Someone who's simply making an alt would most likely love the Alliance system because they could care less about the Romulans they just want something new and shiny. Those however, who plan on playing Romulans exclusively would probably have a much different reaction and it's THOSE people who are more likely to make or break the longevity of a functional Romulan faction.
Like the Romulan Alliance System? Of course you do, it sounds fine to you because you aren't Romulans, you're FED or KDF who are going to make a Romulan alt, it makes a HUGE difference in perspective.
It matters becaus if you don't want to start a romulan...the way cryptic will design them is irrelevant for you
stupid analogy:
The government want to raise the tax for dogs. But if you have no dogs....you don't care or will fight against the rise because it doesn't concern you. In the common attitude you don't care if it rise or not. It means neutral. But in reality you were not really thinking about it because you have no dogs.
If I were in Cryptic's position, I would try to work on player unity. I would not post anything in which would keep the division growing. Legacy of Romulus has great potential. Even though it may have started out on rocky information, the road ahead can only lead to good things.
[/I]
If I were in Cryptic's position, I'd nuke the entire forum other than official Cryptic releases, the bug report section, and patch notes. It might actually be somewhat useful then.
The last couple weeks have been a total embarrassment. Way too many people here clearly need adult supervision in order to be allowed access to the internet, and I feel for Brandon and the community moderators having to wade through the immense amount of gibberish this place has been responsible for lately.
"We are smart." - Grebnedlog
Member of Alliance Central Command/boq botlhra'ghom
It matters becaus if you don't want to start a romulan...the way cryptic will design them is irrelevant for you
stupid analogy:
The government want to raise the tax for dogs. But if you have no dogs....you don't care or will fight against the rise because it doesn't concern you. In the common attitude you don't care if it rise or not. It means neutral. But in reality you were not really thinking about it because you have no dogs.
i hope you understood my analogy
Yes, that is a good analogy.
I guess I can see how Romulan purists (for lack of a better term) might not like the alliance system. But if they want to play as the scheming, manipulative Romulans from TNG, the only Romulan group in STO who still acts like that is the Tal Shiar. And since they've aligned themselves with the Iconians, I don't think they would work as a playable faction.
I think the proposed system (as I understand it so far) is a good one, at least as a start. But I'll reserve further judgement until we get more dev blogs addressing individual concerns and topics.
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them." -Thomas Marrone
It matters becaus if you don't want to start a romulan...the way cryptic will design them is irrelevant for you
stupid analogy:
The government want to raise the tax for dogs. But if you have no dogs....you don't care or will fight against the rise because it doesn't concern you. In the common attitude you don't care if it rise or not. It means neutral. But in reality you were not really thinking about it because you have no dogs.
i hope you understood my analogy
Would that not be a player who does not play them at all?
Making an alt is more like getting a dog, while you already have a cat.
And the Federation-allied romulans really work well the role-play my fleet has.
Let us wear Swimsuits on Foundry maps or bridges please! I would pay zen for that.
I'm saying I think she was probably pretty quick to make that assumption about posts that were actually on topic. And if you're going to throw those posts out, throw them out of the percentage ranking. Which means that people's posts are, by volume, 14% positive about the expansion, 41% neutral, and 45% negative.
Now, even allowing that negative posters post 85% more often than positive posters... We don't know how often neutral posters reply in response to the other two groups. But lets adjust for posting frequency on the positive side.
Here's the basic methodology:
Start off assuming 14 positive, 45 negative, and 41 neutral posts in a 100 post sample.
Adjust up the number of positive by 85% to allow for lower posting frequency.
You now have 26 positive, 45 negative, 41 neutral.
That brings the numbers around to:
40% negative. 23% positive. 37% neutral.
Now, yes, that means either way that negative posters are the minority. But the minority (especially a 40% one) is not strategically insignificant. It's not "break out the cake and to heck with the haters." It's serious sleeve rolling, coffee brewing, and pacing around the whiteboard time. And I'm sure they're already doing that but probably need to look at doing it more if 40% of your target for a free product is turned off by it.
I LIKE Cryptic's plan for the expansion overall. I like the ideas I'm seeing. I think it all stems from a good place, a place of creativity applied to dealing with challenges in game design. But I think that if they don't consider a few major changes, this is going to be a disappointment for them. The hole in the bucket is bigger than previously thought and it's time to get some really creative, adaptive brainstorming in, to let the criticism in and take it honestly and use it constructively. I don't expect Cryptic can just bend over backwards for every critic but I think these kinds of numbers really, really suggest the need for feedback and critical re-examination... and if they listen to Terilynn's dismissively calm take on this, they're going to wind up with a bruised lip and black eye in three months, taking a lot of this back to the drawing board.
If they treat it like an emergency now, it will save them money. You don't say:
- "Good news! My wife is only 40% sure she's going to divorce me!"
- "The doctor only gives me a 40% chance it's cancer!"
- "Revenue is down by a negligible 40% this quarter!"
You grit your teeth. You say, "We've got 60% we can work with." And you set out to understand, conquer, and convert as much of that remaining 40% that you can, while trying to electrify that 37% that's saying, "Meh. It's okay." (Because that's not great either.)
So slightly under double for all the categories, or what's to be expected when you remove a little under 50% of the data [with the largest of the remaining category gaining the leftover share]. However, when the topic at hand is determining a rage thread. I do believe the off-topic numbers are relevant. Of course it is worth noting that most threads contain content that is vastly off-topic, so it's important to realize that when you start considering "wow that thread got busy fast", without appreciating that the largest segment of that content is banal and largely driven by a very small number of people actually posting in the thread.
As for adjusting with posting frequency ,that's really not how you should do it, as you're not normalizing the entire set. You're simply apply the difference between Positive and Negative occurences to the positive population, while leaving neutral unadjusted (we shouldn't assume neutral is 1:1). Also, you're really running risks of introducing rounding errors when doing adjustments like that, would really be better off working with the raw numbers up until the point you're trying to present the total.
For academic purposes, even of we removed the neutral population from the equation, you're left with a (107/289) 37% Positive / (183/289) 64% negative on posts. However, if we just consider by accounts. You are left with (75/146) 51% Positive / (71/146) 49% Negative. However, I would maintain this as purely academic, as removing the neutral population is a disservice.
All that said, I'm just going to repeat what I wrote here earlier in that I feel that off-topic is still important and relevant to the goal of showing what the thread actually contained. And perhaps an interesting reflection on how large threads become larger threads.
Terilynn Shull is just attacking the players in which carry a difference in opinion.
*shrugs*
If I were in Cryptic's position, I would try to work on player unity. I would not post anything in which would keep the division growing. Legacy of Romulus has great potential. Even though it may have started out on rocky information, the road ahead can only lead to good things.
You know I can understand why Branflakes may be bummed in regards to the reaction, maybe not everyone can handle themselves in a mature manner when giving feedback. I still feel there is some truth to the negative feedback and I feel that is primarily that we were given this image of something we are not getting at launch.
Ok so Stahl says it might be later, but that's not the impression I got. I know some people say it makes sense for the Romulans not being able to stand on their own and while I agree with that, I don't think it justifies the lack of reliable information in regards to the expansion. I was excited about having a Romulan fleet and starbase; I personally would have made it so that the alliance still happens but on a fleet scale. So you get your Romulan fleet started and choose your side in the alliance and then you share a fleet interface with either a KDF or FED fleet where you can contribute to their projects and they can help you by contributing to yours to get your first Romulan Base / HQ / Starbase w/e built.
This would have made more sense to me personally, maybe they'll allow the Romulan characters in your fleet to do that later on. Aside from that I'm really excited to play a Romulan and try out the warbirds. I hope in time it does move to more factions that are completely separate.
The discussion about whether the majority is positive or negative is not helpful.
Both sides are big enough to be considered.
We should put our energy into possible solutions instead playing civil war.
my possible solutions
1.) if klingons are not profitable for the devs ...why not try kickstarter..this is the best plattform to solve this problem
2.) Do the "Choose your side"-Thing, but not let Romulans fly alliance ships and vice versa only as a temporary solution until you made enough content for the romulans and then break the bonds to the alliance and make them a full 100 % independent fraction....like development help from the industrialized countries until they are fit enough to stand alone.
3.) Make a real thrird fraction with less content like the klings at launch and deliver content through patches
It is easy to complain or defend the policy of cryptic....it is better to mediate and contribute solutions
Frankly, I think you could have a much fuller Romulan faction with a few changes. The main things are to give Romulans Featured episode text which gives them enough missions for 1-50 and more ship builds.
From there, the issues are PvP and starbases. PvP needs a full overhaul anyway and I personally think starbases are too difficult for Klingons or any smaller faction and what would be ideal there is to let people form out of character fleet clusters of Romulan, Klingon, and Federation that share overall starbase XP and tier but not any of the subcategories.
The remaining issue is DOff assignments.
In this case, Cryptic is so close to a full faction that I can see where they may eventually face pressure to finish the job... Although I suspect if they go that route, it wouldy probably mean no more factions, ever.
Don't forget endgame representation. A Romulan vendor for Task Force Omega, for example, with Romulan specific gear, just like the Feds and Klingons have. Doffs missions? Eh, just give 'em Federation ones with a Romulan twist in the descriptions. Most of those missions are things a fledgling government would be doing anyway. Although the officers should be unique to the Romulan faction... I really don't want a warbird crewed by Jem'hadar. I don't even want a Federation ship crewed by Jem'hadar.
I mean, if there truly is Romulan progression from 1-40, then most of the work is already done... it's endgame and PvP where it all falls apart.
I think Terrilynn's methodology makes Cryptic look bad there. There's no way that many are off topic and then if you do that, you wind up with 45% negative or only 25% positive.
Considering my experience on the forums, the off topic numbers actually look pretty low to me. Most threads if they get long enough, including this one, degenerate into meta discussions about the thread, or about an unrelated topic, or some sort of bickering where 2-5 people argue a point that no one else cares about for 5 pages or more.
The negative numbers don't surprise me. Within minutes of the initial announcement of a Romuland faction, we already had the usual suspects complaining about how this was a huge slap in the face to KDF players, etc. A LOT of people, rightly or wrongly, feel that they have been done wrong by Cryptic and feel the need to express it on a daily basis.
Cryptic could have announced that they'd cured cancer and you'd still have people complaining that they are wasting time on cancer instead of creating a T5 Connie or changing the way that KDF cloaking disengages when hailing or being hailed. Some people have a very specific vision of how the game out to be going, and whatever diverges from that is automatically bad.
Anyway, on topic (kind of) my fed fleet has been very very positive about the expansion and how it's being handled. Whatever disapointment there is that Roms aren't truly their own faction is outweighed by the relief that we won't be splintering off active members to a third faction, or that those of us who want to play Romulans don't need to wait another year or so to see a level 5 starbase (considering we're just now approaching tier 5 on our fed base).
I've seen one very vocal complainer in the ESD zone chat, who seemed to be outnumbered by people who were telling Chuck Norris jokes (or some variant of them).
So I wouldn't say that the general reaction has been negative at all. I would say that the general reaction is that no one is getting their perfect scenario, but most people are getting stuff they want, and probably more than most of them ever expected.
It matters becaus if you don't want to start a romulan...the way cryptic will design them is irrelevant for you
stupid analogy:
The government want to raise the tax for dogs. But if you have no dogs....you don't care or will fight against the rise because it doesn't concern you. In the common attitude you don't care if it rise or not. It means neutral. But in reality you were not really thinking about it because you have no dogs.
i hope you understood my analogy
I get it perfectly, its like all the players in fleets that already have a high tier starbase can't understand why those of us who don't have this would be interested in making a Romulan Starbase in a Romulan Fleet. Like somehow giving players that option would invalidate their choice.
I think the alliance system is also an excuse to not make Romulan Vet rewards. Too easy to say just use your allies.
I get it perfectly, its like all the players in fleets that already have a high tier starbase can't understand why those of us who don't have this would be interested in making a Romulan Starbase in a Romulan Fleet. Like somehow giving players that option would invalidate their choice.
I think the alliance system is also an excuse to not make Romulan Vet rewards. Too easy to say just use your allies.
Its very clearly a set-up for players to make Romulan ALTS and keep playing with their fleets. I don't think you will see very many Romulan theme fleets(which are actually FED or KDF ones) of just Romulan players.
Its very clearly a set-up for players to make Romulan ALTS and keep playing with their fleets. I don't think you will see very many Romulan theme fleets(which are actually FED or KDF ones) of just Romulan players.
Then maybe hardcore romulan players should make one for themselves. Either KDF of Federation.
Let us wear Swimsuits on Foundry maps or bridges please! I would pay zen for that.
Most threads if they get long enough, including this one, degenerate into meta discussions about the thread, or about an unrelated topic, or some sort of bickering where 2-5 people argue a point that no one else cares about for 5 pages or more.
Yes lets sink resources into a FED or KDF fleet in the hopes that one day we can then do it all over if they give ROM's a fleet system. That you can't see how off what you just suggested sounds is rather telling.
Then maybe hardcore romulan players should make one for themselves. Either KDF of Federation.
Like the Romulan Alliance System? Of course you do, it sounds fine to you because you aren't Romulans, you're FED or KDF who are going to make a Romulan alt, it makes a HUGE difference in perspective.
Honestly, the attempt to quantify opinions into numbers is a silly basis to start with. Someone making a judgement call on whether an opinion is +1 or -1 is too easy to misconstrue or, frankly, manipulate.
Bran shouldn't have linked the article at all.
It seems clear the article was posted in an attempt to discredit people who had negative opinions, as if their opinions are less valid because they posted twice.
There seemed no attempt to determine whether posts made valid points, what the intent of posters was, or if the opinions were made regarding the issue or in response to the opposite side. What you see as a neutral comment, perhaps I see as positive, and the poster may have meant as a negative. Even something as common as the loss of intended sarcasm could influence things one way or another. Was any thought given to the importance of the issue for single posters vs. multiple posters?
The fact that this is "newsworthy" or even reliable information seems silly. I'd never considered the journalist in question before, but at this point I won't be associating the name with integrity. If you can't objectively look at the forums, and particularly some of the responses by devs, and see it's obviously a hot-button issue for a significant portion of the people talking about it, there's something wrong with your objectivity.
Honestly, the attempt to quantify opinions into numbers is a silly basis to start with. Someone making a judgement call on whether an opinion is +1 or -1 is too easy to misconstrue or, frankly, manipulate.
Bran shouldn't have linked the article at all.
It seems clear the article was posted in an attempt to discredit people who had negative opinions, as if their opinions are less valid because they posted twice.
There seemed no attempt to determine whether posts made valid points, what the intent of posters was, or if the opinions were made regarding the issue or in response to the opposite side. What you see as a neutral comment, perhaps I see as positive, and the poster may have meant as a negative. Even something as common as the loss of intended sarcasm could influence things one way or another. Was any thought given to the importance of the issue for single posters vs. multiple posters?
The fact that this is "newsworthy" or even reliable information seems silly. I'd never considered the journalist in question before, but at this point I won't be associating the name with integrity. If you can't objectively look at the forums, and particularly some of the responses by devs, and see it's obviously a hot-button issue for a significant portion of the people talking about it, there's something wrong with your objectivity.
Posting something twice does not make you right. An opinion voiced once is as valid as one repeated for a dozen times.
But, I would never consider any journalist at all to be in the same sentence as integrity. They are by their nature, journalists, and integrity does not work with that job.
Let us wear Swimsuits on Foundry maps or bridges please! I would pay zen for that.
As far as the Romulan Faction goes I think you are selling the game short in the long run. Everyone seems to be thinking of the short term. Eve has been around for what , 10 years? In 7 years are people going to be worried about leveling another base? the political dynamics of the endgame are gimped by the decision. I think you should come up with a plan to allow the Romulans to ally but not be a part of the other factions with the goal of having their own bases in a year or two.
Posting something twice does not make you right. An opinion voiced once is as valid as one repeated for a dozen times.
But, I would never consider any journalist at all to be in the same sentence as integrity. They are by their nature, journalists, and integrity does not work with that job.
He is a CM. In a ideal world he is the link between the devs and community. He should be neutral. I know we all humans and in the real world cryptic is paying him that means he is more on the side of the devs. The criticism was more in that direction that negative post were tried to declared irrelevant but we are only saying our opinion. You are posting more than once and you are i would say more the positive type. i respect that but we want the same rights to post more even our posts are negative. The fact that "negative" group is posting more because they are argumenting more because we have to persuade them to correct their path. For the neutral or positive types it is easy...if nothing happens regarding the devs ...it comes like you wanted it to be...but we must fight...persuade...bring arguments...search for solutions....and hope that there is something like movement.... i am not saying "do what we say" i say "take us seriously and talk with us"
If Brandon cannot understand why many people are disappointed, maybe he should put himself in our shoes. We were promised a full faction with a lot of hype and build up, even with a fancy countdown timer everyone got excited over. Despite what some people would claim, we currently have 2 full factions. Another full faction would go along these lines, containing its own storyline, starbase and fleet system, several unique social areas, entire ship tree, C-store, lockbox and lobi offerings, dailies, endgame gear, races etc. With some minor exceptions (Adapted set, diplomatic bridge officers), the current 2 factions do not benefit from content specific to the other. In this sense, the RR is anything but full. Your faction experience will depend upon your choice of alignment. Where is this faction's independence or completeness? I feel let down, taken for a ride.
This reminds me of those 1 million mom people....despite them hating on Video games and being everywhere on the Internet....the're less than 2,000 of them, they are just really really loud and seems like a million.
Brandon mentioned that certain Romulan costume variants unlock depending on the ally they choose. Makes me wonder why would a choice of an ally affect Romulan uniform (or even their off-duty closing) style.
P.S. The early division of Romulan outfits can be found in this topic.
The way I understand it, the RR is a faction that doesn't have independent Fleet functionality at launch. And it will be able to access some of the stuff from their allies. That's really all that sets it apart from the Fed/KDF factions.
And I doubt a lot of people will choose to fly their allied faction's ships, because who creates a Romulan to fly an Odyssey or a Bortasqu'?
Im gonna make a rom toon and join the KDF but once im in my D'Deridex and mogai there is no way im gonna fly a klink ship
Ive been waiting a while to be a rom sure its not what i had hoped for but it is what it is and cant look a gift horse in the mouth....cryptic didnt have to let us be roms at all.
Considering my experience on the forums, the off topic numbers actually look pretty low to me. Most threads if they get long enough, including this one, degenerate into meta discussions about the thread, or about an unrelated topic, or some sort of bickering where 2-5 people argue a point that no one else cares about for 5 pages or more.
The negative numbers don't surprise me. Within minutes of the initial announcement of a Romuland faction, we already had the usual suspects complaining about how this was a huge slap in the face to KDF players, etc. A LOT of people, rightly or wrongly, feel that they have been done wrong by Cryptic and feel the need to express it on a daily basis.
Cryptic could have announced that they'd cured cancer and you'd still have people complaining that they are wasting time on cancer instead of creating a T5 Connie or changing the way that KDF cloaking disengages when hailing or being hailed. Some people have a very specific vision of how the game out to be going, and whatever diverges from that is automatically bad.
Anyway, on topic (kind of) my fed fleet has been very very positive about the expansion and how it's being handled. Whatever disapointment there is that Roms aren't truly their own faction is outweighed by the relief that we won't be splintering off active members to a third faction, or that those of us who want to play Romulans don't need to wait another year or so to see a level 5 starbase (considering we're just now approaching tier 5 on our fed base).
I've seen one very vocal complainer in the ESD zone chat, who seemed to be outnumbered by people who were telling Chuck Norris jokes (or some variant of them).
So I wouldn't say that the general reaction has been negative at all. I would say that the general reaction is that no one is getting their perfect scenario, but most people are getting stuff they want, and probably more than most of them ever expected.
One thing has caught my attention though.... the number of people who complain seemingly endlessly on the forum who apparently don't actually play...
I am overjoyed that the Romulans are making a playable appearance in the game. Am I bothered that the Romulans of choice aren't remnants of the Empire? No, not really. People can play KDF and have their ship and crew roleplay as an honorable crew following Martok, or a dishonored crew following Torg or Duras. The choice-faction within the Romulan faction never bothered me because people can role-play.
What has bothered me specifically (and I believe this to be the main concern of those who have complained) is that Romulan players are being forced to align with the Federation or KDF when they'd have rather played as a Romulan that was specific and unique; and not a part of the war front.
During all the updates, news, speculation etc that came before last weeks Ask Cryptic it was insinuated that the Romulans we were getting would be complete, unique, and on their own. Granted that can be put down to speculation on the part of the readers, but I'd be lying if I said the choice of words used by whoever writes this stuff is insightful, it isn't; it gave a lot of people the wrong idea.
I'm pretty sure I speak for nearly everyone when I say we're all looking forward to May, and everything that is involved with that expansion. It's just a lot of us were expecting a unique faction and three-way PvP, and when concerns and complaints were listed, they seemingly went ignored; you made several posts in the big Romulan Thread in the main Discussion stating that you and the team are taking our feedback in. What exactly does that mean?
...
I read a post the other day in which someone claimed that you guys have, and will always envision the Trek Online story as an eternal war between the Federation and Klingon factions. Is this true? Are we likely to ever see a 3rd faction that isn't involved in this war at all? Are we ever likely to see a three-way PvP scenario?
I think this post addresses my concerns very well. I'm super excited to be a Romulan, I just don't really like how the story seems to be going; I would rather play as a member of an Imperial Remnant, instead of a pro-democracy (Fed-lite) version of the Romulans. Additionally, the "Our wings will block out the sun" type of rhetoric really made it seem like the Romulans would be back in force, to retake their lost territory and rebuild their grand Empire.
Additionally, I think it would be a shame to have the Fed vs. KDF thing overshadow anything else in the game. There's no story reason to do so, and in fact given the grave threats to the entire quadrant we will apparently be facing (and have been facing) it makes much more sense to renew the Khitomer Accords.
What I really hope is not going on is gameplay (PvP) influencing story. I love PvP, and play it regularly, but just because you (the devs) want to keep PvP as a two-queue system is not a reason to shoehorn Romulans in with existing factions. I would much rather see a single "Queue Here!" button where everyone is just split randomly into two teams than forcing people to participate in a Fed vs. KDF war that isn't even happening in the end game storylines (Of course, even better would be a three way system, but I understand the map types wouldn't support that - which means Cryptic needs to create better maps, or adjust the queue system so it's inner-faction war games, FvK, FvR, or RvK - which seems like it would be easier than modifying maps to support three teams, and better for story than making playable Romulans join Fed or KDF).
Additionally, the idea that every race / faction in the game would end up being added to the war is just preposterous. If Tholians were ever playable, they clearly would be their own third party. Or the Dominion, or any Delta Quadrant races. Sure, the Cardassians (True Way vs. nice folk) or Alpha Jem'Hadar might take sides, but what about the actual Gamma Quadrant Dominion? Forcing Romulans into this fight sets a bad precedent.
I guess I can see how Romulan purists (for lack of a better term) might not like the alliance system. But if they want to play as the scheming, manipulative Romulans from TNG, the only Romulan group in STO who still acts like that is the Tal Shiar. And since they've aligned themselves with the Iconians, I don't think they would work as a playable faction.
Except there's also the actual Imperial Fleet, under Sela. I get that the Tal'Shiar are too bad to be played (never mind that people might enjoy playing bad guys) but the Romulan Star Empire still existed before D'Tan tried to set up his Fed-Lite New Romulus (and I would imagine still exists, despite Sela's abduction).
Really, the best solution would have been to allow players to choose which of the Romulan factions they want to join: RSE, New Romulus/Republic, or maybe even the Tal'Shiar. Clearly the tech is in game for choosing factions - it's just being used for the wrong faction choices.
2.) Do the "Choose your side"-Thing, but not let Romulans fly alliance ships and vice versa only as a temporary solution until you made enough content for the romulans and then break the bonds to the alliance and make them a full 100 % independent fraction....like development help from the industrialized countries until they are fit enough to stand alone.
This isn't a bad idea, and I certainly hope that as current fleets reach the end of the starbase progression, Cryptic thinks about adding Romulan starbases - the burnout will be lessened by not having to level a Fed / KDF base and a Rom base at the same time.
Give the Romulans fed or kling star bases and if later in the future romulan star bases are available ...let them convert it to romulan star base with lower tier, so they have to add maybe 30 % to reach the same level before. It would be a temporary solution until there release romulan star bases. They are remnants is logical that they first use the technology of the prime advanced races and have enough skills to build their own stuff.
I know people are displeased with some aspects of the LoR release, but you have to consider even with the flaws you perceive that's wrong with the expansion, you are getting a pretty sweet chunk of content that you won't have to pay a dime for. If this game was being developed by one of Cryptic's main competitors, not only would you be paying for the LoR expansion, but you'd also be paying to unlock a character slot for your new Rommie. I'm not saying since you are getting this expansion for free you have no right to complain, but before you do complain look at all your getting, and weight that against the gripes you have about that content and decide if your gripes are really that significant in comparison.
As far as the alliance thing goes I can understand how some of you would like to be a separate faction, and not involved with the Fed vs KDF war at all. But, the main thing this alliance provides is access to all the hard work your previous main character put into a starbase. As anyone who've made significant contributions to leveling up a starbase can tell you, it takes a lot of resources to level a base and the grind to get those resources isn't fun at all, (which is why some people Pay2Win to build their bases). Also with the alliance system smaller fleets won't be experiencing a starbase progression slowdown while their fleetmates are playing as Romulans, or if they decide to make their new Rommie their main character.
Cryptic did say in the future they might allow Romulans to start building their own bases, so eventually your Romulan toon will get to enjoy the masochistic grind of leveling up a starbase from scratch.
Comments
It matters becaus if you don't want to start a romulan...the way cryptic will design them is irrelevant for you
stupid analogy:
The government want to raise the tax for dogs. But if you have no dogs....you don't care or will fight against the rise because it doesn't concern you. In the common attitude you don't care if it rise or not. It means neutral. But in reality you were not really thinking about it because you have no dogs.
i hope you understood my analogy
If I were in Cryptic's position, I'd nuke the entire forum other than official Cryptic releases, the bug report section, and patch notes. It might actually be somewhat useful then.
The last couple weeks have been a total embarrassment. Way too many people here clearly need adult supervision in order to be allowed access to the internet, and I feel for Brandon and the community moderators having to wade through the immense amount of gibberish this place has been responsible for lately.
"We are smart." - Grebnedlog
Member of Alliance Central Command/boq botlhra'ghom
Yes, that is a good analogy.
I guess I can see how Romulan purists (for lack of a better term) might not like the alliance system. But if they want to play as the scheming, manipulative Romulans from TNG, the only Romulan group in STO who still acts like that is the Tal Shiar. And since they've aligned themselves with the Iconians, I don't think they would work as a playable faction.
I think the proposed system (as I understand it so far) is a good one, at least as a start. But I'll reserve further judgement until we get more dev blogs addressing individual concerns and topics.
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them."
-Thomas Marrone
Would that not be a player who does not play them at all?
Making an alt is more like getting a dog, while you already have a cat.
And the Federation-allied romulans really work well the role-play my fleet has.
Positive 107/407 ~= 26.3%
Negative 183/407 ~= 45%
Neutral 117/407 ~= 28.7%
So slightly under double for all the categories, or what's to be expected when you remove a little under 50% of the data [with the largest of the remaining category gaining the leftover share]. However, when the topic at hand is determining a rage thread. I do believe the off-topic numbers are relevant. Of course it is worth noting that most threads contain content that is vastly off-topic, so it's important to realize that when you start considering "wow that thread got busy fast", without appreciating that the largest segment of that content is banal and largely driven by a very small number of people actually posting in the thread.
As for adjusting with posting frequency ,that's really not how you should do it, as you're not normalizing the entire set. You're simply apply the difference between Positive and Negative occurences to the positive population, while leaving neutral unadjusted (we shouldn't assume neutral is 1:1). Also, you're really running risks of introducing rounding errors when doing adjustments like that, would really be better off working with the raw numbers up until the point you're trying to present the total.
For academic purposes, even of we removed the neutral population from the equation, you're left with a (107/289) 37% Positive / (183/289) 64% negative on posts. However, if we just consider by accounts. You are left with (75/146) 51% Positive / (71/146) 49% Negative. However, I would maintain this as purely academic, as removing the neutral population is a disservice.
All that said, I'm just going to repeat what I wrote here earlier in that I feel that off-topic is still important and relevant to the goal of showing what the thread actually contained. And perhaps an interesting reflection on how large threads become larger threads.
Anyone else see the irony here?
Ok so Stahl says it might be later, but that's not the impression I got. I know some people say it makes sense for the Romulans not being able to stand on their own and while I agree with that, I don't think it justifies the lack of reliable information in regards to the expansion. I was excited about having a Romulan fleet and starbase; I personally would have made it so that the alliance still happens but on a fleet scale. So you get your Romulan fleet started and choose your side in the alliance and then you share a fleet interface with either a KDF or FED fleet where you can contribute to their projects and they can help you by contributing to yours to get your first Romulan Base / HQ / Starbase w/e built.
This would have made more sense to me personally, maybe they'll allow the Romulan characters in your fleet to do that later on. Aside from that I'm really excited to play a Romulan and try out the warbirds. I hope in time it does move to more factions that are completely separate.
Frankly, I think you could have a much fuller Romulan faction with a few changes. The main things are to give Romulans Featured episode text which gives them enough missions for 1-50 and more ship builds.
From there, the issues are PvP and starbases. PvP needs a full overhaul anyway and I personally think starbases are too difficult for Klingons or any smaller faction and what would be ideal there is to let people form out of character fleet clusters of Romulan, Klingon, and Federation that share overall starbase XP and tier but not any of the subcategories.
The remaining issue is DOff assignments.
In this case, Cryptic is so close to a full faction that I can see where they may eventually face pressure to finish the job... Although I suspect if they go that route, it wouldy probably mean no more factions, ever.
I mean, if there truly is Romulan progression from 1-40, then most of the work is already done... it's endgame and PvP where it all falls apart.
Considering my experience on the forums, the off topic numbers actually look pretty low to me. Most threads if they get long enough, including this one, degenerate into meta discussions about the thread, or about an unrelated topic, or some sort of bickering where 2-5 people argue a point that no one else cares about for 5 pages or more.
The negative numbers don't surprise me. Within minutes of the initial announcement of a Romuland faction, we already had the usual suspects complaining about how this was a huge slap in the face to KDF players, etc. A LOT of people, rightly or wrongly, feel that they have been done wrong by Cryptic and feel the need to express it on a daily basis.
Cryptic could have announced that they'd cured cancer and you'd still have people complaining that they are wasting time on cancer instead of creating a T5 Connie or changing the way that KDF cloaking disengages when hailing or being hailed. Some people have a very specific vision of how the game out to be going, and whatever diverges from that is automatically bad.
Anyway, on topic (kind of) my fed fleet has been very very positive about the expansion and how it's being handled. Whatever disapointment there is that Roms aren't truly their own faction is outweighed by the relief that we won't be splintering off active members to a third faction, or that those of us who want to play Romulans don't need to wait another year or so to see a level 5 starbase (considering we're just now approaching tier 5 on our fed base).
I've seen one very vocal complainer in the ESD zone chat, who seemed to be outnumbered by people who were telling Chuck Norris jokes (or some variant of them).
So I wouldn't say that the general reaction has been negative at all. I would say that the general reaction is that no one is getting their perfect scenario, but most people are getting stuff they want, and probably more than most of them ever expected.
I get it perfectly, its like all the players in fleets that already have a high tier starbase can't understand why those of us who don't have this would be interested in making a Romulan Starbase in a Romulan Fleet. Like somehow giving players that option would invalidate their choice.
I think the alliance system is also an excuse to not make Romulan Vet rewards. Too easy to say just use your allies.
Its very clearly a set-up for players to make Romulan ALTS and keep playing with their fleets. I don't think you will see very many Romulan theme fleets(which are actually FED or KDF ones) of just Romulan players.
Then maybe hardcore romulan players should make one for themselves. Either KDF of Federation.
Bingo.....
=/\= 106th Fleet =/\=
Website | Fleet Charter | Mission Statement | Forums | Join | F.A.Q.
Bran shouldn't have linked the article at all.
It seems clear the article was posted in an attempt to discredit people who had negative opinions, as if their opinions are less valid because they posted twice.
There seemed no attempt to determine whether posts made valid points, what the intent of posters was, or if the opinions were made regarding the issue or in response to the opposite side. What you see as a neutral comment, perhaps I see as positive, and the poster may have meant as a negative. Even something as common as the loss of intended sarcasm could influence things one way or another. Was any thought given to the importance of the issue for single posters vs. multiple posters?
The fact that this is "newsworthy" or even reliable information seems silly. I'd never considered the journalist in question before, but at this point I won't be associating the name with integrity. If you can't objectively look at the forums, and particularly some of the responses by devs, and see it's obviously a hot-button issue for a significant portion of the people talking about it, there's something wrong with your objectivity.
Posting something twice does not make you right. An opinion voiced once is as valid as one repeated for a dozen times.
But, I would never consider any journalist at all to be in the same sentence as integrity. They are by their nature, journalists, and integrity does not work with that job.
Just my thoughts.
He is a CM. In a ideal world he is the link between the devs and community. He should be neutral. I know we all humans and in the real world cryptic is paying him that means he is more on the side of the devs. The criticism was more in that direction that negative post were tried to declared irrelevant but we are only saying our opinion. You are posting more than once and you are i would say more the positive type. i respect that but we want the same rights to post more even our posts are negative. The fact that "negative" group is posting more because they are argumenting more because we have to persuade them to correct their path. For the neutral or positive types it is easy...if nothing happens regarding the devs ...it comes like you wanted it to be...but we must fight...persuade...bring arguments...search for solutions....and hope that there is something like movement.... i am not saying "do what we say" i say "take us seriously and talk with us"
P.S. The early division of Romulan outfits can be found in this topic.
For the record, I am not a fan of this idea.
Im gonna make a rom toon and join the KDF but once im in my D'Deridex and mogai there is no way im gonna fly a klink ship
Ive been waiting a while to be a rom sure its not what i had hoped for but it is what it is and cant look a gift horse in the mouth....cryptic didnt have to let us be roms at all.
My character Tsin'xing
I think this post addresses my concerns very well. I'm super excited to be a Romulan, I just don't really like how the story seems to be going; I would rather play as a member of an Imperial Remnant, instead of a pro-democracy (Fed-lite) version of the Romulans. Additionally, the "Our wings will block out the sun" type of rhetoric really made it seem like the Romulans would be back in force, to retake their lost territory and rebuild their grand Empire.
Additionally, I think it would be a shame to have the Fed vs. KDF thing overshadow anything else in the game. There's no story reason to do so, and in fact given the grave threats to the entire quadrant we will apparently be facing (and have been facing) it makes much more sense to renew the Khitomer Accords.
What I really hope is not going on is gameplay (PvP) influencing story. I love PvP, and play it regularly, but just because you (the devs) want to keep PvP as a two-queue system is not a reason to shoehorn Romulans in with existing factions. I would much rather see a single "Queue Here!" button where everyone is just split randomly into two teams than forcing people to participate in a Fed vs. KDF war that isn't even happening in the end game storylines (Of course, even better would be a three way system, but I understand the map types wouldn't support that - which means Cryptic needs to create better maps, or adjust the queue system so it's inner-faction war games, FvK, FvR, or RvK - which seems like it would be easier than modifying maps to support three teams, and better for story than making playable Romulans join Fed or KDF).
Additionally, the idea that every race / faction in the game would end up being added to the war is just preposterous. If Tholians were ever playable, they clearly would be their own third party. Or the Dominion, or any Delta Quadrant races. Sure, the Cardassians (True Way vs. nice folk) or Alpha Jem'Hadar might take sides, but what about the actual Gamma Quadrant Dominion? Forcing Romulans into this fight sets a bad precedent.
Except there's also the actual Imperial Fleet, under Sela. I get that the Tal'Shiar are too bad to be played (never mind that people might enjoy playing bad guys) but the Romulan Star Empire still existed before D'Tan tried to set up his Fed-Lite New Romulus (and I would imagine still exists, despite Sela's abduction).
Really, the best solution would have been to allow players to choose which of the Romulan factions they want to join: RSE, New Romulus/Republic, or maybe even the Tal'Shiar. Clearly the tech is in game for choosing factions - it's just being used for the wrong faction choices.
This isn't a bad idea, and I certainly hope that as current fleets reach the end of the starbase progression, Cryptic thinks about adding Romulan starbases - the burnout will be lessened by not having to level a Fed / KDF base and a Rom base at the same time.
Goodness gracious I hope not. I want a unique 1,000 day Romulan ship, not another Chimera!
As far as the alliance thing goes I can understand how some of you would like to be a separate faction, and not involved with the Fed vs KDF war at all. But, the main thing this alliance provides is access to all the hard work your previous main character put into a starbase. As anyone who've made significant contributions to leveling up a starbase can tell you, it takes a lot of resources to level a base and the grind to get those resources isn't fun at all, (which is why some people Pay2Win to build their bases). Also with the alliance system smaller fleets won't be experiencing a starbase progression slowdown while their fleetmates are playing as Romulans, or if they decide to make their new Rommie their main character.
Cryptic did say in the future they might allow Romulans to start building their own bases, so eventually your Romulan toon will get to enjoy the masochistic grind of leveling up a starbase from scratch.
1 statistic was missing I saw tho. 100% confused
also referring to it as a 'thread of rage' is way over the top
constructive criticism in response to the answers given. thank you.