 10 units of Major Components and 10 units of Minor Components. Also, I purchased 10 units of Major Regenerators and 10 units of Minor Rejuvenators. I figured, I would approach the problem in a economic sense. The cost for this solution is 80,000 energy credits for the major components and 10,000 energy credits for the minor components. The rejuvenators cost me 8,000 and 1,000 energy credit. However, I think the 8,000 figure is not accurate.
Even though, I have not saved any money towards injuries, The cost was the same if I had just waited to go back to space dock, it has saved me time. In economics the two most important factors are money and time. Everyone has the same amount of time, which is twenty-four hours in a day. The component and rejuvenator ideal is basically the republicans idea of medical savings plan. Here you purchase insurance at cost prior to the injury, and it saves you time.
The first chance to test the system yesterday was that I responded to a priority 1 distress call to a fellow fleet member. He could not enter his playing zone because the mobs were camping the entrance. He had racked up a ton of injuries. After analyzing the problem, I decided to prep my ship to enter the zone. I enter the zone and started confusing the targets and tangling them up. While this was going on, I slowly moved to the starboard side of the zone to get away from the door. I encouraged my shipmate to do the same. After a while we overcame the foes and I stop to get an understanding of his situation.
I asked him to go back to space dock and repair because, if he had continued on he would probably get more injuries because at the end of these missions is usually two battleships. For the rest of his mission we adopted a policy of containing, isolating and eliminating the foes.
The total cost of my injuries was 1 minor component, and I l passed on all drops (we play on need&greed), so that my shipmate could rebuild his coffers. As we moved forward, he started to actually make money.
What does this anecdotal story mean?
Throughout the story, the mobs were continuously blowing him up and returning back to their full strength. Even when in some cases they were at 10 percent health. Also, when you get the mobs down to 10 percent health and you have more them 80 percent health, they mysteriously have a weapon that can bypass all your defenses that knocks you down to like 10 percent health. If this happen one or two times, I would dismiss it, but it happens like clockwork. I plan on it and have a heal sitting there waiting.
On the ground, the Borg were able to always call in reserve units right when you were about to overrun their unit.
If the game is truly about balance, then we as players should be able to do the same. Not more, but equal.
I do understand that the player has to do his or her part to make the system work, but the developers need to recognize to that the system is flawed and biased towards the NPC's. This should not be the goal the game should strive too. The combat should not be so easy and without penalty, but also it should not be a cakewalk for the NPC's either.
It is not true that you come back full of health and with shields maximized. Often, especially in space, the NPC camps the zone in spot. while your waiting on the sliders to get up to speed, the NPCS simple fly up to you and kill you before you re-spawn.
You're talking about power levels in space, not health and shields (and certainly not on the ground). As we can't directly observe any NPC ship power levels, neither of us have any idea how identically they function to ours or what process they have to go through when initiating an attack. However, NPC power levels obviously do exists as they are the basis for the various powers that attack subsystem strength.
I will also point out that, unlike player ground shields, NPC ground units shields do not regenerate from a damaged state if you manage to get out of combat (flee). That hardly seems fair for the NPCs, no?
And to the part of injuries, why can I as a medical doctor be able to heal medical injuries to people? Or if anything get a discount on the cost of purchasing Minor Rejuvenations, and minor rejuvenations. As well, why can't engineers on the ship repair the ship from major and minor damage. Isn't the point of having 500 people in a crew to effect damage control.
I can't answer your discount question other than suggesting that it's a design decision. But you can heal injuries to people with the proper tools.
At the risk of splitting hairs, let's not forget your captain and your ship both have a health bar. Both can be repaired with the proper skills and/or time. Your ship, after all, has a natural hull regeneration rate, which is supposed to simulate your crew effecting repairs much like your example with the aircraft carrier. Nothing is required there other than time, the amount of which is influenced by your skill point investments.
Then there are the specific injuries brought on by Injury System. Those injuries can be repaired with the proper tools. Returning to a starbase isn't necessary except to resupply. Seeing as you should be frequently stopping by a starbase anyway to pick up new missions (not all of them are available remotely through the comm), I really don't see the problem. Regardless, the developers have said they intend to introduce repair mini-games you can participate in once they implement ship interiors, which should make you completely self sufficient at the cost of some time.
And your reasons oscillate, when you make a suggestion in favor of you, you say, "it is all about realism" then when I counter argue, you fall back onto "well that would be to realistic for the game" and I would argue that you cannot have it both ways. The game cannot be realistic for the NPC in offense and unrealistic for players in the defense. Which is what is happening at the moment. The player must have the same advantages and disadvantages as the NPC forces. The system does nothing to address this.
I think you must have misunderstood something I wrote, because from the start I've been saying that realism tends to take a backseat to gameplay. I certainly never said "it's all about realism". I did point out that you seem to be upset about how realism is being ignored, and yet you only seem to be asking for realism "to a point". Because, for example, you're suggesting it's realistic to be able to switch out kits in combat while ignoring how impossibly difficult/ludicrous that would actually be to do in the middle of a hail of disruptor bolts. "Someone stop firing long enough to help me out with this buckle!".
You're talking about power levels in space, not health and shields (and certainly not on the ground). As we can't directly observe any NPC ship power levels, neither of us have any idea how identically they function to ours or what process they have to go through when initiating an attack. However, NPC power levels obviously do exists as they are the basis for the various powers that attack subsystem strength.
I will also point out that, unlike player ground shields, NPC ground units shields do not regenerate from a damaged state if you manage to get out of combat (flee). That hardly seems fair for the NPCs, no?
I can't answer your discount question other than suggesting that it's a design decision. But you can heal injuries to people with the proper tools.
At the risk of splitting hairs, let's not forget your captain and your ship both have a health bar. Both can be repaired with the proper skills and/or time. Your ship, after all, has a natural hull regeneration rate, which is supposed to simulate your crew effecting repairs much like your example with the aircraft carrier. Nothing is required there other than time, the amount of which is influenced by your skill point investments.
Then there are the specific injuries brought on by Injury System. Those injuries can be repaired with the proper tools. Returning to a starbase isn't necessary except to resupply. Seeing as you should be frequently stopping by a starbase anyway to pick up new missions (not all of them are available remotely through the comm), I really don't see the problem. Regardless, the developers have said they intend to introduce repair mini-games you can participate in once they implement ship interiors, which should make you completely self sufficient at the cost of some time.
I think you must have misunderstood something I wrote, because from the start I've been saying that realism tends to take a backseat to gameplay. I certainly never said "it's all about realism". I did point out that you seem to be upset about how realism is being ignored, and yet you only seem to be asking for realism "to a point". Because, for example, you're suggesting it's realistic to be able to switch out kits in combat while ignoring how impossibly difficult/ludicrous that would actually be to do in the middle of a hail of disruptor bolts. "Someone stop firing long enough to help me out with this buckle!".
This was your best counter argument yet. Also, I am not upset at all, Ever-quest (SOE) developers would have dismissed this a long time ago. After reading some of your talking points yesterday, I went and applied them to my play style to get a better understanding of what you're trying to articulate. I do think the components and rejuvenators are the key to success.
I am also going to go out and purchase different weapons for my BO's maybe the main problem is we are fighting with the wrong technology. However, this brings up another problem. I do not have the room to store every type of ground weapon for my bridge officers. Also, I do not have the space to store different types of personnel shield generators and armor. I hope in the interior aspect they allow us to have storage lockers on the ship to stow away gear for specific task. I also hope that we can beam back to the ship and regroup with out losing the mission. It would be nice if the ship could analyze the ground forces before we beam down. Which is what a Federation crew would do.
I would also like the ability to change out BO's on the ground. Not in combat, but if I reach a point on the ground and I want to beam down better tactical people. I would like to do that.
I would like the crafting system to enable us to make our own kits and decide which skill combination we'd like to include. Still draw from the skills available to class kit types and limit the total number of skills according to Mk.
On the one hand, that's a pretty interesting idea. Because it fosters more customization.
On the other hand, it also opens the game up to abuse and exploitation of imbalances in the systyem by a sub set of the population that min-maxxes.
I like your idea. But fear hardcore players would ruin the spirit of it.
Tough call. I don't think I could make that kind of decision.
If the game is truly about balance, then we as players should be able to do the same. Not more, but equal.
I do understand that the player has to do his or her part to make the system work, but the developers need to recognize to that the system is flawed and biased towards the NPC's. This should not be the goal the game should strive too. The combat should not be so easy and without penalty, but also it should not be a cakewalk for the NPC's either.
No, you are wrong. its not about balance and its not about the NPC's being anymore flawed then....being NPC's.
You claim you want to be equal with the NPC's. Ill assume that you'll in turn limit your intelligence, logic, and gamesmenship to the same limits dictated by program and code?
AI in games, especially an MMO, and even more so an MMO rushed to dead-line, Is simply not smart enough to challenge a player an 100% equal footing. The AI has to cheat, be it by numbers, resistance or damage. They need this bias as their own balance. Otherwise they simply will not be a challenge.
Is there room to go to far? Of course, there is. Fortunately this games normal mode, is considered by the vast majority, to be VERY forgiving. If this statement was not true, then adding higher difficulty settings would seem absurd rather then welcomed.
So it comes back this simple line of thought. Why play a game on an increased difficulty setting then complain about how unfair or unbiased the difficulty is? Cause, you know. Borg drones were able to call in proto-drones before the difficulty changes and no one complained about it then.
No, you are wrong. its not about balance and its not about the NPC's being anymore flawed then....being NPC's.
You claim you want to be equal with the NPC's. Ill assume that you'll in turn limit your intelligence, logic, and gamesmenship to the same limits dictated by program and code?
AI in games, especially an MMO, and even more so an MMO rushed to dead-line, Is simply not smart enough to challenge a player an 100% equal footing. The AI has to cheat, be it by numbers, resistance or damage. They need this bias as their own balance. Otherwise they simply will not be a challenge.
Is there room to go to far? Of course, there is. Fortunately this games normal mode, is considered by the vast majority, to be VERY forgiving. If this statement was not true, then adding higher difficulty settings would seem absurd rather then welcomed.
So it comes back this simple line of thought. Why play a game on an increased difficulty setting then complain about how unfair or unbiased the difficulty is? Cause, you know. Borg drones were able to call in proto-drones before the difficulty changes and no one complained about it then.
I did complain about that before. I was told that is the way it was in beta and because beta people are consider "the greatest people in the world" and they could not make it work, then us mortal game players cannot possibly do it. I do not really hold beta testers in high regard. However, I would like to see the ideals I suggested be added in. Also, the AI on some chess games are quite sophisticated.
I do not give any validity to the statement "vast majority" unless I see some data to support your hypothesis.
And it is not my fault my intelligence is limited to 135 on the WAIS intelligence scale.
I like the idea of Engineers getting cheaper repairs or doctors healing injuries and maybe tac officers getting cheaper weapons or some thing. Those are kind of neat ideas.
I did complain about that before. I was told that is the way it was in beta and because beta people are consider "the greatest people in the world" and they could not make it work, then us mortal game players cannot possibly do it. I do not really hold beta testers in high regard. However, I would like to see the ideals I suggested be added in. Also, the AI on some chess games are quite sophisticated.
I do not give any validity to the statement "vast majority" unless I see some data to support your hypothesis.
And it is not my fault my intelligence is limited to 135 on the WAIS intelligence scale.
So now the argument is that the game wasn't considered to easy. If thats the case, why bother with injury kits and the advanced settings? After all the costs of the kits factored highly on your list of complaints.
There is no secret cookie at the end of the road for playing on elite. There is no special club or secret handshake. If its to hard all you are doing is beating your head against a wall for nothing. Play on the level that gives you the player the most enjoyment. And if thats easy, then its easy, and no one else cares if thats fun for you. But *****ing about tons of deaths, expensive injury repairs, and a laundry list of fixes that only complicate things. Can not be defined as fun.
And as far as simply making the AI better....like a chess progrom :rolleyes:..Id love to hear how Cryptic is simply going to do that and make it challenging, but not to hard, balanced, but not cheat. When we as players often have varrying views on balance when playing against each other in PVP.
Nothing like having reasonable goals or requests here.
Comments
Not being able to change out equipment in combat is a fairly common restriction as well. Sure, we can ask "is it realistic that I can't just grab a different tricorder to use a different skill?", but at the same time is it realistic to expect to be able to remove all the components from your current kit, locate your new one, and buckle on all the new components in a single second while under fire? People tend to use the realism argument right up to the point where it starts getting in the way. Regardless, in this case your choice of kit goes back to the point of balance, and the decisions you're supposed to make before the fighting starts. It's meant to be part of your tactics. Personally, I'm just glad we're able to change out our abilities between fights; some MMOs don't even allow you to do that.
As for the rest, there are tools available to repair injuries without having to return to a spacedock. You just have to invest in them beforehand. And it sounds like eventually they'll allow us to play a mini-game aboard our ship to repair our damage.
Yes, but is unrealistic, a real team will come with all the different kits, since they do not know what they will encounter. And tricorder or kit like in the shows only weigh like 2 to 3 pounds. And if I am a commander in the field and I come up to a force of 10 or more Borg, I will call to the ship for reserves to even the odds. I would not even fight them individually. I would simply call for an orbital bombardment. why waste human resources?
On the ground we should be able to call up artillery support as the Admiral or Commanding officer.
Some captains can. Just not all of them. No, the limitation isn't realistic but it is part of the balance.
Realism and gameplay rarely go hand in hand. We could even argue that instantly changing out kits mid-fight is simply a matter of having the old kit and new kit swapped onto your person through transporter technology. But in the end it still comes down to a designer deciding whether or not he feels the idea does more harm than good. It may make things easier for you by removing the problem of having to make any pre-fight decisions, but that's probably contrary to what the designer wanted because he's after a certain style of gameplay. And what's easier for you is not necessarily easier for the developers to balance.
You suggest that you should be able to call in reserves when coming across a large force of Borg. And yet the whole point in pitting you against a large number of Borg is to raise the difficulty of that particular encounter. If you can simply counter it by calling in more units of your own then the entire point is lost. Why don't we just beam the enemy units off the surface of the planet and out into the vacuum of space and call it "mission complete" without leaving the comfort of the captain's chair? "Realism" has to take a backseat to gameplay sometimes. It sure got tossed out the window often enough in the television episodes in the name of storytelling.
If what you say is true, then why are we able to change out weapons in mid combat. A weapon has 3 preprogrammed skills. We are able to hit the "z" button in combat and change out the weapon. Why not have the same system for the kit. We should be able to at least have two preset kits, that we can change out in the field. In the science kit arena, some of the kits are offensive, some are defensive.
And if what you say is true "...realism and game-play rarely go hand and hand..." Then why did they add the difficulty system in the game to begin with? Also, if "balance" is the strive, I would argue that the balance has not been achieved. The NPC has become harder to kill and take less damage, while you become weaker as the encounter goes on. If you die, you do not refresh, you simply resume where you were and are weaker. The enemy npc, after you re-spawn, is back to full health. I think having the kit switchable in play like weapons would balance things out for you and your team, since you are the Commanding Officer.
Also, most Commanders decisions in combat is not based on what they think prior to the fight. A commander must understand and know the tactical situation on the ground. Also, the commander must in the plan account for the unknown and unpredictable. A preconscious decision would be to bring two kits to the fight. So if you are wrong, which most times is the case, you can adapt to the situation.
In essence, you say the whole combat strategy is based on someone who feels that people in combat do not do that, and that all plans in combat are done prior to the engagement. That may be how plans are done in TV or in the Movies, but that is not the way it is in combat at all.
As a commander in combat, we should be able to access the enemies position, then use the transporters to drop into the LZ, or have additional NPC's drop into the LZ as a reserve unit. We should also be able to set up an artillery battery or call in for an orbital bombardment to keep the enemy forces from massing in strength.
As a commander, you are tasked with trying to prevent your people from getting into unnecessary hand to hand engagement. That is why they have technology, even in close quarter combat, a real commander would send one lightly armed team to sweep the enemy one direction, and have a heavily armed squad in a fixed position do the actual elimination.
Also, the new system, although is really nice, and probably the best "death penalty" system I have seen in quite some time, it has a systematic way of making people avoid the combat all together. You are always fighting an "up-hill" battle as a Federation player. Although this is fun in some instances, if the Federation player is never allowed to have a point in the game where they have tactical advantage, which is not realistic to the show, then people will get tired of it really fast.
It feels to me in this game, whether pvp, pve, ground, or space...the Federation is always fighting the uphill battle. I find it unrealistic with all the personnel shields and armor designed to stop physical and kinetic damage, a hand-to-hand weapon can ignore all that, and in most instances is far more lethal then a rifle that can disintegrate people.
This systemic problem will eventually turn people off and just play on "normal." Before, the game gets to this state, I would recommend some changes to prevent this moment from occurring. It has already occurred in my fleet. And, if my fleet is a small sampling of the overall population of the game, I think the developers of the game should recognize it before it gets out-of-hand.
After reading it, I'd say it's a suggestion.
Im not sure what you are trying to get at here. Injuries are totally optional. You only have to deal with them if you make the choice to have your combat more difficult. So whats the point of making that personal choice moot by zurg rushing battles or by increasing the size of your group to trivialize enemy numbers?
If ground combat is seen as an obstruction or a time sink. You as the player have the option to choose to make it easier or harder..Or in the case of your B-tran example. To simply skip over them completely.
I would imagine the simplest reason being that perhaps the developers wanted and were willing to balance the game around a player having access to two weapon options in combat, but only one kit.
I think that had little to do with realism and everything to do with players complaining about the game being too easy, in addition to numerous requests on the forum asking for a difficulty slider (which Cryptic has used in other games they've developed). The only realism here is the reality that not everyone plays at the same skill level and a difficulty slider is a reasonable way of dealing with that hurdle.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, because if you die and respawn you have full shields and full health. If you happen to have an injury you can cure it on the spot with the appropriate repair device. You're as good as new before you have to face your opponents again.
Now if someone decide to continue fighting with injuries, then obviously they're entering the fight with a disadvantage. But it raises the question of why they're doing that rather than using a repair device to heal themselves up. If they're dying so often that the repairs are causing financial problems then I think they probably need to fall back to one of the lower difficulty settings.
As for the rest of this, it really sounds like you're looking for a completely different style of game, and I would honestly be surprised if STO ever went in that direction.
This is part of my point, the game should be trying to encourage people to play more and not discourage. The difficulty is fine in the game on advance or elite, but it seems only the NPC's are able to cal in reserves, transport around your forces and adjust to the combat. While your forces are stuck with what ever you beamed down to the planet with, and it is often when you beam down, you have no ideal what is on the planet.
I think as a commanding officer and an admiral, that being able to carry multiple kits into the combat and being able to change them out like weapons, would even the odds for the player character. I routinely see the npc forces doing all the normal things in combat which player characters are not allowed to do, and often the only reason is "that some beta tester did not think of it..."
In addition a captain of a starship should be able to cal in air support and orbital bombardments, and the commander should be able to cal in additional security forces. In the current mission I am on, there were 10 borgs in a squad. After we attacked and our offense was having success, the Borg were able to transport in reserve units right into the landing party to give them 5 more people.
This is really unfair under any difficulty system. If we as players can not call in reserves then npc's should not be able to either.
It is not true that you come back full of health and with shields maximized. Often, especially in space, the NPC camps the zone in spot. while your waiting on the sliders to get up to speed, the NPCS simple fly up to you and kill you before you re-spawn.
And to the part of injuries, why can I as a medical doctor be able to heal medical injuries to people? Or if anything get a discount on the cost of purchasing Minor Rejuvenations, and minor rejuvenations. As well, why can't engineers on the ship repair the ship from major and minor damage. Isn't the point of having 500 people in a crew to effect damage control.
I live on an aircraft carrier for five years, and we had a fire on-board one night which melted like 3 decks and warped deck plates, and the ship was able to effect repairs while floating in the water. Real naval ships do not go back to port to effect repairs. A tender just comes along side and helps with repairs, and you have people on board trained to do so.
Most ships do not even go back to port to resupply and replenish, we just did it at sea. one tender can resupply two ships at a time. They do have floating dry docks.
And your reasons oscillate, when you make a suggestion in favor of you, you say, "it is all about realism" then when I counter argue, you fall back onto "well that would be to realistic for the game" and I would argue that you cannot have it both ways. The game cannot be realistic for the NPC in offense and unrealistic for players in the defense. Which is what is happening at the moment. The player must have the same advantages and disadvantages as the NPC forces. The system does nothing to address this.
To ignore the situation and act like it doesn't exist is only going to make people upset. I am getting reports from all my commanders in my fleet of 92+ people. These complaints or suggestion are not my own sole issues. I have compiled a list and address the main ones and narrowed it down to what I think are core issues.
To simply just say, well you like it and it works for you, and that people who do not like it need to suck it up or learn to like it, is a mistake. The penalty system should encourage people to use it and not discourage people.
I guess I still dont see what you want here. You on one hand insist that you feel the higher difficulty settings are fine. Yet you continue to ask for options, changes, skills, or numbers that would do nothing but undermine or trivialize that very same difficulty.
More people, more abilities, more damage, and less hard choices about kits and crew. Can only equal easier.
I would like the crafting system to enable us to make our own kits and decide which skill combination we'd like to include. Still draw from the skills available to class kit types and limit the total number of skills according to Mk.
You won't understand what I am saying because you are caught up "heuristics." You keep interpreting what I am writing as "I want more than they got" and "I want abilities that the NPC's cannot do."
Also, you keep parsing out my statement and only focusing on parts you think give your argument validity. You have to take that paragraph in context of the entire article I have written in the thread. If you only parse out what you want to read and fill in the blanks with whatever you want, this will only enable more confusion on your part.
This is not what I am saying or writing at all. I am writing that I want to be equal to the NPC's ability. If the NPC can call in reserves, the player character should be able to call in reserves. If the NPC's can call in forces of 20 or more people, then the player character should be able to do that too.
The purpose of the "death" penalty system in a game setting is to simulate that "death" has consequences. Also, it simulates that nothing in life is free. I like the aspect that if we die in the game or are "incapacitated." In a game "incapacitate" is equal to "dying" and hugging is equivalent to "sex."
When you die there should be a consequence, however that consequence does not have to be in the form of "the enemy gets to fight with superior numbers all the time" or "players always have to fight an uphill battle."
Yesterday, I went out and purchased 10 units of Major Components and 10 units of Minor Components. Also, I purchased 10 units of Major Regenerators and 10 units of Minor Rejuvenators. I figured, I would approach the problem in a economic sense. The cost for this solution is 80,000 energy credits for the major components and 10,000 energy credits for the minor components. The rejuvenators cost me 8,000 and 1,000 energy credit. However, I think the 8,000 figure is not accurate.
Even though, I have not saved any money towards injuries, The cost was the same if I had just waited to go back to space dock, it has saved me time. In economics the two most important factors are money and time. Everyone has the same amount of time, which is twenty-four hours in a day. The component and rejuvenator ideal is basically the republicans idea of medical savings plan. Here you purchase insurance at cost prior to the injury, and it saves you time.
The first chance to test the system yesterday was that I responded to a priority 1 distress call to a fellow fleet member. He could not enter his playing zone because the mobs were camping the entrance. He had racked up a ton of injuries. After analyzing the problem, I decided to prep my ship to enter the zone. I enter the zone and started confusing the targets and tangling them up. While this was going on, I slowly moved to the starboard side of the zone to get away from the door. I encouraged my shipmate to do the same. After a while we overcame the foes and I stop to get an understanding of his situation.
I asked him to go back to space dock and repair because, if he had continued on he would probably get more injuries because at the end of these missions is usually two battleships. For the rest of his mission we adopted a policy of containing, isolating and eliminating the foes.
The total cost of my injuries was 1 minor component, and I l passed on all drops (we play on need&greed), so that my shipmate could rebuild his coffers. As we moved forward, he started to actually make money.
What does this anecdotal story mean?
Throughout the story, the mobs were continuously blowing him up and returning back to their full strength. Even when in some cases they were at 10 percent health. Also, when you get the mobs down to 10 percent health and you have more them 80 percent health, they mysteriously have a weapon that can bypass all your defenses that knocks you down to like 10 percent health. If this happen one or two times, I would dismiss it, but it happens like clockwork. I plan on it and have a heal sitting there waiting.
On the ground, the Borg were able to always call in reserve units right when you were about to overrun their unit.
If the game is truly about balance, then we as players should be able to do the same. Not more, but equal.
I do understand that the player has to do his or her part to make the system work, but the developers need to recognize to that the system is flawed and biased towards the NPC's. This should not be the goal the game should strive too. The combat should not be so easy and without penalty, but also it should not be a cakewalk for the NPC's either.
You're talking about power levels in space, not health and shields (and certainly not on the ground). As we can't directly observe any NPC ship power levels, neither of us have any idea how identically they function to ours or what process they have to go through when initiating an attack. However, NPC power levels obviously do exists as they are the basis for the various powers that attack subsystem strength.
I will also point out that, unlike player ground shields, NPC ground units shields do not regenerate from a damaged state if you manage to get out of combat (flee). That hardly seems fair for the NPCs, no?
I can't answer your discount question other than suggesting that it's a design decision. But you can heal injuries to people with the proper tools.
At the risk of splitting hairs, let's not forget your captain and your ship both have a health bar. Both can be repaired with the proper skills and/or time. Your ship, after all, has a natural hull regeneration rate, which is supposed to simulate your crew effecting repairs much like your example with the aircraft carrier. Nothing is required there other than time, the amount of which is influenced by your skill point investments.
Then there are the specific injuries brought on by Injury System. Those injuries can be repaired with the proper tools. Returning to a starbase isn't necessary except to resupply. Seeing as you should be frequently stopping by a starbase anyway to pick up new missions (not all of them are available remotely through the comm), I really don't see the problem. Regardless, the developers have said they intend to introduce repair mini-games you can participate in once they implement ship interiors, which should make you completely self sufficient at the cost of some time.
I think you must have misunderstood something I wrote, because from the start I've been saying that realism tends to take a backseat to gameplay. I certainly never said "it's all about realism". I did point out that you seem to be upset about how realism is being ignored, and yet you only seem to be asking for realism "to a point". Because, for example, you're suggesting it's realistic to be able to switch out kits in combat while ignoring how impossibly difficult/ludicrous that would actually be to do in the middle of a hail of disruptor bolts. "Someone stop firing long enough to help me out with this buckle!".
This was your best counter argument yet. Also, I am not upset at all, Ever-quest (SOE) developers would have dismissed this a long time ago. After reading some of your talking points yesterday, I went and applied them to my play style to get a better understanding of what you're trying to articulate. I do think the components and rejuvenators are the key to success.
I am also going to go out and purchase different weapons for my BO's maybe the main problem is we are fighting with the wrong technology. However, this brings up another problem. I do not have the room to store every type of ground weapon for my bridge officers. Also, I do not have the space to store different types of personnel shield generators and armor. I hope in the interior aspect they allow us to have storage lockers on the ship to stow away gear for specific task. I also hope that we can beam back to the ship and regroup with out losing the mission. It would be nice if the ship could analyze the ground forces before we beam down. Which is what a Federation crew would do.
I would also like the ability to change out BO's on the ground. Not in combat, but if I reach a point on the ground and I want to beam down better tactical people. I would like to do that.
On the one hand, that's a pretty interesting idea. Because it fosters more customization.
On the other hand, it also opens the game up to abuse and exploitation of imbalances in the systyem by a sub set of the population that min-maxxes.
I like your idea. But fear hardcore players would ruin the spirit of it.
Tough call. I don't think I could make that kind of decision.
No, you are wrong. its not about balance and its not about the NPC's being anymore flawed then....being NPC's.
You claim you want to be equal with the NPC's. Ill assume that you'll in turn limit your intelligence, logic, and gamesmenship to the same limits dictated by program and code?
AI in games, especially an MMO, and even more so an MMO rushed to dead-line, Is simply not smart enough to challenge a player an 100% equal footing. The AI has to cheat, be it by numbers, resistance or damage. They need this bias as their own balance. Otherwise they simply will not be a challenge.
Is there room to go to far? Of course, there is. Fortunately this games normal mode, is considered by the vast majority, to be VERY forgiving. If this statement was not true, then adding higher difficulty settings would seem absurd rather then welcomed.
So it comes back this simple line of thought. Why play a game on an increased difficulty setting then complain about how unfair or unbiased the difficulty is? Cause, you know. Borg drones were able to call in proto-drones before the difficulty changes and no one complained about it then.
I did complain about that before. I was told that is the way it was in beta and because beta people are consider "the greatest people in the world" and they could not make it work, then us mortal game players cannot possibly do it. I do not really hold beta testers in high regard. However, I would like to see the ideals I suggested be added in. Also, the AI on some chess games are quite sophisticated.
I do not give any validity to the statement "vast majority" unless I see some data to support your hypothesis.
And it is not my fault my intelligence is limited to 135 on the WAIS intelligence scale.
So now the argument is that the game wasn't considered to easy. If thats the case, why bother with injury kits and the advanced settings? After all the costs of the kits factored highly on your list of complaints.
There is no secret cookie at the end of the road for playing on elite. There is no special club or secret handshake. If its to hard all you are doing is beating your head against a wall for nothing. Play on the level that gives you the player the most enjoyment. And if thats easy, then its easy, and no one else cares if thats fun for you. But *****ing about tons of deaths, expensive injury repairs, and a laundry list of fixes that only complicate things. Can not be defined as fun.
And as far as simply making the AI better....like a chess progrom :rolleyes:..Id love to hear how Cryptic is simply going to do that and make it challenging, but not to hard, balanced, but not cheat. When we as players often have varrying views on balance when playing against each other in PVP.
Nothing like having reasonable goals or requests here.