the only 'social' pve content is in ques. single player story content, and what ever the hell exploration is supposed to be, is not designed for teams, and does not depend on teamwork. at most its merely possible to do wile on a team.
I would like to se more bridges and interiors for romulans, and also that you create new interors for federation becouse they are too big and outdated.
the only 'social' pve content is in ques. single player story content, and what ever the hell exploration is supposed to be, is not designed for teams, and does not depend on teamwork. at most its merely possible to do wile on a team.
Some people are trying to push this PvP vs PvE and vs everything else agenda.
I play everything, these days more PvE then PvP by a mile.
I finished everything worthwhile in the game.
I also remember what exploration meant in game. It meant most boring singleplayer content imaginable.
Scan 1 thing. scan it 4 more times on huge and empty randomly generated map. kill few unrelated enemies and beam out.
So of course, PvP.
Fun with friends and enemies. It's not like you can't play anything else once you PvP when it is fixed.
It requires least resources to fix and will bring many players back and buck of course.
Devs disregarded PvP way too much so even other parts started breaking down as well, parts that PvPers were always first to notice and send bug reports.
Wouldn't Kobali Prime open Battlezone be good as a PvP map? Or map from Defend Rh'lhho Station, or Azure Nebula space map.
"The problem is asking the wrong questions! If they asked the questions I wanted them to ask the votes would be 1000000000000% aligned with my own personal opinions!"
Somebody needs a good hit to the statisticals.
*sigh and head scratching if u read the whole post*
dude... it's quite easy: of course one could ask any question and then just collect the numbers. but always the question is as well, regarding the outcome, if those numbers show what they're supposed to show.
that said, if they are really about to simply ask for if we want more pvp queues added, the question is valid, true.
but while forming a question for a poll like this, one always should go from the basics, the surroundings, the actual circumstances that that question refers on.
so, reagarding pvp in sto at this point, it is the totally wrong question. this is backed up by a ton of statements in here that said "i would go for pvp, but not for more q's. balance and fixes is what is needed first."
(obviously only my personal opinion, sure lmao.... dig the thread and count those posts dude :P)
therefore the outcome gets distorted, because obviously the numbers would be higher if that question would have been the 2nd one regarding pvp after the question for balance and fixes.
it's a bit like asking thirsty men in the desert if they'd like to get some umbrellas. true, there will be a number to collect in the end, but will it show those mens real interests or needs? (first example that came to mind, there surely are better ones)
as i said: at least that question may would have worked with some explanations in the op, but to simply drop a question like this into a surrounding like this will proove what valid in the end?
nothing at this point imho!
not sure if this now is more clearer. and i won't apologize for english not being my mother-tongue (why should i lol), but on the next occasion i'll ask my prof of quantitive statistics about this and tell u what he thinks about my "mental gymnastics"/this poll. yet we understood each other most of the time quite good .
oh and btw: i'd really appreciate some content in a conter-post, not just griefing. thx.
As these are already upgradable to 11 console via T5-U, instead of an extra console, give them an extra Bridge Officer Slot. Nothing Higher than upgrading a Lt to Lt-Cmdr, and universals not being upgraded from Ensign to Lt. This would bring them on par with the new Command ships, but without the Starship Trait or the Specialist BOFF Stations but would make a lot of players really happy, and for Cryptic trigger a nice set of Fleet Module sales. I dare say there are plenty of players who would be happy to pay the smaller amount for the Fleet Module than shell out for a full ship to make this worthwhile for income, so I think it's a Win for both players and Cryptic
As these are already upgradable to 11 console via T5-U, instead of an extra console, give them an extra Bridge Officer Slot. Nothing Higher than upgrading a Lt to Lt-Cmdr, and universals not being upgraded from Ensign to Lt. This would bring them on par with the new Command ships, but without the Starship Trait or the Specialist BOFF Stations but would make a lot of players really happy, and for Cryptic trigger a nice set of Fleet Module sales. I dare say there are plenty of players who would be happy to pay the smaller amount for the Fleet Module than shell out for a full ship to make this worthwhile for income, so I think it's a Win for both players and Cryptic
those are already at t5 fleet level (lil sidenote: the -u option rendered at least the kumari totally obsolete in comparison to the charal.)
they just should've made all the mass of t5's upgradeable to t6's imo. less money per unit, but a whole ton of more possible sources for new income. no traits and special seatings for those t5's on t6 and they still would have kept the points to sell new t6's.
but that's just me...
Why not fix all the bugs first and just put the ships on the backburner and refine them there while fixing the bugs first? Sounds simple, I know, but perhaps there would be more traction in game without skips, trips, nerfs, and crashes? *anticipates incoming nonconstructive criticism*
Exploration. What boggles my mind is the amount of patrol missions in the format of "Kill x groups of [insert race here]" still left in the game when that level of quality was supposedly considered bad enough to get star clusters the boot.
If nothing else, it would give us players some attachment to the commendation stats, and that alone would be a quality boost. For example, "Aid the Planet" could give XP in Colonial or Development. More missions to get people to talk it out, like "Trick or Treat" ("Patrol the Danteri System") or "Patrol the Beytan System" would be awesome and perfect for Diplomacy XP.
There could be more maps with ground mobs designed to be snuck around, instead of fought with, to give Espionage XP and accolades - as a plus, those missions could be completed as combat and non-combat versions, getting players 2 playthroughs of the same mission for different rewards.
I don't think anyone can disagree with that. If the option was there, it would have won all the votes.
I doubt that. I don't vote for bugfixes. Well ,I have a choice between different ones, I might. But bugfixes are part of everyday's business.
And most people do not realize how many people work at Cryptic that can't possibly do bug fixes. Everyone that produces content doesn't produce code.
And that means these people sit around idly - or get fired. Sure, some people would rejoice at the idea of Geko being fired, but it would mean a complete team, not just a single person - tacofangs, jheinig, borticus, crypticquack, jamjanz, kestrel and who knows how many people more - that knows the tools, that knows the design, that knows the story ideas, just leaving - and hoping that when the bug fixing phase is over, that they'd still be around waiting to come back, or that a new team actually can pick up where the last team left.
It's a completely infeasible proposition.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
I doubt that. I don't vote for bugfixes. Well ,I have a choice between different ones, I might. But bugfixes are part of everyday's business.
And most people do not realize how many people work at Cryptic that can't possibly do bug fixes. Everyone that produces content doesn't produce code.
And that means these people sit around idly - or get fired. Sure, some people would rejoice at the idea of Geko being fired, but it would mean a complete team, not just a single person - tacofangs, jheinig, borticus, crypticquack, jamjanz, kestrel and who knows how many people more - that knows the tools, that knows the design, that knows the story ideas, just leaving - and hoping that when the bug fixing phase is over, that they'd still be around waiting to come back, or that a new team actually can pick up where the last team left.
It's a completely infeasible proposition.
You do have a point there. If I may add, the part of Cryptic being hated regardless - that sounds a lot like ungrateful complaining. People wanted new and more difficult challenges, they got them, but whine that it is too hard. I agree it is more difficult, but there are those who wanted that and now others suffer. For instance, those said others only thought about what they wanted without bearing in mind the repercussions. To be frank, I love a good challenge, but not at the cost of others suffering from not keeping in mind how others might feel. I also respect individual thinking, but why not do some collective thinking to come to a compromise to settle on an idea. Not collective thinking like the Borg, but collective thinking through individual ideas and come to a consensus by sharing each individual's thoughts with constructive feedback. I understand that this may be counterproductive, but what about where we are at now? Aren't these current problems with STO, counterproductive? I love exploration, challenges, and even some of the stories that are in Star Trek, but not at the cost that would diminish it for others. I also understand that this might sound cheesy, but do you see where I am coming from?
Well, first of all I would like more bug-fixing before anything. But yeah, not going to happen. I would also like PvE-queues consolidated and re-populated, but yep, not going to happen.
I like the way Guild Wars 2 did "exploration". You've got a bunch of stuff to do in order to 100% a map/zone, and then you win a prize when you 100% the map.
Star Trek has nothing to do with exploring new places. It's just a catch phrase to obfuscate the exploration of the human condition (with funny silicone things stuck to their oddly monocultural heads).
If I have to navigate a Dialogue tree to "win" a mission instead of shooting them or punching them in the face, I think that would be a huge FAIL as a game experience. Most games just do "diplomacy" badly.
Honestly, at this point I'd appreciate if you guys spent a release cycle just fixing the bugs that have slowly accrued and did a bit of polishing on released features and maps rather than releasing new content and bringing in another dozen small bugs
Here's some thoughts about current state of the game and my vision of its priority development vectors:
1) When starbase system went up there were brilliant ideas about it, such as a global point of interest, making a large amount of players to cooperate to harvest some resources or sector control, etc. It had a huge potential and ability to involve players to the game to success in something big, being a part of dinamic universe. Where is it now? And this point is closer to fleet activity, so I voted for that.
2) Bug fix and playable PvP. Classes and ships balance. Did you ever think about implementing an open PvP? Most of us watched series, so I suppose there's nothing bad about Klingon warbird decloaking behind you with a friendly torpedo salvo as universal galactic greeting. There's always an option to make some sectors aviable for that. Why can't a player intercept another? It's all about canon. In other way if you don't want to get in trouble like that, you can always go to explore another sector far away from neutral/war zone. There's Kerrat system in the game, but that's all. This situation makes a lot of players just... sad.
3) Exploration. Well I don't have a clue vision of the concept you meaning by that, but I'd like to see it before you break something more in the game. And that's all about canon again!
4) New episodes and foundry. I really like the story arcs and the way they tied to the game, (with that in mind I appreciate all the players who create something new and fun in the foundry, you making the game better your way!), but one-time content ruins playerbase the same way as overgrind that have been implemented to the game for the last 2 years. Some day tolerance to that will wipe off and that will make the game sink to the bottom (does it still sailing on waves?). It will be a black day for all of us, so devs have to do smth with that.
Everyone wants some piece of bread and it's good to have some cheese and tomatoes on it for example (at this point I can understand devs policy), but overgrind and lack of involving playerbase into something really great and comprehensive, so they can feel they taking part in growing universe, not just one-time episode (you can repeat it 3-5 times, but feel sick on the 6) break all the point and the desire to play.
Something to keep in mind; the driver for the Exploration missions 'popularity' is at least partly the result of the elimination of exploration clusters (With little to no warning) last year.
They weren't the "Most Awsumnuss" but people DID use them to fill resource tables and pad skill points, and they were an important source of Dilithium for low-level Federation characters.
The removal upset quite a few people.
Assuming the infographic's numbers are even CLOSE to reality in terms of flesh-and-blood people, this poll represents the desires of around .1% of the game population. (Roughly 1/1000th.)
The response is a LOT smaller than it was in 2012.
Well, there's still almost 23 hours left, maybe they're just waiting...
I think all of this is right on the money. I'm pulling for exploration. Heck I'd like them to just put back what they removed.
As far as the numbers - 250,000 remotely active players. Maybe. I would estimate around 30,000 very active. Then maybe another say 60,000 somewhat active.
I would say the number of 'hardcore oldtimers' the type most likely to visit the forum and vote in polls is greatly reduced from 2012.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
There's merit in alot of suggestions, but there is one in particular that I admit I'd really like to see introduced, and there are others I know who also like the idea. You know those extra ships that many of us have, but rarely use anymore? I have about 30 of them on my main character, and they all have full loadouts of weapons and most of the consoles filled. I can switch to any of them at any time and none of them will pull weapons from another. Which brings the idea, wouldn't it be cool if I could share these? Maybe turn command of some over to bridge officers with a trained specialization, for help in a mission. Maybe loan some out to friends and fleetmates, so they can use their own boffs and captain skills to see how my ships handle. That could even end up in a few extra ship purchases from the z-store, if any of them like what they see. Would be a really cool option to see in a future update.
Fleet Admiral Rosso, Starfleet Tactical, Rogue Leader
Proud to lead the Rogue Squadron of Starfleet
team exploration ...aka coop patrols.By the same logic Left 4 dead is a mmo....same coop vs stupid npcs.
So? People want to do this let them, all adds to the fun and increases the potential for a new system. I could say the same for a lot of things by that flimsy logic.
Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head. - Euripides
I no longer do any Bug Hunting work for Cryptic. I may resume if a serious attempt to fix the game is made.
So? People want to do this let them, all adds to the fun and increases the potential for a new system. I could say the same for a lot of things by that flimsy logic.
yes you can say the same thing about the whole pve except episodes...thats pretty much singleplayer .The only thing you can't say that is PvP....there you play with people against people not against stupid npcs.
Comments
Some people are trying to push this PvP vs PvE and vs everything else agenda.
I play everything, these days more PvE then PvP by a mile.
I finished everything worthwhile in the game.
I also remember what exploration meant in game. It meant most boring singleplayer content imaginable.
Scan 1 thing. scan it 4 more times on huge and empty randomly generated map. kill few unrelated enemies and beam out.
So of course, PvP.
Fun with friends and enemies. It's not like you can't play anything else once you PvP when it is fixed.
It requires least resources to fix and will bring many players back and buck of course.
Devs disregarded PvP way too much so even other parts started breaking down as well, parts that PvPers were always first to notice and send bug reports.
Wouldn't Kobali Prime open Battlezone be good as a PvP map? Or map from Defend Rh'lhho Station, or Azure Nebula space map.
and 2 cents on balancing things:
Why neutronic torp needed the nerf fresh video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBucK88ZqI8
Super SpecialStar Trek Online Review
SpecialTemporal PUG 100K DPS Build
We are Travelers
*sigh and head scratching if u read the whole post*
dude... it's quite easy: of course one could ask any question and then just collect the numbers. but always the question is as well, regarding the outcome, if those numbers show what they're supposed to show.
that said, if they are really about to simply ask for if we want more pvp queues added, the question is valid, true.
but while forming a question for a poll like this, one always should go from the basics, the surroundings, the actual circumstances that that question refers on.
so, reagarding pvp in sto at this point, it is the totally wrong question. this is backed up by a ton of statements in here that said "i would go for pvp, but not for more q's. balance and fixes is what is needed first."
(obviously only my personal opinion, sure lmao.... dig the thread and count those posts dude :P)
therefore the outcome gets distorted, because obviously the numbers would be higher if that question would have been the 2nd one regarding pvp after the question for balance and fixes.
it's a bit like asking thirsty men in the desert if they'd like to get some umbrellas. true, there will be a number to collect in the end, but will it show those mens real interests or needs? (first example that came to mind, there surely are better ones)
as i said: at least that question may would have worked with some explanations in the op, but to simply drop a question like this into a surrounding like this will proove what valid in the end?
nothing at this point imho!
not sure if this now is more clearer. and i won't apologize for english not being my mother-tongue (why should i lol), but on the next occasion i'll ask my prof of quantitive statistics about this and tell u what he thinks about my "mental gymnastics"/this poll. yet we understood each other most of the time quite good
oh and btw: i'd really appreciate some content in a conter-post, not just griefing. thx.
Odyssey's
Vesta's
Andorian Escorts
Bortasqu's
Scimitar's
As these are already upgradable to 11 console via T5-U, instead of an extra console, give them an extra Bridge Officer Slot. Nothing Higher than upgrading a Lt to Lt-Cmdr, and universals not being upgraded from Ensign to Lt. This would bring them on par with the new Command ships, but without the Starship Trait or the Specialist BOFF Stations but would make a lot of players really happy, and for Cryptic trigger a nice set of Fleet Module sales. I dare say there are plenty of players who would be happy to pay the smaller amount for the Fleet Module than shell out for a full ship to make this worthwhile for income, so I think it's a Win for both players and Cryptic
Greywolf Taskforce
those are already at t5 fleet level (lil sidenote: the -u option rendered at least the kumari totally obsolete in comparison to the charal.)
they just should've made all the mass of t5's upgradeable to t6's imo. less money per unit, but a whole ton of more possible sources for new income. no traits and special seatings for those t5's on t6 and they still would have kept the points to sell new t6's.
but that's just me...
If nothing else, it would give us players some attachment to the commendation stats, and that alone would be a quality boost. For example, "Aid the Planet" could give XP in Colonial or Development. More missions to get people to talk it out, like "Trick or Treat" ("Patrol the Danteri System") or "Patrol the Beytan System" would be awesome and perfect for Diplomacy XP.
There could be more maps with ground mobs designed to be snuck around, instead of fought with, to give Espionage XP and accolades - as a plus, those missions could be completed as combat and non-combat versions, getting players 2 playthroughs of the same mission for different rewards.
Of course, but they didn't out the "fixing Bugs" option
Super SpecialStar Trek Online Review
SpecialTemporal PUG 100K DPS Build
We are Travelers
I doubt that. I don't vote for bugfixes. Well ,I have a choice between different ones, I might. But bugfixes are part of everyday's business.
And most people do not realize how many people work at Cryptic that can't possibly do bug fixes. Everyone that produces content doesn't produce code.
And that means these people sit around idly - or get fired. Sure, some people would rejoice at the idea of Geko being fired, but it would mean a complete team, not just a single person - tacofangs, jheinig, borticus, crypticquack, jamjanz, kestrel and who knows how many people more - that knows the tools, that knows the design, that knows the story ideas, just leaving - and hoping that when the bug fixing phase is over, that they'd still be around waiting to come back, or that a new team actually can pick up where the last team left.
It's a completely infeasible proposition.
You do have a point there. If I may add, the part of Cryptic being hated regardless - that sounds a lot like ungrateful complaining. People wanted new and more difficult challenges, they got them, but whine that it is too hard. I agree it is more difficult, but there are those who wanted that and now others suffer. For instance, those said others only thought about what they wanted without bearing in mind the repercussions. To be frank, I love a good challenge, but not at the cost of others suffering from not keeping in mind how others might feel. I also respect individual thinking, but why not do some collective thinking to come to a compromise to settle on an idea. Not collective thinking like the Borg, but collective thinking through individual ideas and come to a consensus by sharing each individual's thoughts with constructive feedback. I understand that this may be counterproductive, but what about where we are at now? Aren't these current problems with STO, counterproductive? I love exploration, challenges, and even some of the stories that are in Star Trek, but not at the cost that would diminish it for others. I also understand that this might sound cheesy, but do you see where I am coming from?
1: Ability to export fleet member contribution history in a format that Excel can read.
2: A report generator so we can see who's contributed to what project in a given period of time.
3: Ability to create a PvE que that simply allows the first x players from a specified fleet to join.
4: Fleet vs. fleet pvp (Starbase defense?)
5: At the very least please get the overall contributions option on the fleet roster to sort correctly.
BTW: Yes, if these were available I would pay upwards of 1000 zen for them, since I could actually run my fleet.
Sev
Give PVP the much needed attention it deserves
A lot less grinding
I like the way Guild Wars 2 did "exploration". You've got a bunch of stuff to do in order to 100% a map/zone, and then you win a prize when you 100% the map.
Star Trek has nothing to do with exploring new places. It's just a catch phrase to obfuscate the exploration of the human condition (with funny silicone things stuck to their oddly monocultural heads).
If I have to navigate a Dialogue tree to "win" a mission instead of shooting them or punching them in the face, I think that would be a huge FAIL as a game experience. Most games just do "diplomacy" badly.
IKS Korrasami (Fleet B'rel Bird of Prey Retrofit T5-U)
1) When starbase system went up there were brilliant ideas about it, such as a global point of interest, making a large amount of players to cooperate to harvest some resources or sector control, etc. It had a huge potential and ability to involve players to the game to success in something big, being a part of dinamic universe. Where is it now? And this point is closer to fleet activity, so I voted for that.
2) Bug fix and playable PvP. Classes and ships balance. Did you ever think about implementing an open PvP? Most of us watched series, so I suppose there's nothing bad about Klingon warbird decloaking behind you with a friendly torpedo salvo as universal galactic greeting. There's always an option to make some sectors aviable for that. Why can't a player intercept another? It's all about canon. In other way if you don't want to get in trouble like that, you can always go to explore another sector far away from neutral/war zone. There's Kerrat system in the game, but that's all. This situation makes a lot of players just... sad.
3) Exploration. Well I don't have a clue vision of the concept you meaning by that, but I'd like to see it before you break something more in the game. And that's all about canon again!
4) New episodes and foundry. I really like the story arcs and the way they tied to the game, (with that in mind I appreciate all the players who create something new and fun in the foundry, you making the game better your way!), but one-time content ruins playerbase the same way as overgrind that have been implemented to the game for the last 2 years. Some day tolerance to that will wipe off and that will make the game sink to the bottom (does it still sailing on waves?). It will be a black day for all of us, so devs have to do smth with that.
Everyone wants some piece of bread and it's good to have some cheese and tomatoes on it for example (at this point I can understand devs policy), but overgrind and lack of involving playerbase into something really great and comprehensive, so they can feel they taking part in growing universe, not just one-time episode (you can repeat it 3-5 times, but feel sick on the 6) break all the point and the desire to play.
I think all of this is right on the money. I'm pulling for exploration. Heck I'd like them to just put back what they removed.
As far as the numbers - 250,000 remotely active players. Maybe. I would estimate around 30,000 very active. Then maybe another say 60,000 somewhat active.
I would say the number of 'hardcore oldtimers' the type most likely to visit the forum and vote in polls is greatly reduced from 2012.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
1/2 of playerbase want a offline sto ....you know you dont really need a server for singleplayer content.
Not necessarily, I've seen a few good ideas batted around the forums about team-based exploration, and they do have merit.
team exploration ...aka coop patrols.By the same logic Left 4 dead is a mmo....same coop vs stupid npcs.
Proud to lead the Rogue Squadron of Starfleet
So? People want to do this let them, all adds to the fun and increases the potential for a new system. I could say the same for a lot of things by that flimsy logic.
yes you can say the same thing about the whole pve except episodes...thats pretty much singleplayer .The only thing you can't say that is PvP....there you play with people against people not against stupid npcs.