This games lacks comprehensible documentation

angrytarg
angrytarg Member Posts: 10,808 Arc User
Do you know the difference between base damage and actual damage? Do you know what a category 2 buff is? Do you know wether or not armour consoles feature "diminishing returns" and what that would mean in practice? What is overcapping and when does it occur? What is a firing cycle?

Your answer to some or all of the above might be "yes", but if you know these things you certainly didn't learn them by studying the games' documentation or in-game help but used the forums, reddit or twitter to learn about it.

Currently the supposed "Admirality nerf" causes a lot of confusion. Patchnotes talk about "limiting the daily amount of campaign XP to 10.000", causing an uproar of people complaining that "XP was nerfed again", not realising that "campaign XP" and "specialization/character XP" are two different things.

I feel a lot of those issues could be countered by having a comprehensible documentation, explaining even the most basic features. Basic stuff like how damage and resists are calculated and what "100% cooldown reduction" mean or even more complex, what category 1 or 2 buffs are is nowhere explained but sometimes mentioned when devs explain stuff.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I feel there's a lot to be done about that and it would benefit the playerbase AND the devs ultimately.

EDIT: I feel the need to edit the OP. When I talk about documentation I mean a type of document (yes, reading, that's the thing hurting your eyes and makey you go "boooring!") explaining the rules of the game. That does not mean what button makes you jump, it means explaining how the game is supposed to work. Things like "Why does a +35% damage console only increase my actual damage output by 12% of what I had?" or "What does +35 resistance mean?" because it certainly doesn't mean what you think at first.​​
Post edited by angrytarg on
lFC4bt2.gif
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
«134

Comments

  • devilment666
    devilment666 Member Posts: 112 Arc User
    http://sto.gamepedia.com/

    And the beauty of a wiki is that anyone can edit them or add content.
  • jaymclaughlin
    jaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    Do you know the difference between base damage and actual damage? Do you know what a category 2 buff is? Do you know wether or not armour consoles feature "diminishing returns" and what that would mean in practice? What is overcapping and when does it occur? What is a firing cycle?

    Your answer to some or all of the above might be "yes", but if you know these things you certainly didn't learn them by studying the games' documentation or in-game help but used the forums, reddit or twitter to learn about it.

    Currently the supposed "Admirality nerf" causes a lot of confusion. Patchnotes talk about "limiting the daily amount of campaign XP to 10.000", causing an uproar of people complaining that "XP was nerfed again", not realising that "campaign XP" and "specialization/character XP" are two different things.

    I feel a lot of those issues could be countered by having a comprehensible documentation, explaining even the most basic features. Basic stuff like how damage and resists are calculated and what "100% cooldown reduction" mean or even more complex, what category 1 or 2 buffs are is nowhere explained but sometimes mentioned when devs explain stuff.

    Maybe I'm mistaken, but I feel there's a lot to be done about that and it would benefit the playerbase AND the devs ultimately.​​

    The cat 1/2 buff thing is a player invented thing, so shouldn't necessarily be in any in game documentation.

    I do agree that there needs to be more and clearer explanations.... however, most people skip tutorials... most people 'F' through dialogues and don't click on the additional options which explain things. Most people don't even run normal queues before advanced in order to learn how they work, so adding in-game documentation would be pretty pointless, because few people would ever actually read it.

    There's actually an interact in the tutorial that explains firing arcs (although it confuses beam banks with arrays). I bet only a small handful of people know it exists.
    animated.gif
  • angrytarg
    angrytarg Member Posts: 10,808 Arc User
    http://sto.gamepedia.com/

    And the beauty of a wiki is that anyone can edit them or add content.

    I know the wiki, but this is like using the foundry to substitute for dev created content. I believe that the fundamentals should be explained in the game or readme itself, not via third party tools. But maybe that's just me pig-1.gif​​
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • hravik
    hravik Member Posts: 1,202 Arc User
    STO for me has always been in that weird place where you can be as bad at the game as you want to be, and its almost impossible to fail in most missions. On the other hand, there are systems layered on top of systems, on top of abandoned stuff, on top of tweaks and changes, on top of broken stuff, on top of almost none of it being explained very well, if at all.

    It can take a lot of time to figure out what everything does and how it all works together, and so much of it is scattered in so many places that aren't actually put out by Cryptic.
  • posvali
    posvali Member Posts: 15 Arc User
    I agree with OP and others who posted here. Moreover, even when there are ingame explanations they are more than often wrong, like tool tips etc. I cannot understand why they make all things so complex and complicated, the formulas, dependencies and all. It must generate too many errors, even with the most careful and meticulous designs. Let's hope it will arrive soon the time when it will no longer be necessary to seek answers and instructions on other sites and sources (even forums here). The sooner the better for everyone.
  • risian4
    risian4 Member Posts: 3,711 Arc User
    Meh. I've been in many missions where I would explain what needed to be done to get an optional, how to get, equip and use a remodulator when I found out I was the only one who was doing damage, basic tactics like protecting your flanks and not run ahead of the rest of the team, 'those aren't buffs, they're injuries', don't use concussive tachyon emission when you're unable to take cover or deal with the incoming fire that will almost certainly follow... and more of those basic things.

    I've often encountered someone in KAGA who would explain, possibly with copy-pasted text, that no one should leave the first room, instead wait and lure the borg to the team to save some time.

    In most cases, none of this advice was taken. While I can certainly agree that the information should be available in-game for those that do want to read it, I doubt the more technical stuff like different tiers of buffs will be actually read. I don't think it will solve anything. Just look how many people you see flying or walking around with a few or even a dozen injuries.

    There's a lot of people in this game who just want to pew pew the enemies they encounter. They're not interested in useful hints, so I very much doubt they'd be prepared to read the even more complicated stuff.
  • kavase
    kavase Member Posts: 771 Arc User
    In before someone mentions about the useless wik......damn it!
    http://sto.gamepedia.com/

    And the beauty of a wiki is that anyone can edit them or add content.

    No, there isn't any beauty to it...at all.

    Now with that out of the way, I can understand why they don't have much in the way of documentation or tutorials etc. because they keep changing, and therefore they would also needed to be updated.

    This trend of lack of documentation isn't exclusive to STO sadly, many games are heading in this direction for one reason or another. I hate it. Every game I got used to come with a comprehensive manual. Heck, even new triple A title games no longer come with a manual anymore.

    At this point, I'd be happy with a simple data base available to show all ship stats, every console & weapon information etc.
    Retired. I'm now in search for that perfect space anomaly.
  • posvali
    posvali Member Posts: 15 Arc User
    risian4 made good observations about some players' behaviour. What OP talks about will prevent some complaints and make at least a few more players better informed. Lol, at the beggining I use to fly and walk aound with many injuries because I could not afford the cure or was too lazy to go to medical officer of engineer... Now injuries are very rare. And now I just glance over explanations but at the begining I really needed more.
  • cidjack
    cidjack Member Posts: 2,017 Arc User
    Over the past 3 years i have written my own personal reference guide. It helps me when i foeget something.
    Armada: Multiplying fleet projects in need of dilithium by 13."
    95bced8038c91ec6f880d510e6fd302f366a776c4c5761e5f7931d491667a45e.jpgvia Imgflip Meme Generator
  • ryugasirius
    ryugasirius Member Posts: 283 Arc User

    The cat 1/2 buff thing is a player invented thing, so shouldn't necessarily be in any in game documentation.

    Well, the cat 1/2 definition is player invented, but the underlying game mechanic is not (not every +10% bonus thingy is applied the same way. Two items might have the exact same tooltip, but behave differently, and that's not good).
    ryuga81.png
  • jaymclaughlin
    jaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User

    The cat 1/2 buff thing is a player invented thing, so shouldn't necessarily be in any in game documentation.

    Well, the cat 1/2 definition is player invented, but the underlying game mechanic is not (not every +10% bonus thingy is applied the same way. Two items might have the exact same tooltip, but behave differently, and that's not good).

    Yes, but powers get modified and changed with almost every patch, and new things added, so you would never be able to implement any of that in any kind of documentation realistically.

    animated.gif
  • jaymclaughlin
    jaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    posvali wrote: »
    risian4 made good observations about some players' behaviour. What OP talks about will prevent some complaints and make at least a few more players better informed. Lol, at the beggining I use to fly and walk aound with many injuries because I could not afford the cure or was too lazy to go to medical officer of engineer... Now injuries are very rare. And now I just glance over explanations but at the begining I really needed more.

    Laziness is something that no end of documentation can overcome. There's actually a mission on ESD that teaches how to use the medical officer. I doubt many have done it.

    animated.gif
  • tunebreaker
    tunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User
    Consider this the last remaining exploration we have in game. If they would give manuals, what would happen to our search for knowledge?

    Seriously though, I agree. This game has too many things that do *something*. But what that *something* is or how big is the difference compared to something else, nobody knows for sure. How big is exactly the dmg boost you get from APB? ... Anyone??
  • jaymclaughlin
    jaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    Consider this the last remaining exploration we have in game. If they would give manuals, what would happen to our search for knowledge?

    Seriously though, I agree. This game has too many things that do *something*. But what that *something* is or how big is the difference compared to something else, nobody knows for sure. How big is exactly the dmg boost you get from APB? ... Anyone??

    That's the issue though... for a start, most things are relative. It's not like it's just a finite number. You can find out a large proportion of the information specific to your ship by mousing over tooltips in Sol space.
    animated.gif
  • sonicshower
    sonicshower Member Posts: 216 Arc User
    I'm the kind of guy that never reads the directions anyway, but it would be helpful for a lot of players.
    sh2sxc7.gif
  • kavase
    kavase Member Posts: 771 Arc User
    edited December 2015
    Consider this the last remaining exploration we have in game. If they would give manuals, what would happen to our search for knowledge?

    Seriously though, I agree. This game has too many things that do *something*. But what that *something* is or how big is the difference compared to something else, nobody knows for sure. How big is exactly the dmg boost you get from APB? ... Anyone??

    That's the issue though... for a start, most things are relative. It's not like it's just a finite number. You can find out a large proportion of the information specific to your ship by mousing over tooltips in Sol space.

    That's great, but there's a catch. You need to *buy* it first prior to you discovering what it actually does.

    What I'd like is a data list that I can view and hover over with the actual effect of what it provides prior to having to make the purchase.

    Edit: I think I may have discovered why Cryptic doesn't do documentations now. :D
    Retired. I'm now in search for that perfect space anomaly.
  • jaymclaughlin
    jaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    To be honest, the solution would be to re-write the first 10 missions in the game.

    For example, on the second mission, why have a shuttle cut scene, when they could get you to manually fly the shuttle down to Vulcan through a series of gates etc, which in turn would teach you more about plotting and throttle control.
    animated.gif
  • kontarnus
    kontarnus Member Posts: 289 Arc User
    edited December 2015
    No game that I know of has ever published what amounts to readable text explanations of how its core code equations work and interact. For good reason.
    It's IP, they don't want another developer using it as a template or guide. This isn't open source programming here...

    The result is that players always have to figure things out for themselves. That's the way it works.
    The sto gamepedia is not the best, and is frequently misleading to those who don't pay close enough(any) attention to official blogs or how things end up working in-game (or it's edited by clueless individuals who think they're clever), but it's better than nothing.
    The various game podcasts are not much better, quite frankly, since the people on them frequently perpetuate and reinforce the ignorant patter on the forums,wiki, and in-game chat.
    If you want all of those things explained, OP, write up a document, or page, that explains those things in a succinct manner that would be helpful to all the people who dislike reading and thinking.
    "Intelligence is finite, stupidity is infinite" -- Umberto Eco
  • dareau
    dareau Member Posts: 2,389 Arc User
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but most of the games I've played usually save the "detailed, in depth, every step explained" combat calculations for the strategy guide, not the main manual/tutorials.

    So things like resistance's diminishing returns, category X bonus etc. are all "strategy guide" material, not "tutorial / manual" material.

    And due to the constantly changing nature of the MMO world, perhaps the wiki is a more appropriate "strategy guide" than a paper manual - but that also requires a much more involved commitment amongst the playerbase / dev team / community team... (hint hint PWE / Trendy - full time wiki guy...)

    And as far as player confusion goes - any reduction to any number draws a cry of "nerf". I sometimes think that "misrepresentations" are hyperbole in a misguided attempt to cancel the reduction - get enough people thinking that the spec point XP earnings are affected, the inevitable firestorm might get the admiralty change cancelled type maneuver...

    I mean, it's been working for BFaW all these years (remember, the whole driver of Aux2Bat was to take a single copy of TT and BFaW and get them near-100% uptime on low-tac-slot cruisers), we have devs saying a "clearly broken A2B and BFaW system can't be repaired due to community outrage unless a 'proper' method is eventually stumbled upon"...
    Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...

    To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
  • zorander6
    zorander6 Member Posts: 130 Arc User
    Ah documentation, the user's cry for it, the employee's hate writing it, and in the end only one person ever reads it.

    Even with shiney pictures and audio reading of the documentation users will then complain that it's annoying and they want it turned off or what ever the documentation is about done for them automagically.

    So while having some documentation would be nice almost no one would read it. Know what happens to most game manuals? They get lost or thrown away unless there is some value to them outside of the game itself. That and you have to have a writer who understands the systems in question write the manual. Not to mention the unending argument of "it doesn't work that way."

    Just my humble opinion. Not necessarily disagreeing but pointing out the mentality around the magical "documentation."
  • leemwatson
    leemwatson Member Posts: 4,620 Arc User
    edited December 2015
    angrytarg wrote: »
    Do you know the difference between base damage and actual damage? Do you know what a category 2 buff is? Do you know wether or not armour consoles feature "diminishing returns" and what that would mean in practice? What is overcapping and when does it occur? What is a firing cycle?

    Your answer to some or all of the above might be "yes", but if you know these things you certainly didn't learn them by studying the games' documentation or in-game help but used the forums, reddit or twitter to learn about it.

    Currently the supposed "Admirality nerf" causes a lot of confusion. Patchnotes talk about "limiting the daily amount of campaign XP to 10.000", causing an uproar of people complaining that "XP was nerfed again", not realising that "campaign XP" and "specialization/character XP" are two different things.

    I feel a lot of those issues could be countered by having a comprehensible documentation, explaining even the most basic features. Basic stuff like how damage and resists are calculated and what "100% cooldown reduction" mean or even more complex, what category 1 or 2 buffs are is nowhere explained but sometimes mentioned when devs explain stuff.

    Maybe I'm mistaken, but I feel there's a lot to be done about that and it would benefit the playerbase AND the devs ultimately.​​

    I've never used the wiki or any other guide. I learned alot from prior knowledge of gaming (30+ years), observation and playing the tutorial. Most of it is having the common sense to hover your mouse over something or right-clicking then 'info'. It's not that hard, yet so many don't take the time to do the tutorial or even pay attention to it!
    "You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
  • kontarnus
    kontarnus Member Posts: 289 Arc User
    leemwatson wrote: »
    angrytarg wrote: »
    Do you know the difference between base damage and actual damage? Do you know what a category 2 buff is? Do you know wether or not armour consoles feature "diminishing returns" and what that would mean in practice? What is overcapping and when does it occur? What is a firing cycle?

    Your answer to some or all of the above might be "yes", but if you know these things you certainly didn't learn them by studying the games' documentation or in-game help but used the forums, reddit or twitter to learn about it.

    Currently the supposed "Admirality nerf" causes a lot of confusion. Patchnotes talk about "limiting the daily amount of campaign XP to 10.000", causing an uproar of people complaining that "XP was nerfed again", not realising that "campaign XP" and "specialization/character XP" are two different things.

    I feel a lot of those issues could be countered by having a comprehensible documentation, explaining even the most basic features. Basic stuff like how damage and resists are calculated and what "100% cooldown reduction" mean or even more complex, what category 1 or 2 buffs are is nowhere explained but sometimes mentioned when devs explain stuff.

    Maybe I'm mistaken, but I feel there's a lot to be done about that and it would benefit the playerbase AND the devs ultimately.​​

    I've never used the wiki or any other guide. I learned alot from prior knowledge of gaming (30+ years), observation and playing the tutorial. Most of it is having the common sense to hover your mouse over something or right-clicking then 'info'. It's not that hard, yet so many don't take the time to do the tutorial or even pay attention to it!

    ^^ This + sifting through the TRIBBLE on this forum and in-game and in the wiki, then synthesizing some kind of ad-hoc understanding of how things work. An ongoing process that is always being refined and updated. That's part of the mental work of figuring out and playing a game. If some people don't want to do it, or are too lazy and want it all spelled out for them... or, misunderstand and with excessive exuberance trumpet their misunderstanding as arrogant cleverness... it's their own fault for being pathetic, quite frankly.
    "Intelligence is finite, stupidity is infinite" -- Umberto Eco
  • angrytarg
    angrytarg Member Posts: 10,808 Arc User
    I can partly understand the argument that "nobody" would read it, then again, not offering any form of documentation just because most people are incapable of reading nowadays is a curious argument at best. It's good we just talk about a video game here, but I still would like an official part on how this game is supposed to be played. Exploration is all well and good, but calling insufficient documentation and wild guesswork about a games' ruleset exploration in my opinion misses the mark. And lastly, making it some kind of "skill" to figure out the game via guesswork is ridiculous in my opinion. This is a weird sorting of priorities.​​
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • jaymclaughlin
    jaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    You know there's a tutorial right?
    animated.gif
  • starcruiser#3423
    starcruiser#3423 Member Posts: 862 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    Do you know the difference between base damage and actual damage? Do you know what a category 2 buff is? Do you know wether or not armour consoles feature "diminishing returns" and what that would mean in practice? What is overcapping and when does it occur? What is a firing cycle?

    Your answer to some or all of the above might be "yes", but if you know these things you certainly didn't learn them by studying the games' documentation or in-game help but used the forums, reddit or twitter to learn about it.

    Currently the supposed "Admirality nerf" causes a lot of confusion. Patchnotes talk about "limiting the daily amount of campaign XP to 10.000", causing an uproar of people complaining that "XP was nerfed again", not realising that "campaign XP" and "specialization/character XP" are two different things.

    I feel a lot of those issues could be countered by having a comprehensible documentation, explaining even the most basic features. Basic stuff like how damage and resists are calculated and what "100% cooldown reduction" mean or even more complex, what category 1 or 2 buffs are is nowhere explained but sometimes mentioned when devs explain stuff.

    Maybe I'm mistaken, but I feel there's a lot to be done about that and it would benefit the playerbase AND the devs ultimately.

    Agreed Angrytarg...Would be nice if the Community manager could create/edit another Forum category named: "New Player Help" or the like nomenclature. Even though we have "The Academy" it is not very well advertised as a fountain of knowledge place for information. That nomenclature does not work for some people trying to find out information about power/levels/skills/etc and should be re-named to something more generic. The best source of knowledge (besides wiki) are the players and even DEVs should post necessary stickies for players to find out where to get information about powers, skills, damage categories and yes even the difference between "Campaign XP" and regular XP.​​
  • hanover2
    hanover2 Member Posts: 1,053 Arc User
    This would first involve a massive research project for Cryptic, because I doubt they have organized, user-readable documentation of how every single function interacts with every other one, updated every single time they change something. Especially not when many of those interactions aren't fully understood until a change goes live and the PLAYER BASE discovers something. After time and manpower are accounted-for, there is still an underlying element of embarrassment on Cryptic's part that cannot be ruled out here. Reluctant to admit that nobody has a firm handle on exactly how everything works, that massive changes are released with minimal testing, relying on the players to finish the QA process, and that some things are just never fixed if they were fully understood in the first place.
  • angrytarg
    angrytarg Member Posts: 10,808 Arc User
    You know there's a tutorial right?

    The tutorial doesn't adress any of the issues I outlined in the OP. I assume you either didn't read anything or you don't understand the problem. STO actually has a rather complex (or better: chaotic) ruleset with a lot of in-game tool tips displaying inaccurate and contradictionary information and lots of mechanics remain invisible for people not using third party methods to gain that knowledge. Documenting one's program is something elementary and explaining the rules of the game to players should not be an obscurity. Rules do not mean "how to play" (that's tutorial stuff) but "how things work".​​
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • jaymclaughlin
    jaymclaughlin Member Posts: 630 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    You know there's a tutorial right?

    The tutorial doesn't adress any of the issues I outlined in the OP. I assume you either didn't read anything or you don't understand the problem. STO actually has a rather complex (or better: chaotic) ruleset with a lot of in-game tool tips displaying inaccurate and contradictionary information and lots of mechanics remain invisible for people not using third party methods to gain that knowledge. Documenting one's program is something elementary and explaining the rules of the game to players should not be an obscurity. Rules do not mean "how to play" (that's tutorial stuff) but "how things work".​​

    But surely 'how things work' should be necessary in understanding 'how to play'?

    The only way to actually implement what you want successfully, would be through the tutorial and early missions. A 'user manual' would simply be a waste of time, because 99% of players would never read it.

    The game should teach players how things work, through game play.
    animated.gif
  • angrytarg
    angrytarg Member Posts: 10,808 Arc User
    But surely 'how things work' should be necessary in understanding 'how to play'?

    The only way to actually implement what you want successfully, would be through the tutorial and early missions. A 'user manual' would simply be a waste of time, because 99% of players would never read it.

    The game should teach players how things work, through game play.

    That's insufficient. You cannot learn the numbers by heart through the tutorial, there needs to be easily accesible documentation on the ruleset so you can look up stuff. Especially you, advertising the dps race, should understand the importance of that. Sure, someone already made the excel tables and it's in the net, but none of that is official and to this day the game never declared how the basic formula for calculating damage is. People aren't required to read it, it's still a standard a game should come with. When you were already around back in the day you surely remember games like "A320 Airbus" or "Falcon 4.0" which came with hundreds of pages of documentation. Role playing games with thick rulebooks to familiarize yourself with everything, even though you have it in the game (the German "Das Schwarze Auge" trilogy for example comes with a thick book actually explaining the adapted pen and paper ruleset, D&D certainly did something similiar). Those were the days pig-35.gif​​
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • fiberteksyfir
    fiberteksyfir Member Posts: 1,207 Arc User
    Damn shizzle. Hell back in the day reading mamuals was actually enjoyable they were well illustrated, pages of details on how stuff works, stupid antipiracy code words and the lucasarts code wheels, the golden age for sure! Imho though most games nowadays have at least a built in help database of various topics,rules,mechanics,etc