test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Update on Fleet Marks and Dilithium

12223252728101

Comments

  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Aaaaand now you're just trying to get this thread locked.
  • himble42himble42 Member Posts: 21 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Back in the day that Dilithium was introduced all the other ridiculous currencies were removed to "streamline" stuff.

    We've now got these creeping back into the game with FM, OM, RM ....

    My suggestion is go back to the original idea. Get rid of these additional currencies and stick with dilithium. Different amounts dilithium for different missions, get rid of the refining cap - or increase it significantly - and only have this for the currency on the fleet and personal development track things.

    Alternatively, if you really want to keep FM to promote interaction, still get rid of OM and RM (turn into Dil) and give fleet marks for all missions, events, pvp, etc that require you to team with another person or group of people. Use the FM for fleet advancement and none of the fleet projects use Dil anymore, just FM.

    Keeping the economy simple, let people choose what missions they want to do and how they want to play, and don't stifle them. Then you won't get this kind of outcry.

    This outcry purely comes from the fact that the other ways of getting FM are few, poorly rewarded, and old.
    Himble_zps0106667a.jpg
  • papertoastypapertoasty Member Posts: 248 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    after reading most of this and seeing a few things highlighted something pops out at me

    i find it seems a bit fishy that within weeks of a few fleets reaching t5 (completely, and bragging all over the forums about it too) the devs come out with 'fleets are progressing faster than their suppose too so lets pull the plug on this'.

    hmmm, i wonder how some of those mega-fleets filled out those obscene fleet mark requirements so quick?

    prolly running some of the same afk foundry maps that i ran the last 2 weeks while i work.

    so those of us that are now essentially stuck have to suffer because of the few that reached t5 too fast??
    .
    .
    .

    im just glad that the fleet im in just finished out t3 shipyard in time
    too bad the t3 base upgrade we just started prolly wont finish for months
  • ariseaboveariseabove Member Posts: 186 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    dastahl wrote: »
    Concurrently, we also closed a major loophole in Foundry missions in Season 7 which removed Dilithium rewards from what many considered "exploitative" Foundry missions (literally "log in click a button" get a boat of Dilithium). The number of players who were exploiting this type of mission was vast and so there were several weeks where we aggressively adjusted Dilithium rewards in order to keep Dilithium earnings back in line with our goal of getting more Dilithium into players hands without using the exploit. Due to the tuning we?ve done with Season 7, players are now earning more Dilithium than ever without the Foundry exploit.

    Why did you bother mentioning this? Why are you trying to make out players exploited a game mechanic?

    It was you the Dev's that are at fault, it was you the Dev's that created the so called "loophole" by having your own click missions that are still in play.

    What missions am I talking about?....The Academy click missions!

    Then a player comes a long and copies it to a Foundry mission based on one of your Dev made missions and you wanna turn around and call us Exploiters.

    Your been a tad hypocritical don't you think?

    Personally I would remove that whole paragraph, People (Myself included) are already annoyed at you guys/girls for the resent changes but now you go pour salt in an old wound....
  • kyuui13kyuui13 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    olivia211 wrote: »
    It's easy to say that more than half of those accounts are ftp and aren't even touched anymore. It would be like me owning a junkyard and boasting that I have 30 cars. What's the use if maybe 3 of those cars actually run? WHO CARES! I still have 30 cars!

    :rolleyes:

    I think, thats what Cryptic is trying to value here; the car count. Not the running count, but the total count, and to me, that is missing the mark by a wide margin
    Next time you log in, ask yourself this.
    dastahl wrote: »
    If you can't have fun, then what is the point?
  • marc8219marc8219 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    tinead51 wrote: »
    "Knock,Knock" hello anybody there? seems marc8129 has left the building ;)

    Don't get your hopes up so soon. This thread is so long I actually have to do other stuff to like be in game sometimes and take a break to eat which I am about to do now, but don't worry I will be back in awhile to support the Devs decision.
    Tala -KDF Tac- House of Beautiful Orions
  • phyrexianherophyrexianhero Member Posts: 768 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    You're assuming 2 million captains = 2 million unique and active accounts.

    Actually I'm not. I posted just yesterday that the 2 million captains included alts and characters that never made it past Lt 1, possibly untouched for 3 years. I was very much against that number being 2 million accounts instead of 2 million characters. ;)
    Playing since January 2010. STOwiki administrator. Accolade hunter.
    My STOwiki page | Reachable in-game @PhyrexianHero
    Fed Armada: Section 31 (level 730, 2700+ members)
    KDF Armada: Klingon Intelligence (level 699, 2100+ members)
  • adendisadendis Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    The more you tighten your grip, the more players will slip through your fingers.

    Ok sorry, wrong franchise.. but you get the idea.
  • sunfranckssunfrancks Member Posts: 3,925 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    after reading most of this and seeing a few things highlighted something pops out at me

    i find it seems a bit fishy that within weeks of a few fleets reaching t5 (completely, and bragging all over the forums about it too) the devs come out with 'fleets are progressing faster than their suppose too so lets pull the plug on this'.

    hmmm, i wonder how some of those mega-fleets filled out those obscene fleet mark requirements so quick?

    prolly running some of the same afk foundry maps that i ran the last 2 weeks while i work.

    so those of us that are now essentially stuck have to suffer because of the few that reached t5 too fast??
    .
    .
    .

    im just glad that the fleet im in just finished out t3 shipyard in time
    too bad the t3 base upgrade we just started prolly wont finish for months


    No fleet has got to T5 completely, a couple of fleets were bragging that they hit T5 shipyards, but that is not the whole starbase.

    T5 shipyard is relatively easy to get to if you just concentrate on that alone.....
    Fed: Eng Lib Borg (Five) Tac Andorian (Shen) Sci Alien/Klingon (Maelrock) KDF:Tac Romulan KDF (Sasha) Tac Klingon (K'dopis)
    Founder, member and former leader to Pride Of The Federation Fleet.
    What I feel after I hear about every decision made since Andre "Mobile Games Generalisimo" Emerson arrived...
    3oz8xC9gn8Fh4DK9Q4.gif





  • edited February 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • olivia211olivia211 Member Posts: 675 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Actually I'm not. I posted just yesterday that the 2 million captains included alts and characters that never made it past Lt 1, possibly untouched for 3 years. I was very much against that number being 2 million accounts instead of 2 million characters. ;)

    sounds very much like a fleet that claims to have 100 members when it's really maybe 15 people with multiple alts and 4-6 of them don't even logon anymore.

    The argument is that yes, technically, they do have that many members, but it looks like Enron accounting to me and we all know what happened to Enron.
    No, I am not who you think I am. I am someone different. I am instead a banana.
  • azurianstarazurianstar Member Posts: 6,985 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I'm extremely disappointed that Stahl basically gave Small Fleets the middle finger in his OP Comment.


    Small fleets work harder than Large Fleets in doing daily grinding and have to endure Public Queues with people using them to level up their "newb" characters (which even with buffed to Level 50, players with characters less than Captain are useless in Fleet Events), and deal with the serious problem with AFKers ruining events. Not to mention Small fleets have to use up their savings and deal with people leaving because they want to go to a larger fleet.

    Don't get me wrong, I understand the need for the difference between Large Fleets and Small Fleets, but you shouldn't punch people and give them the middle finger solely because they want to stay small and avoid things like drama and politics. And honestly, STO doesn't have enough content to justify even being in a large fleet outside of a maxed Fleet Starbase. I mean this isn't old school MMOs like Everquest that needed 50-100 person raids.


    So Stahl, I recommend you rethink your policies regarding small fleets.



    One more thing I wish to add: Public Queues suck.
  • papertoastypapertoasty Member Posts: 248 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    sunfrancks wrote: »
    No fleet has got to T5 completely, a couple of fleets were bragging that they hit T5 shipyards, but that is not the whole starbase.

    T5 shipyard is relatively easy to get to if you just concentrate on that alone.....

    well . . . there is one that made a vid of them filling out the t5 holdings http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=550091

    i still find it a strange turn events nonetheless
  • rinksterrinkster Member Posts: 3,549 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    So, we are officially past the page count of the threrad that was locked by Branflakes.

    Come on devs, time to step up and make an announcement......

    Oh, and please do not lock this thread because a CDF player decides the best way to stifle dissent is to break the TOS.

    Yes, i am looking at you Marc. Funny how you are not getting edited, doncha think.....
  • knuhteb5knuhteb5 Member Posts: 1,831 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    sunfrancks wrote: »
    No fleet has got to T5 completely, a couple of fleets were bragging that they hit T5 shipyards, but that is not the whole starbase.

    T5 shipyard is relatively easy to get to if you just concentrate on that alone.....

    I've noticed that, as well. Any of the pics of people showing off tier 5 starbases shows their sci and engineering are at tier 3 or tier 4 while military has gone up to 5. Those starbases aren't finished yet. Nice try.
    marc8219 wrote: »
    Don't get your hopes up so soon. This thread is so long I actually have to do other stuff to like be in game sometimes and take a break to eat which I am about to do now, but don't worry I will be back in awhile to support the Devs decision.

    You mean people actually have lives outside of STO!? GASP!??? Who would have known!?
    aGHGQIKr41KNi.gif
  • atomictikiatomictiki Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Don't get me wrong, I understand the need for the difference between Large Fleets and Small Fleets, but you shouldn't punch people and give them the middle finger solely because they want to stay small and avoid things like drama and politics. And honestly, STO doesn't have enough content to justify even being in a large fleet outside of a maxed Fleet Starbase. I mean this isn't old school MMOs like Everquest that needed 50-100 person raids.

    There should be no difference, and scaling should be introduced.

    cryptic shouldbe doing all it can for player retention, yet instead seems hellbent on telling customers to get the hell off their lawn.
    Leave nerfing to the professionals.
  • captainmikeccaptainmikec Member Posts: 94 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    they said before fleets were starving for FM so they added them into the IOR mission
    now they just took them away with no plan to replace the lost marks for several months, in effect putting fleets back into the same starving situation they were in before, not a good plan

    i remember reading them say that DL is easier to get now than ever before
    but at the same time they just said that fleet/players are starved for DL, that is partially true, players are starved for REFINED DL. I just unlocked T5 omega rep yesterday, needless to say i was shocked at the costs. DL to unlock, then DL to get the items....

    if DL is easier to get now, and fleets are starved for it, then either players arent working for it or something in the system is holding them back
    i am inclined to believe the refining cap and multiple demands for DL are the problem
    STF gear, romulan gear, starbases, embassy, consumables, DOFF requisitions, ships, and other things, including buying zen ingame for DL.... its too little spread too thin

    i have mentioned it a couple times now, but one idea i have besides raising the cap is to add unrefined DL as requirements to some projects/items in place of part of the refined DL requirements, maybe some projects/items just completely unrefined to help ease the burden (like consumable stuff).

    idk what metrics are being used to determine the average refining for DL each day
    are the numbers taking into account multiple characters on an account and even 1 person having alt accounts each with characters. since the only listed criteria was "max level players".
    what is the activity requirement for the players to count in the sample? active in the last week, month, 3 months?
    i have a lvl 50 klingon character that i rarely hit the limit on, he shouldnt be counted since he is an alt
    also the effect of the Zen exchange has to be considered, since some ppl will buy DL with zen and bypass the refining process altogether on their character

    but even then, the people that are active could use the refining boost, the people that arent even hitting the limit now wouldnt be effected by it anyway. might even encourage some to play more if they know they can get further with a little less wait. not to mention the increase in refining could encourage more zen trading thus more profit for cryptic.

    Rule of Acquisition 2 - The best deal is the one that brings the most profit.


    as for the fleet marks
    removing them was a bad decision, the cool down could have been adjusted on IOR, the amount of FM reduced some, or if there was another idea waiting to replace it that would have been fine too, but there wasnt

    i also used the foundry as a source for some fleet marks
    as others have mentioned, i dont find the fleet missions worth playing.
    its another repetitive grind that is kinda dull, on top of the normal play, DL grind, omega grind and romulan grind. the FM u get for the time required just isnt up to par. (the romulan missions could use a boost too, most of those missions arent worth doing for 5 marks and cap needs to be lifted on missions like azure nebula)
    i especially hate the freighter protection missions, for me the STFs are better time spent. i guess the lesser of 2 weevils.

    i understand them wanting to make the fleet marks more group oriented so wanting them out of the IOR and into other team content
    but i compare what was done to kicking the jack out from under a car before the flat tire can be changed.... u have to have the new tire ready before u kick the support out from under the car.

    everyone that plays has an interest in seeing the game go well
    ppl are upset cause they like the game and care what happens to it, so the criticism should be examined closely by the staff,.
    on this and every issue, ppl are telling them what would make the game better, thus give more incentive to play and spend money
    its market research data that some companies pay millions to consultant firms to get, and they are being told how to improve their product for free

    Rule of Acquisition 76 - Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the Hell out of your enemies
    "Tickle us, do we not laugh? Prick us, do we not bleed? Wrong us, shall we not revenge?"
    -General Chang
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    well . . . there is one that made a vid of them filling out the t5 holdings http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=550091

    i still find it a strange turn events nonetheless

    That's the same fleet whose reps went on a crusade about how everyone should join five hundred member zerg fleets, and that anyone who wanted considerations for smaller fleets were lazy, greedy and entitled folks who wanted starbases handed to them for no work.
  • knuhteb5knuhteb5 Member Posts: 1,831 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    That's the same fleet whose reps went on a crusade about how everyone should join five hundred member zerg fleets, and that anyone who wanted considerations for smaller fleets were lazy, greedy and entitled folks who wanted starbases handed to them for no work.

    I stay clear of those fleets because there tends to be little or no individuality in them.
    aGHGQIKr41KNi.gif
  • marc8219marc8219 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    rinkster wrote: »
    So, we are officially past the page count of the threrad that was locked by Branflakes.

    Come on devs, time to step up and make an announcement......

    Oh, and please do not lock this thread because a CDF player decides the best way to stifle dissent is to break the TOS.

    Yes, i am looking at you Marc. Funny how you are not getting edited, doncha think.....

    I am not a dev, its just that I am not breaking TOS thats why I am not edited. You people that keep dev bashing should be glad that they are nice enough to let it all slide.

    Anyway I was just taking a break from this thread for awhile to get in game and still see we will have no problems with this update hurting fleet progression at all. It is a sound update with reasonable fixes. I support it entirely.
    Tala -KDF Tac- House of Beautiful Orions
  • clannmacclannmac Member Posts: 279 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    ...everyone that plays has an interest in seeing the game go well. ppl are upset cause they like the game and care what happens to it, so the criticism should be examined closely by the staff. On this and every issue, ppl are telling them what would make the game better, thus give more incentive to play and spend money - i'ts market research data that some companies pay millions to consultant firms to get, and they are being told how to improve their product for free.

    Well said.
    366400.jpg

    Fleet Commander
    Caprica's Revenge
    (...actually active since November 2010, which may one day be important to archaeologists, but not to anyone else...)
  • tinead51tinead51 Member Posts: 449 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    marc8219 wrote: »
    I am not a dev, its just that I am not breaking TOS thats why I am not edited. You people that keep dev bashing should be glad that they are nice enough to let it all slide.

    Anyway I was just taking a break from this thread for awhile to get in game and still see we will have no problems with this update hurting fleet progression at all. It is a sound update with reasonable fixes. I support it entirely.

    You're definately not a Dev mate,more a Div :D
  • kyuui13kyuui13 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    knuhteb5 wrote: »
    I stay clear of those fleets because there tends to be little or no individuality in them.

    I am sure you are not alone, My fleet is small, I know them all, I've been face to face with a couple of them in fact. I get punished for not wanting to deal with idiots, politics favoritism and everything else that comes with the mega fleet. I get punished for wanting to relax and enjoy STO.

    hmmm.
    Next time you log in, ask yourself this.
    dastahl wrote: »
    If you can't have fun, then what is the point?
  • rinksterrinkster Member Posts: 3,549 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    marc8219 wrote: »
    I am not a dev, its just that I am not breaking TOS thats why I am not edited. You people that keep dev bashing should be glad that they are nice enough to let it all slide.

    Anyway I was just taking a break from this thread for awhile to get in game and still see we will have no problems with this update hurting fleet progression at all. It is a sound update with reasonable fixes. I support it entirely.


    Flaming and/or Trolling
    You may not post content which contains insults to other users or Perfect World Entertainment Staff, are specifically made to create undue discontent on the forums, disturbances in forum threads, pick fights or otherwise promote unfriendly conversation.


    ...and you think that calling all those who disagree with you obnoxious is not flaming eh.....

    and then there was your post inserting real world party politics.

    Do you think we can not read.....
  • phyrexianherophyrexianhero Member Posts: 768 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    olivia211 wrote: »
    sounds very much like a fleet that claims to have 100 members when it's really maybe 15 people with multiple alts and 4-6 of them don't even logon anymore.

    The argument is that yes, technically, they do have that many members, but it looks like Enron accounting to me and we all know what happened to Enron.

    Just don't blame me for the numbers. :) I was the one who was saying Cryptic was just trying to inflate their player numbers, for some time now.
    Playing since January 2010. STOwiki administrator. Accolade hunter.
    My STOwiki page | Reachable in-game @PhyrexianHero
    Fed Armada: Section 31 (level 730, 2700+ members)
    KDF Armada: Klingon Intelligence (level 699, 2100+ members)
  • kyuui13kyuui13 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    rinkster wrote: »
    Flaming and/or Trolling
    You may not post content which contains insults to other users or Perfect World Entertainment Staff, are specifically made to create undue discontent on the forums, disturbances in forum threads, pick fights or otherwise promote unfriendly conversation.


    ...and you think that calling all those who disagree with you obnoxious is not flaming eh.....

    and then there was your post inserting real world party politics.

    Do you think we can not read.....

    Interesting this.
    Next time you log in, ask yourself this.
    dastahl wrote: »
    If you can't have fun, then what is the point?
  • kyuui13kyuui13 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Just don't blame me for the numbers. :) I was the one who was saying Cryptic was just trying to inflate their player numbers, for some time now.

    knowing that you've been around for ages, Answer me this, this is NOT the first time they've misrepresented things to the player base, is it not?

    I seem to recall they've done it before. On several things.
    Next time you log in, ask yourself this.
    dastahl wrote: »
    If you can't have fun, then what is the point?
  • trellabortrellabor Member Posts: 209 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    rinkster wrote: »
    Flaming and/or Trolling
    You may not post content which contains insults to other users or Perfect World Entertainment Staff, are specifically made to create undue discontent on the forums, disturbances in forum threads, pick fights or otherwise promote unfriendly conversation.


    ...and you think that calling all those who disagree with you obnoxious is not flaming eh.....

    and then there was your post inserting real world party politics.

    Do you think we can not read.....

    It's cool man, I don't really think he's been terribly out of line or anything but definitely is trolling hard. Let him eat cake, we can carry on with the topic at hand.

    I find it slightly strange that the PWE surveys went out last night, we have no response on thread as of mid afternoon today from the Guv'nor....perhaps some high level 'meetings' are in progress? One can hope.
    ____
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The o3 - Killed you good
  • olivia211olivia211 Member Posts: 675 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Just don't blame me for the numbers. :) I was the one who was saying Cryptic was just trying to inflate their player numbers, for some time now.

    Oh, I know. Was just saying that certain things never change. Everyone wants to seem bigger than they really are.

    I still put forth the challenge to Cryptic to let us know how many real, active accounts they currently have. I don't care about a 2 year old account that hasn't been touched since it was opened. I wanna see how many people log on at least every other day for the last couple of months. Those are the people who really play the game.
    No, I am not who you think I am. I am someone different. I am instead a banana.
  • neoakiraiineoakiraii Member Posts: 7,468 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    marc8219 wrote: »
    I am not a dev, its just that I am not breaking TOS thats why I am not edited. You people that keep dev bashing should be glad that they are nice enough to let it all slide.

    Anyway I was just taking a break from this thread for awhile to get in game and still see we will have no problems with this update hurting fleet progression at all. It is a sound update with reasonable fixes. I support it entirely.

    Armature :D
    GwaoHAD.png
This discussion has been closed.