It's not Kirk Vs Gary Mitchell. It would make 0 sense in the new timeline for that to be the case.
The point with the Mirror Universe was that it was the morally inferior of the two...
anyways this is going dangerously off topic, so I will leave it at this.
Though the conversation is more fun than playing the game atm
Clarification: I didn't mean Gary Williams, but a character based on him but...
LOL when a movie debate becomes more exciting than the game. I end by saying two things:
1) We can both agree what is or isn't Trek can be a subjective thing.
2) Whether we like or hate ST09, we musn't let JJ tear us apart. The real fight against the nerf must be continued. ONWARD TO VICTORY!!!!!!! (Or baked ham for dinner, one of the two).
How the Devs see Star Trek, apparently:
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . Please do not discuss forum moderation; file a forums and website ticket if you have more questions. ~BranFlakes
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . Please do not discuss forum moderation; file a forums and website ticket if you have more questions. ~BranFlakes
How the Devs see Star Trek, apparently:
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
For endgame play, progressing the SB and embassy are activities that our fleet can engage in (a small fleet). Fleet marks are a choke point. The FM's were the only reason that I played foundry missions and I actually had some fun doing it. But I was doing it for fleet marks. I can earn dilithium other ways more efficiently and have more fun doing it; or we can buy dilithium, if so inclined.
Figure out a way to get the FM's rolling again now, not in three months. Do it IN ADDITION to the IOR repeatable, not in place of. Give me some freakin' choices in how to earn the things needed to progress the SB and embassy. I detest being told how to play the game.
This exactly, please. Allow people to choose a path to earning resources that they personally find tolerable. As others mentioned, there are a lot of ways to earn dil with decent payoffs: exploring, teaming up to fight, answering lore, doffs. For ECs as well (selling drops, the tour, playing the exchange). I am asking for a similar range of choices for fleet marks with similarly decent payoffs. If that takes time to bring about, we understand, but please leave the foundry choice in place until other options are ready to roll out.
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . Please do not discuss forum moderation; file a forums and website ticket if you have more questions. ~BranFlakes
This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . Please do not discuss forum moderation; file a forums and website ticket if you have more questions. ~BranFlakes
Quote from the rules: Creating threads or posts that question or reference administrative decisions or potential administrative decisions, such as post removals and thread closures, is not permitted.
Starbases are just GIANT resource and time sinks - glorified stores for expensive gear.
They offer almost no functionality and even the big fleet with 400+ members - the places are usually vacant.
Really what is all the fuss about? You want to waste more of your time and money/resources buying over priced ships and gear that are only needed by the 5% of people that pvp in STO?
I don't think its just about the gear for some but also a piece of real estate that represents your fleet (although its become a big pain in the a** vs. labor a love.) I would love more functionality. Back on topic, this nerf is ridiculous without something to replace what they removed. You can still AFK in foundry for 20 min you just don't get marks but now you can get boatloads of dilithium. I would think being that this currency is the only one tied to real cash indirectly they would want to limit it, but then again it has a low refining cap vs. in game demands.
Maybe it's time for folks to quit trying to convince Dan Stahl of making the right choices and start emailing PWE execs or Jack Emmert to ask for Dan's resignation. I think it's time to get some new blood at the helm and maybe we'll get someone whose concerns are more inline with the playerbase.
I with you on this one. Maybe its time for a fresh look by someone new.
Quote from the rules: Creating threads or posts that question or reference administrative decisions or potential administrative decisions, such as post removals and thread closures, is not permitted.
No - things weren't going good - all the previous EP did was prep the game for F2P.
He was a systems guy - no vision, no passion - he had a job to do and he did it.
Whilst the game might be slightly different if he'd stayed as EP, I honestly don't think it'd be any better (and again, I'm not sure that the calls would really have been his to make).
You don't think that Dan may have went to Zynga to pick up a few farmville micro-transaction ideas and come back? That may have been the plan all along.
Quote from the rules: Creating threads or posts that question or reference administrative decisions or potential administrative decisions, such as post removals and thread closures, is not permitted.
"If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a "Forums and Website" support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs. "
You know what I don't see on that page? A link that says "Create Ticket".
EDIT: The button that says "contact us" -- make sure to choose the 'forums and website' drop down (Category>Customer Support>Forums and Website). Please note we'll never discuss moderation with you that was taken against others. That's private information and if that person has questions, they would need to reach out. -Brandon
Give me some freakin' choices in how to earn the things needed to progress the SB and embassy. I detest being told how to play the game.
And this cuts to the heart of the matter.
Here's a suggestion: Folks want to earn fleetmarks for UGC yes? So find a way to tack them on to the rewards for running Spotlight missions.
That way there is some oversight and review for missions. The ones that pass muster (Review by Das Overflake or whoever ) issue fleet-marks and other "bonuses" as seen fit by whatever power reviews missions.
You don't think that Dan may have went to Zynga to pick up a few farmville micro-transaction ideas and come back? That may have been the plan all along.
I think, that had this game's original publisher had bottomless pockets, faith in the IP and in Cryptic, that STO would be a very different game to the one we're playing today.
Zinc and Stahl after him had grand visions for STO - both have a passion for Star Trek and I truly believe that Dan wants to deliver the best Star Trek MMO he can - nobody wants a failed MMO on their resume and failing a major IP like Trek is failing about as hard as you can.
The problem is that developing story content - missions, Featured Episodes etc. is so much more time consuming than creating a new ship - even an STF requires a huge investment in design and balancing - months of work for several Devs.
So they're stuck - to get the maximum profit out of the players they need to keep introducing new lockboxes etc. but how many ships do you need before you get tired of doing the same content in them?
So they have to create the story content too but it's given far less priority than the lockbox stuff because it doesn't actually make them any money - it just keeps the players interested enough to take their shiny new Andorian Escort for a spin around the new missions.
And you know, eventually they're going to run out of things to sell. For me, aside from a Tier 5 Connie Refit, they already have - there's no ships, no costumes, no consoles, no races, nothing left that I'd pay for.
I'd pay for some great new Featured Episodes featuring Kestrel's storyline that get the Iconian thread back on track - but I'm not being offered those.
I'd pay for some exciting new ground and space STFs that have the care and attention paid to them that Infected, Khitomer or Cure do - but I'm not being offered those either.
I think, that had this game's original publisher had bottomless pockets, faith in the IP and in Cryptic, that STO would be a very different game to the one we're playing today.
Zinc and Stahl after him had grand visions for STO - both have a passion for Star Trek and I truly believe that Dan wants to deliver the best Star Trek MMO he can - nobody wants a failed MMO on their resume and failing a major IP like Trek is failing about as hard as you can.
The problem is that developing story content - missions, Featured Episodes etc. is so much more time consuming than creating a new ship - even an STF requires a huge investment in design and balancing - months of work for several Devs.
So they're stuck - to get the maximum profit out of the players they need to keep introducing new lockboxes etc. but how many ships do you need before you get tired of doing the same content in them?
So they have to create the story content too but it's given far less priority than the lockbox stuff because it doesn't actually make them any money - it just keeps the players interested enough to take their shiny new Andorian Escort for a spin around the new missions.
And you know, eventually they're going to run out of things to sell. For me, aside from a Tier 5 Connie Refit, they already have - there's no ships, no costumes, no consoles, no races, nothing left that I'd pay for.
I'd pay for some great new Featured Episodes featuring Kestrel's storyline that get the Iconian thread back on track - but I'm not being offered those.
I'd pay for some exciting new ground and space STFs that have the care and attention paid to them that Infected, Khitomer or Cure do - but I'm not being offered those either.
I had forgotten all about the Iconians. That storyline showed promise. Would have been nice to see the ultimate consequence of the Hobus event and the Iconian's return.
How the Devs see Star Trek, apparently:
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
So to me it looks like dstahl outright lied saying a fleet of 25+ would only hit the time gate. I can not see that a fleet of 50 who play 2-3 times a week will want to grind 3 or 4 of the hours that they play just to advance the fleet when the way to get FM is so dull and un-popular. Bring back the fun
I don't think he lied. It's what they call iterative development.
Basically, Dan can promise something. It can be 50% done. And a senior designer can say, "Nope. Not feeling it. Let's drop it/increase the price."
And by company policy, Dan is to go along with that (with his senior devs anyway) under the rationale that contradicting them would make them quit and a replacement would be expensive if the person has experience.
So Dan can believe something is going to happen. He can have reason to believe it will happen. It can be a realistic work goal or expectation based on rate of progress.
And the person can say, "I'm not going to do that/it will be more expensive."
And Cryptic goes with it. And Dan doesn't have enforcement ability even if he wanted it. And he's basically dealing with a mutiny situation if he does try to enforce things, which is where I think he was at just prior to leaving for Zynga.
Which is again, why I think what's needed longterm is basically a customer satisfaction oriented marketing lead. And while they can't necessarily tell people what to do, they can veto other people's plans/changes if they expect player backlash and their veto can only be overridden by BOTH Dan and the Chief Marketing Officer of Cryptic.
That basically creates a scenario where some of what I perceive as forceful monetization or gameplay design (not from PWE, I think, but from people under Dan that he has no enforcement power over) can be shot down by a Marketing/Customer Service/Brand Image Lead. And Dan can say, "It's out of my hands!"
And then the developer or developers who want to push these strategies after the marketing Lead vetoes them have to go make a case before both Dan AND the CMO of Cryptic why ticking off customers is justified in this case.
As long as the Marketing Lead uses the veto judiciously, it should slow down some of these kinds of decisions and reinforce the idea that "Hey! This will tick people off!" BEFORE the stuff gets pushed live... and if the veto does get overridden, at least everyone will expect backlash and be battening down the hatches BEFORE the patch drops... Because at that point, somebody will have had to go over Dan's head for any contentious changes.
And if they keep doing it, there will at least be a documented record of "Hey! Why is Tacofangs constantly butting heads with the customer satisfaction guy and going over Dan's head when the behavioral research indicates this will tick people off?" And then you start to have numbers you can weigh against employee replacement costs if it becomes a serious problem. Because the Marketing Lead will say, "I estimate this change will cost us $2000 worth of lost goodwill." And at a certain point, maybe that $25k cost of replacing an employee has numbers it can be measured against.
Wasn't the fleet marks with the "daily officer reports" and foundry in patch note season 7 permanent change that players would rewarded and you making it repeatable ... read nothing about temp change... rewards hmmm... why wouldn't you make 50 fleet makes or Dilithium or make it reward 50 marks 1 time a day hmmm... seems silly glad spam inviting fleets get all the help raise fleet mark and then their SB to tier 5. Seems that you guys could made limited marks or gave choice pick like we did before... because you que missions for fleet lets face it there not as good as you think. I think foundry was best thing ever had maybe limit the rewards fleet marks. Seem you hit a nerve with fan base... of game hate seem it die. I just don't want have farm marks in ques with under skilled players who never come in geared or any knowledge how play the game. Seem so may would benefit to maybe some training missions at SFA would help them get over learning curve that general population suffering in STF and fleet actions... "sigh" :rolleyes: seem got a lot things you could do but maybe some teaching missions would be great to teach unskilled -un geared player heck there alway so many hang out in SFA just saying and you have all those holo-decks...
thank you for your time hope my words don't fall on deaf hears.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] DELTA RISING FIXS THERE NEVER COMING WHY I'M I WASTING MY TIME ASKING FOR THEM ???
Sorry, couldn't help it. It wasn't until Page 130 something that we even got a response (which really turned out to be a non-response). That speakes volumes.
How the Devs see Star Trek, apparently:
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
I'll add that I see the iterative approach as having a lot of strengths. But I think it can turn a workplace into a magnet for jerks and it can make people callous, which is why you basically need somebody who can say "ABSOLUTELY NO!" to iterations.
And maybe Dan can do that. But I bet it makes work harder if he does and people may not understand why he does it.
Whereas if you have a dedicated customer satisfaction specialist in the room whose job is to tell people "No!" and back it up with customer satisfaction research... and Dan can't override the "No!" by himself, well...
It's a successful management approach. You have the leader/figurehead who says, "Yes!" and is maybe the only one with the power to say "Yes!" sometimes. And his job is basically to either say "Yes!" or NOT say "Yes!" But never really "No!" Which frees him up to lead.
And then you put somebody else in the room who can't really say "Yes!" to anything but who's job is to say, "No. Here's why. And Dan can't give you a yes on this. Sorry."
Dan is free to lead and be popular. And that other guy shoots down stuff on the CMO's authority, basically. It's not his fault. His job is to say "No!"
The important thing is that Dan can't override the CS person's veto by himself. He and the CMO have to agree. And the CTO/CCO/etc. are completely outside the chain of command on this decision. So if D'Angelo as CTO doesn't like a veto and gets complaints from STO programmers, even D'Angelo has to go before Dan and the CMO and get a unanimous decision to override the veto.
This is important basically because it means that, this way, if the ML does their job, nothing contentious should go live without the Executive Producer and the Chief Marketing Officer agreeing, unanimously, to take joint responsibility for it by overriding a Marketing Lead's veto.
I'll add that I see the iterative approach as having a lot of strengths. But I think it can turn a workplace into a magnet for jerks and it can make people callous, which is why you basically need somebody who can say "ABSOLUTELY NO!" to iterations.
And maybe Dan can do that. But I bet it makes work harder if he does and people may not understand why he does it.
Whereas if you have a dedicated customer satisfaction specialist in the room whose job is to tell people "No!" and back it up with customer satisfaction research... and Dan can't override the "No!" by himself, well...
It's a successful management approach. You have the leader/figurehead who says, "Yes!" and is maybe the only one with the power to say "Yes!" sometimes. And his job is basically to either say "Yes!" or NOT say "Yes!" But never really "No!" Which frees him up to lead.
And then you put somebody else in the room who can't really say "Yes!" to anything but who's job is to say, "No. Here's why. And Dan can't give you a yes on this. Sorry."
Dan is free to lead and be popular. And that other guy shoots down stuff on the CMO's authority, basically. It's not his fault. His job is to say "No!"
The important thing is that Dan can't override the CS person's veto by himself. He and the CMO have to agree. And the CTO/CCO/etc. are completely outside the chain of command on this decision. So if D'Angelo as CTO doesn't like a veto and gets complaints from STO programmers, even D'Angelo has to go before Dan and the CMO and get a unanimous decision to override the veto.
This is important basically because it means that, this way, if the ML does their job, nothing contentious should go live without the Executive Producer and the Chief Marketing Officer agreeing, unanimously, to take joint responsibility for it by overriding a Marketing Lead's veto.
STOleviathan99 - you are dancing around the name that is behind all of this - why don't you just come out and call a spade a spade - or a guy whose name rhymes with Hal, pal, sal, - etc
We want Fleet Marks to be something more that just run the exact same content from 6 months ago or at least that content actually awarding something tangible, not peanuts.
Nobody is going to run one of those .... "spotlight" missions if the reward is 50 marks, that is simply NOT WORTH OUR TIME because some people think missions should be padded to high heaven with dialogue "choices", I tried one I ditched it when the acceptation hail was already at 3 boxes for no reason, I really wish stop trying to make UGC what is not, its not BioWare's NwN or Obsidian's NwN or those RPGs that track of morality choices the player makes, its isnt a dating sim either and having to go about screens and screens of boring pointless padding that exists for ... well lets say, there is a difference of DA:O and BG2 and a lot of authors are mimicking DA2 "high brow writing".
3 Hours for lousy 50 Fleet Marks? I rather do a Daily FA ... faster, same payout and without so much padding, unless its Big Dig,
I did big dig today in under 15 minutes... definitely would never play a long spotlight mission to earn resources. You play that stuff for RP and a break from the grind if you have time for that.
This is the 11th most commented thread in this entire sub-forum with over 1300 posts - all the threads with more posts are now archived so this particular issue has received more feedback and attention than:
a) The Omega Rep System
b) The 1000-day Veteran debacle
c) The announcement of the winner of the design the Ent-F competition
d) The news post announcing STO's intention to go F2P
This is the 11th most commented thread in this entire sub-forum with over 1300 posts - all the threads with more posts are now archived so this particular issue has received more feedback and attention than:
a) The Omega Rep System
b) The 1000-day Veteran debacle
c) The announcement of the winner of the design the Ent-F competition
d) The news post announcing STO's intention to go F2P
Keep it going and keep it constructive!!
What about the thread after they cut(then put back) dilthium from STF's?
Comments
Clarification: I didn't mean Gary Williams, but a character based on him but...
LOL when a movie debate becomes more exciting than the game. I end by saying two things:
1) We can both agree what is or isn't Trek can be a subjective thing.
2) Whether we like or hate ST09, we musn't let JJ tear us apart. The real fight against the nerf must be continued. ONWARD TO VICTORY!!!!!!! (Or baked ham for dinner, one of the two).
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
This exactly, please. Allow people to choose a path to earning resources that they personally find tolerable. As others mentioned, there are a lot of ways to earn dil with decent payoffs: exploring, teaming up to fight, answering lore, doffs. For ECs as well (selling drops, the tour, playing the exchange). I am asking for a similar range of choices for fleet marks with similarly decent payoffs. If that takes time to bring about, we understand, but please leave the foundry choice in place until other options are ready to roll out.
So, we can't talk about moderation?
====EDIT====
Correct. My post here: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?p=8119281#post8119281
Forum rules: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/announcement.php?f=20&a=51
Quote from the rules: Creating threads or posts that question or reference administrative decisions or potential administrative decisions, such as post removals and thread closures, is not permitted.
~Brandon
"Unlimited In-Game Mail Access" must mean something different to Cryptic than it does to English.
I don't think its just about the gear for some but also a piece of real estate that represents your fleet (although its become a big pain in the a** vs. labor a love.) I would love more functionality. Back on topic, this nerf is ridiculous without something to replace what they removed. You can still AFK in foundry for 20 min you just don't get marks but now you can get boatloads of dilithium. I would think being that this currency is the only one tied to real cash indirectly they would want to limit it, but then again it has a low refining cap vs. in game demands.
I with you on this one. Maybe its time for a fresh look by someone new.
The first rule about moderation club is that you don't talk about moderation club
And no - it's against the rules (apparently) to discuss the actions of the moderators on this forum.
Although I don't know now if this post technically breaks that rule...
====EDIT====
Correct. My post here: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?p=8119281#post8119281
Forum rules: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/announcement.php?f=20&a=51
Quote from the rules: Creating threads or posts that question or reference administrative decisions or potential administrative decisions, such as post removals and thread closures, is not permitted.
~Brandon
You don't think that Dan may have went to Zynga to pick up a few farmville micro-transaction ideas and come back? That may have been the plan all along.
I am similarly confused.
====EDIT====
My post here: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?p=8119281#post8119281
Forum rules: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/announcement.php?f=20&a=51
Quote from the rules: Creating threads or posts that question or reference administrative decisions or potential administrative decisions, such as post removals and thread closures, is not permitted.
~Brandon
"Unlimited In-Game Mail Access" must mean something different to Cryptic than it does to English.
"Unlimited In-Game Mail Access" must mean something different to Cryptic than it does to English.
"If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a "Forums and Website" support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs. "
Apparently some forum posters have diplomatic immunity nowadays, where can I get mine? [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
You know what I don't see on that page? A link that says "Create Ticket".
EDIT: The button that says "contact us" -- make sure to choose the 'forums and website' drop down (Category>Customer Support>Forums and Website). Please note we'll never discuss moderation with you that was taken against others. That's private information and if that person has questions, they would need to reach out. -Brandon
"Unlimited In-Game Mail Access" must mean something different to Cryptic than it does to English.
There is a huge search bar though, why don't you give that a try...:rolleyes:
Apparently some forum posters have diplomatic immunity nowadays, where can I get mine? [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
And this cuts to the heart of the matter.
Here's a suggestion: Folks want to earn fleetmarks for UGC yes? So find a way to tack them on to the rewards for running Spotlight missions.
That way there is some oversight and review for missions. The ones that pass muster (Review by Das Overflake or whoever
I think, that had this game's original publisher had bottomless pockets, faith in the IP and in Cryptic, that STO would be a very different game to the one we're playing today.
Zinc and Stahl after him had grand visions for STO - both have a passion for Star Trek and I truly believe that Dan wants to deliver the best Star Trek MMO he can - nobody wants a failed MMO on their resume and failing a major IP like Trek is failing about as hard as you can.
The problem is that developing story content - missions, Featured Episodes etc. is so much more time consuming than creating a new ship - even an STF requires a huge investment in design and balancing - months of work for several Devs.
So they're stuck - to get the maximum profit out of the players they need to keep introducing new lockboxes etc. but how many ships do you need before you get tired of doing the same content in them?
So they have to create the story content too but it's given far less priority than the lockbox stuff because it doesn't actually make them any money - it just keeps the players interested enough to take their shiny new Andorian Escort for a spin around the new missions.
And you know, eventually they're going to run out of things to sell. For me, aside from a Tier 5 Connie Refit, they already have - there's no ships, no costumes, no consoles, no races, nothing left that I'd pay for.
I'd pay for some great new Featured Episodes featuring Kestrel's storyline that get the Iconian thread back on track - but I'm not being offered those.
I'd pay for some exciting new ground and space STFs that have the care and attention paid to them that Infected, Khitomer or Cure do - but I'm not being offered those either.
Ugh, no. Brandan has terrible taste on content. Tried a couple, couldn't stomach the fanfic.
I had forgotten all about the Iconians. That storyline showed promise. Would have been nice to see the ultimate consequence of the Hobus event and the Iconian's return.
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
I don't think he lied. It's what they call iterative development.
Basically, Dan can promise something. It can be 50% done. And a senior designer can say, "Nope. Not feeling it. Let's drop it/increase the price."
And by company policy, Dan is to go along with that (with his senior devs anyway) under the rationale that contradicting them would make them quit and a replacement would be expensive if the person has experience.
So Dan can believe something is going to happen. He can have reason to believe it will happen. It can be a realistic work goal or expectation based on rate of progress.
And the person can say, "I'm not going to do that/it will be more expensive."
And Cryptic goes with it. And Dan doesn't have enforcement ability even if he wanted it. And he's basically dealing with a mutiny situation if he does try to enforce things, which is where I think he was at just prior to leaving for Zynga.
Which is again, why I think what's needed longterm is basically a customer satisfaction oriented marketing lead. And while they can't necessarily tell people what to do, they can veto other people's plans/changes if they expect player backlash and their veto can only be overridden by BOTH Dan and the Chief Marketing Officer of Cryptic.
That basically creates a scenario where some of what I perceive as forceful monetization or gameplay design (not from PWE, I think, but from people under Dan that he has no enforcement power over) can be shot down by a Marketing/Customer Service/Brand Image Lead. And Dan can say, "It's out of my hands!"
And then the developer or developers who want to push these strategies after the marketing Lead vetoes them have to go make a case before both Dan AND the CMO of Cryptic why ticking off customers is justified in this case.
As long as the Marketing Lead uses the veto judiciously, it should slow down some of these kinds of decisions and reinforce the idea that "Hey! This will tick people off!" BEFORE the stuff gets pushed live... and if the veto does get overridden, at least everyone will expect backlash and be battening down the hatches BEFORE the patch drops... Because at that point, somebody will have had to go over Dan's head for any contentious changes.
And if they keep doing it, there will at least be a documented record of "Hey! Why is Tacofangs constantly butting heads with the customer satisfaction guy and going over Dan's head when the behavioral research indicates this will tick people off?" And then you start to have numbers you can weigh against employee replacement costs if it becomes a serious problem. Because the Marketing Lead will say, "I estimate this change will cost us $2000 worth of lost goodwill." And at a certain point, maybe that $25k cost of replacing an employee has numbers it can be measured against.
thank you for your time hope my words don't fall on deaf hears.
DELTA RISING FIXS THERE NEVER COMING WHY I'M I WASTING MY TIME ASKING FOR THEM ???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4
Sorry, couldn't help it. It wasn't until Page 130 something that we even got a response (which really turned out to be a non-response). That speakes volumes.
Star Trek: The Original Grind
Star Trek: The Next Grind
Star Trek: Deep Space Grind
Star Trek: Voyage to the Grind
And maybe Dan can do that. But I bet it makes work harder if he does and people may not understand why he does it.
Whereas if you have a dedicated customer satisfaction specialist in the room whose job is to tell people "No!" and back it up with customer satisfaction research... and Dan can't override the "No!" by himself, well...
It's a successful management approach. You have the leader/figurehead who says, "Yes!" and is maybe the only one with the power to say "Yes!" sometimes. And his job is basically to either say "Yes!" or NOT say "Yes!" But never really "No!" Which frees him up to lead.
And then you put somebody else in the room who can't really say "Yes!" to anything but who's job is to say, "No. Here's why. And Dan can't give you a yes on this. Sorry."
Dan is free to lead and be popular. And that other guy shoots down stuff on the CMO's authority, basically. It's not his fault. His job is to say "No!"
The important thing is that Dan can't override the CS person's veto by himself. He and the CMO have to agree. And the CTO/CCO/etc. are completely outside the chain of command on this decision. So if D'Angelo as CTO doesn't like a veto and gets complaints from STO programmers, even D'Angelo has to go before Dan and the CMO and get a unanimous decision to override the veto.
This is important basically because it means that, this way, if the ML does their job, nothing contentious should go live without the Executive Producer and the Chief Marketing Officer agreeing, unanimously, to take joint responsibility for it by overriding a Marketing Lead's veto.
STOleviathan99 - you are dancing around the name that is behind all of this - why don't you just come out and call a spade a spade - or a guy whose name rhymes with Hal, pal, sal, - etc
I did big dig today in under 15 minutes... definitely would never play a long spotlight mission to earn resources. You play that stuff for RP and a break from the grind if you have time for that.
CONGRATULATIONS EVERYONE!!!
This is the 11th most commented thread in this entire sub-forum with over 1300 posts - all the threads with more posts are now archived so this particular issue has received more feedback and attention than:
a) The Omega Rep System
b) The 1000-day Veteran debacle
c) The announcement of the winner of the design the Ent-F competition
d) The news post announcing STO's intention to go F2P
Keep it going and keep it constructive!!
What about the thread after they cut(then put back) dilthium from STF's?