test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Ideas for expanding out the 23rd century for more playability.

2»

Comments

  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    davidwford wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    People asking to go play tourist in the 23rd century obviously haven't played the game's storyline. The whole point of the time-travel arcs, the reason the TOS player character is recruited in the first place, is to STOP people from abusing time travel.

    Most of us are NOT asking to touring and sight seeing in the 23rd century. We are simply asking that TOS characters stay in their native timeline. What says that the Battle of Caleb IV didn't occur after the events in TMP, but before Wrath of Khan? it would make more sense to recruit a Commander/Captain/Admiral contemporary of Kirk rather than some lowly expendable Lieutenant Redshirt (Mallory, Grant. Leslie, etc.).
    Daniels recruits the Player Character, because Destiny Says So. All the Player Characters (except jem'hadar, since their story begins after the whole time travel business is over) are recruited by level 20 (“The Once and Future Agent”). Nor is the player at any moment a "redshirt." Regardless of game-mechanical rank, all Player Characters are in command of a ship after the tutorial.

    And for that matter, "The Battle of Caleb IV" is not even where the TOS player is recruited, that's just the point at which they fake the player's death. (S)he'd been working for Daniels since "Painful Omens."

    You asked for TOS character to "return to his timeline" yourself in this same thread:
    davidwford wrote: »
    Agreed. As often as Daniels interacted with Archer and company after his death (apparently), there is no reason why a TOS character cannot return to his timeline (for the sake of argument, the Time B*stard theory). Hell, Chekov went back with the character to the Babel conference though he stayed out of sight for the most part.
    In general people asking for a way to go back to 23rd century map and/or ESD, for shopping and sightseeing (since the missions themselves are replayable anyway), is a common request that makes no sense for the storyline.

    And Cryptic says when the Battle of Caleb IV happened. If some people don't want to complete the AoY origin story and instead live in a bubble on a temporary map, that's their choice. But the devs are not going rewrite the game's storyline for that, or jury rig 25th century features and content in there.

    Anymore than they did anything for those romulans who refused to choose an ally back in 2013. Of indeed any jem'hadar who might want to do the same now. That's not how the game and storyline is meant to progress.
  • baddmoonrizinbaddmoonrizin Member Posts: 10,901 Community Moderator
    What says when the Battle of Caleb IV occurred? Umm, history? It's pretty much stated in game that the Battle of Caleb IV is when and where the Federation learns for the first time that Klingons have cloaking technology.
    GrWzQke.png
    Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
    Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
    Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
    ----> Contact Customer Support <----
    Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
    Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
    Want the latest information on Star Trek Online?
    Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
  • kodachikunokodachikuno Member Posts: 6,020 Arc User1
    What says when the Battle of Caleb IV occurred? Umm, history? It's pretty much stated in game that the Battle of Caleb IV is when and where the Federation learns for the first time that Klingons have cloaking technology.

    aaahhhhh but history changes depending on who's mucking with it that day and how! Maybe it changed while Daniels was dead! /sarcasm
    tumblr_mr1jc2hq2T1rzu2xzo1_400.gif
    tacofangs wrote: »
    STO isn't canon, and neither are any of the books.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,980 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    davidwford wrote: »
    Most of us are NOT asking to touring and sight seeing in the 23rd century. We are simply asking that TOS characters stay in their native timeline.

    Forming an isolated subpopulation in an MMO. You think a dev would be on board with that? You may want more added to your club house but as much as that might provide subjective gratification, there are objective issues with that approach. Namely: Cryptic's developing one game, not two. The 23c starting area was never intended to be more than a tutorialized transition into the main game and any player willing to refuse that progression should be prepared to endure the drawbacks inherent to that approach. Namely: not much to do in 23c.

    By design, probably won't fix.
    Null content? Matter of opinion.

    No, it's not. You can quantify the elements present in exploration assignments and compare them to other content in STO. The exploration assignments almost had the barest possible minimum for gameplay and story content except for the repetition of a simple objective set (ie. they could have had one kill/scan objective, not five; though again it's worth noting that "deliver supplies" did nearly consist of this absolute minimum, save for having two contact dialogs instead of one.) However, that repetition didn't elevate "exploration" beyond the lowest technicality. Hence: null. What they had in their favor was the superficial randomization of proper names and alien appearances, which shouldn't be mistaken for coherent world building or story telling. For that, you need written structure or a much deeper approach to randomization to allow for stochastic interactions and call backs to emulate events native to the player's experience.

    This was not "better than nothing" because nothing wouldn't have diverted resources in development from other projects or drawn player attention away from patrols, zones, and missions when live. Those, in some respect or another, are more substantial which from a developer's point of view is a definite problem (in the execution of "exploration.") It's counterproductive for them to allow null content to influence player experience (especially those who are just incoming) when they have ready alternatives. Ie. the rest of the game.

    Hence: removal when the dichotomy became very clear (ie. strong FE's, zones, PVE's, and the Foundry which all did far more than repeat a simple design pattern) and hence why "exploration," as it was, should never be brought back to STO. If more content is truly necessary in the 23c sector block for players who refuse to leave, enabling Foundry doors would provide a much greater (and probably more easily implemented) resource, especially for the authors who write specifically for the TOS era and the players that follow them. The Foundry level restriction also means that these missions would be automatically hidden from the normal 23c progression (so the "intended AOY experience" is maintained for those that follow it.)
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
    Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
  • davidwforddavidwford Member Posts: 1,836 Arc User
    potasssium wrote: »
    Nothing from stopping a new Temporal Operations ARC from bringing us back there. Our Captains may just need to get to a certain point in their own timeline before they are sent back.

    Just because the Temporal War is resolved in the future, doesn't mean we still don't have a role to play in the past.
    *points at Foundry* Seriously, The devs had no plans to make a full expansion out of the AoY stuff, and in fact didn't originally plan to label it as an expansion. If they had, then yes, we might have gotten TOS Romulans and KDF. But they didn't do that.

    That is a co-out. If enough players demand it, they will put in the effort. This suppose to be a game "by the fans for the fan", though over the last several years I have come to question that.
    What says when the Battle of Caleb IV occurred? Umm, history? It's pretty much stated in game that the Battle of Caleb IV is when and where the Federation learns for the first time that Klingons have cloaking technology.

    Memory Alpha, the clearing house for star trek lore doesn't specify, because the exact date was never specified. Only that the Klingons first fielded cloaking technology, and the both Kor and Kang were involved. The first time that we saw Klingons use cloaking tech on screen was Search for Spock. Therefore, anytime before that is when it occurred. Hence, it is entirely possible for that battle to take place after TMP, but before Wrath of Khan. And with how often the events of the game get reconed and changed, the argument that it is set in stone by the Devs is hogwash. My statement still stands.
    Forming an isolated subpopulation in an MMO. You think a dev would be on board with that? You may want more added to your club house but as much as that might provide subjective gratification, there are objective issues with that approach. Namely: Cryptic's developing one game, not two. The 23c starting area was never intended to be more than a tutorialized transition into the main game and any player willing to refuse that progression should be prepared to endure the drawbacks inherent to that approach. Namely: not much to do in 23c.

    By design, probably won't fix.

    Same thing was said about endgame Connies. How now brown cow?

    No, it's not. You can quantify the elements present in exploration assignments and compare them to other content in STO. The exploration assignments almost had the barest possible minimum for gameplay and story content except for the repetition of a simple objective set (ie. they could have had one kill/scan objective, not five; though again it's worth noting that "deliver supplies" did nearly consist of this absolute minimum, save for having two contact dialogs instead of one.) However, that repetition didn't elevate "exploration" beyond the lowest technicality. [/quote]

    Same can be said for a lot of the material recently relased, only difference being voice overs. And that is more a limitation of the game engine. Those "cohesive storytelling" may be opera for some, but tabloid trash for others, not fit to print. That is called "accounting for taste" for which there is none.
    What they had in their favor was the superficial randomization of proper names and alien appearances, which shouldn't be mistaken for coherent world building or story telling. For that, you need written structure or a much deeper approach to randomization to allow for stochastic interactions and call backs to emulate events native to the player's experience.

    It is called suspension of belief which is a critical skill for immersive roleplaying. I know that concept is lost of min-max power gamers.

    This was not "better than nothing" because nothing wouldn't have diverted resources in development from other projects or drawn player attention away from patrols, zones, and missions when live. Those, in some respect or another, are more substantial which from a developer's point of view is a definite problem (in the execution of "exploration.") It's counterproductive for them to allow null content to influence player experience (especially those who are just incoming) when they have ready alternatives. Ie. the rest of the game.

    Then simply don't play it. The same argument and logic applies to Foundry missions. You still failed to make a valid point.

    The beauty of expanding the 23rd century is that it DOES in effect create two games within the same game engine and program. Again, if the player base demands it, the programmers will put the time into it. As they say , money talks, BS walks.
  • edited July 2018
    This content has been removed.
  • vorwodavorwoda Member Posts: 698 Arc User
    edited July 2018
    [SNIP]
    This was not "better than nothing" because nothing wouldn't have diverted resources in development from other projects or drawn player attention away from patrols, zones, and missions when live. Those, in some respect or another, are more substantial which from a developer's point of view is a definite problem (in the execution of "exploration.") It's counterproductive for them to allow null content to influence player experience (especially those who are just incoming) when they have ready alternatives. Ie. the rest of the game.
    [/SNIP]

    I admit that you have a valid point about missions, and possibly zones, but patrols? Those are literaly nothing except "kill 5 waves of baddies". No better than the exploration clusters, in fact demonstrably worse, as they don't even have the benefit of cosmetic randomization to give even the illusion of non-repetitiveness, nor the functional randomization that what you get might not be "kill 5 waves of baddies." Personally, I enjoyed the exploration clusters FAR more than the always-the-same patrols. I admit that I have been just as guilty of grinding Tau Dewa or Argala for certain marks, so my "metric" may indicate otherwise. But that's not enjoyment, simply a chore as a means to an end.

    And STF's and Red Alerts are just as bad as patrols. The same fight against the same opponents on the same terrain, over and over again. Still less entertaining than the exploration clusters' variety. Still ground out for rewards. With unlimited resources, I'd avoid all that junk, and just run Foundry missions (where there is some GREAT work to be enjoyed), and the story missions when they come out.

    And before someone else points it out, my getting a character to level 48 in the 23rd century setting HAS taken a LOT of repetition, yes. And I DO have 9 characters (including my main) in the 25c. But this character is purely for vacationing in the setting I most enjoy: TOS. In fact, almost all of it has been in "Shadow of Cestus", because that's the only repeatable mission that's PURELY TOS, no observable temporal shenanigans going on. Yes, Daniels is there, but only as a redshirt, with a couple of non-timey-wimey lines.
    Hence: removal when the dichotomy became very clear (ie. strong FE's, zones, PVE's, and the Foundry which all did far more than repeat a simple design pattern) and hence why "exploration," as it was, should never be brought back to STO. If more content is truly necessary in the 23c sector block for players who refuse to leave, enabling Foundry doors would provide a much greater (and probably more easily implemented) resource, especially for the authors who write specifically for the TOS era and the players that follow them. The Foundry level restriction also means that these missions would be automatically hidden from the normal 23c progression (so the "intended AOY experience" is maintained for those that follow it.)

    Now that is truly a great idea! Add Foundry doors to 23c. space. A few minutes of DEV time, resulting in vast possibilities for the Players who chose to play TOS online. You have your century, we have ours, and and everyone's happy with minimal fuss! Thank you!
  • davidwforddavidwford Member Posts: 1,836 Arc User
    With the coming release of Age of Discovery, is this going to replace Agents of Yesterday, supplement it, or be a completely new tutorial sequence. I would prefer to see it supplement AoY with more missions and material. The LAST thing we need is a third Federation faction tutorial sequence.
  • This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.