Excited for S6 and all the content around fleets and starbases. But, as is stands currently on tribble I am concerned about the way resources are contributed for fleet tasks. This quote from another player best sums it up:
of everything I've seen (most of which I think is good) - the first come first serve contribution system is IMO not a good method as it will allow for certain cliques within a fleet to monopolize Fleet Credit generation and as a result, will make a lot of what is 'provisioned' into the Fleet store unobtainable for some members who come in, WANT to donate (and earn Fleet Credits); and find that everything is full, and no further donations can be made.
I hope this catches the eyes of the right people currently developing the fleet system. I can see alot of problems coming up with this with in the fleet. where one person just decides to throw in everything needed and swamps up all the fleet marks and credits before anyone else has a chance to contribute.
Please think of something else like a pool where any fleet member can add to this pool (and recieve credit) but the fleet leaders then allocate from that pool to the tasks the fleet votes on doing first. Or something else other then "first come first serve"
Comments
You could apply this system to the fleet stabase UI. setting min and max per person (or per fleet rank) allowed per 24 hour period. so everyone has a better chance to make a contribution and earn fleet marks. This way, someone cannot say they didnt have a chance to contribute, earn marks etc.
NOT a hard limit per person set by Cryptic! that is not good.
But, limits that are adjustable (like the bank system) which are a setting option the fleet elects to use (min-max). So in the case of smaller fleets with say, 5 people. They can still add unlimited resources per person. (they would opt not to use a Min-max setting since they have only 5 people). The same way we can elect not to use the min-max setting on fleet bank tabs)
Just another way to have a check in place, but not restrict the people/fleet that dont need it or want to use it. I like the "resource pool" method better, but with this you could perhaps use some of the system already developed for fleet bank tabs.
If you let the leadership set the limits, it'll still allow them to set the rules in the favor of their internal clique and for large public fleets it won't be different in the end than what we have now. This is not so easy to fix.
In theory you should always be able to fill stuff for special projects while you wait for the main projects. Maybe they should make it so more special projects can be run in parallel.
limits adjustable by fleet leaders seem wise as well so they can set it dependant on the fleet size.
Registered: Oct/2009 , LTS : Feb/2011
Fleets: Warriors of the Phoenix, Kirian Industries[/SIGPIC]
Three years and still no Captain Klaa hair...
Like said above, people rushing to contribute, leaving others without a way to earn fleet credits. So this is a major negative for large fleets, even for moderate-sized fleets.
The pigeonholed way of earning Fleet Merits by doing Fleet Events, which again means large fleets will be at a disadvantage since not everyone would be able to earn them. And small fleets with casual players be hurt with this too, since they won't have enough players to form teams to earn Fleet Merits.
Then there is the Fleet Ships, which are better than the C-store ships, which makes us wonder how Cryptic is going to earn income?
Also, given these ships are mainly upgraded Tier 2s and 3s, why don't they finally implement a ship upgrade system so we can level up with our favorite ships? And at Level 50+, those in fleets get a chance to unlock that 10th console slot and fleet buffs (Shields, HPs).
This also prevents Fleets having moments where people are passed over for ships (due to no ships being available and officers getting first pick).
Cheers,
Brandon =/\=
Thank you for replying! I fear issues with the fleet politics solution. With some fleets being very large, monitoring everyone that contributes, and the only method for recourse being removal from the fleet will create additional problems. And this is for only the baddies that know there is a policy and dont follow it. Many fleets have members that dont pay attention to new policy right away, dont speak english but enjoy a soical group to play with etc. Those guys will just go about a normal day contributing not even knowing what they are doing is not "fair" for the other 400 plus people wanting to earn merits.
If you have 400 members and 10 keep sucking up all the fleet merits not listening to fleet policy what else can leaders do aside from remove them from the fleet? That will create problems for cryptic with tickets such as "I was in this fleet forever, contributed a ton of resources to the Starbase then they kicked me for helping!"
We need something in the fleet advancement system to decide how everyone will have a fair shot at contributing and earning fleet merit.
Basically, the output of the Starbase projects come down to services and products. The only way to get either one is to contribute to projects and earn fleet credits in the process.
Let's face it, most people are interested in the fleet ships. So let's go with that.
Assume the fleet has managed, after many moons, to upgrade their shipyards to T5. In that time, everyone has earned fleet credits based on how much they contributed to the fleet. Let's use a fictional "Cap'n Skippy" as our example.
Skippy wants a particular ship. He's been faithfully contributing to the fleet and he's got a nice pile of fleet credits. Nobody can directly cheat him out of those credits. He could even form a new fleet and take the credits with him.
Before he can get the ship, a provisioning project has to be started to put the "schematics" or whatever in the fleet store. Skippy doesn't control which projects are in play, but he makes it known that he wants his ship.
Let's say for instance that Skippy's fleet doesn't want to provision a ship. Worst case scenario, he can't find another fleet to join that has a T5 shipyard and is willing to provision the fleet store. Skippy has every reason to feel a bit disgruntled, but at least he still has his fleet credits and we have to assume he will eventually be able to spend them on what he wants.
But suppose Skippy doesn't want to leave his fleet. His fleet doesn't want to provision the ship Skippy wants, they want to provision something different.
Skippy stops contributing because they aren't building what Skippy wants. Projects start moving slower. Generation of fleet credits slows down. Everybody else has burned through the fleet credits they had before, but Skippy's still sitting on a nice little pile of them and he's also sitting on the resources he's been stockpiling because they aren't building what Skippy wants. In particular, Skippy's got a big pile of fleet marks that are not in plentiful supply.
Skippy cuts a deal. If they'll start HIS project, he'll start kicking in his considerable resources on the other projects as well. Projects start moving quicker, generation of fleet credits speeds up. Once the fleet store has been stocked with his ship, Skippy's able to jump on it sooner because he's got credits banked up and ready to spend where everybody else is still catching up.
Granted, there are more holes in this scenario than a Romulan at a bat'leth tournament. But the case is the same... Skippy simply has more resources than anybody else because he's been grinding and contributing more, and nobody has the power to take it away from him. If his fleet continues to stonewall him, Skippy goes and forms a new fleet and takes his stockpiles with him. He's been slowed way down, but if he's going to grind one way or the other he may as well grind for his own fleet and have a better shot at what he wants.
The main thing I see is that this is going to put pressure on very large fleets to downsize. It's also going to create a lot of incentive for fleets to operate democratically. I would expect fleets to campaign and vote for the projects that everybody wants.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
I've been on both sides of that wall, no fun on either side.
Dec/2008
No doubt about it, when the system launches we can probably expect a "gold rush". But this is assuming that 10 individuals can "carry" a 400 person fleet all the way to T-5 without a break. I'm not sure how realistic that is. As the number of resource sinks and the cost of advancement increases, the harder it will be for fleets to finish projects without mass cooperation.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
These slots will only be available for Secondary Projects based on the completion of Primary Projects and would not add to the Advancement of Tiers... (this keeps the advancement at a slow pace, but would make many more Large Fleet members happy as they will be able to get the New Shiney's in a reasonable time)
They would be available to do over and over, thus making it possible for many more members in Large Fleets to get the shiney's and wouldn't make it necessary for members who already have the shiney's, to have to put in resources for something they already have. (though they could if they wanted to)
So essentially, when a Fleet opens up a Tier One Starship Construction Project and upon it's completion, a Secondary slot becomes available to RE-DO that project...
Perhaps a small cost of some commodity and/or SBxp's could be used to obtain these Secondary Project Slots and maybe have each MIL/ENG/SCI Tier be able to have up to 2 Secondary Project Slots that could be purchased.
This way, a Large Fleet can always have a popular project in the pipe-line for all it's members to donate too, as well as having the Four Primary Projects going to advance the Fleets Tier standings.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Bingo for the fleet politics. I have been involved in politics in online organizations, and it is never a fun thing. If they're anything like this in STO, I shudder for the fleet system.
I can only imagine how many posts there are going to be around the 7 month mark when the fleet leaders no longer need the 50 or so people they've strung along for their starbase. Either the Powers That Be are ignoring everyone's comments about these, are ignorant as to the implications, or intend to watch the players stab each other in the back. Not a fun thought any way you cut it, and their "we intend fleet politics to solve this" attitude is unsettling.
Large fleet
-Good: quick at resource gathering
-Bad: Politics in distribution of shiny-ies
Small fleet
-Good: Less politics
-Bad: Slower at resource gathering
Come join the 44th Fleet.
startrek.44thfleet.com[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I don't really think They believe that letting Rancor and Rage dominate Their new SB System is the way to go...
My suggestion above your post, could go a long way to diminish this from happening.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Big fleets might have more resources, but they're going to have to slow down and provision what the majority wants to keep the membership happy. If they don't, they'll lose members to smaller fleets and the fleet sizes will start averaging out more.
As the big fleets thin out, they'll get more nimble and start reaping the benefits of hitting that "sweet spot" of active players.
Fact is, Cryptic benefits from averaging out the fleet sizes. Anything that slows down fleet advancement enough to keep people playing, without slowing it down too far and driving them to quit, works in Cryptic's favor.
The real losers, if any, are likely to be small fleets with few active members. They won't have the resources to advance reasonably quickly, nor the Starbase amenities to attract more players, and will risk losing members to mid-sized fleets that do.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Yeah, thats sure to work out well. :rolleyes:
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Crusader
As a 'Solo-with-Alt's' Fleety, I'm actually looking forward to this system hitting Holodeck...
I plan on playing this game till either It or Myself, die... ...(preferably neither anytime soon)
So this will give me a Very-Long-Term Goal, to continue to play the game.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Fleets arent just for those who contribute everything its for those who log in with the time and effort they can afford. Casual people will be left way behind.
Make it worth it for everyone or whats the point.
Ground rules are useless with out the tools provided by the developers to enforce them. Its like we have ground rules that new members can't take items directly from the bank. We also have tab tools to enforce this in the bank settings.
Your development team needs to do a better job to enable us as fleet leaders to establish ground rules.
Cheers
Johny
this will hinder the growth of the star base for smaller fleets
join date: Jan. 2012
:P
I dont know... my idea might suck haha.
Fleet politics should deal with those who aren't contributing by looking at the fleet bank logs of who is participating and who is not.. and those not be talked to by the fleet leaders or expelled from said fleet to prevent them from accessing items that the rest of the fleet members have contributed to. In no way should a select few members within a fleet have access to content meant for the entire fleet.
STO Forum Account Creation Date: June 9, 2008 (Perpetual Entertainment at the time)
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Pestalence_XC
Proud member of Xenocorp
"Listen, and understand. That terminator is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead." - Kyle Reese, 'Terminator'
I have to second this. Saying that it's going to be all a matter of fleet politics is glib and unhelpful.
Give fleets the tools they need to set and enforce policy. Not doing so is just irresponsible.
***Disenchanted***
Real Join Date: Monday, 17 May 2010
This.
Also this.
I'm pretty much an lone wolf and even I can see the current setup is ripe for a Lord of the Flies type scenario. Once any equipment useable by an individual player is unlocked by an fleet (weapons, ships, etc.), the item in question should be permanently available for purchase in unlimited quantities by all fleet members. At worst it should unlock an individual project/task for an fleet member to requisition the specific item they want that is always available.
With a total of five ongoing fleet projects possible, no single player can dominate all projects and fleets will need to coordinate more on how to accomplish a particular project, instead of a resource free-for-all.
Quick, dirty, simple.
I'd support something like this .
There needs to be some kind of "balance" mechanism in place , so fleets can both progress with the building of the base , and also be able to work on projects (or on the cases of larger fleets -- multiple projects) at the same time .
If Cryptic relies on Fleet Leaders to decide between either Base Progression or Fleet Equipment (weapons & ships) , someone(s) are going to end up unhappy .