TRIBBLE MAINTENANCE AND RELEASE NOTES - 10/30/18

moonroach
moonroach Member Posts: 29 Cryptic Developer
Tribble has been updated to ST.90.20181029a.0

General:
  • Removed the Energy Credit cost when transwarping to the start of a mission.
  • Optimized matchmaking system to allow matches to be made quicker when players decline or timeout of a Task Force Operation.
  • Updated frequency for when mission auto-hails appear:
    • Auto Hails can only appear once a player has completed the tutorial.
    • Auto Hails only occur for the next mission available in the mission chain the player is on.
    • Auto Hails will only occur if there is no mission in progress that is in the story arcs.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing various ship window options to appear as white textures.
  • Resolved an issue that prevented audio to not play during the Federation tutorial.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing Klingons to use Bat’leths instead of Mek’leths during the Discovery era Tutorial missions.
  • Resolved an issue that caused objects in the Kelvin Timeline Bridge to not have proper reflections.
  • Resolved an issue where male Klingon Captains were being called “Mistress”.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing the mini map on the Discovery era Starfleet academy to not properly appear.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing the Light posts to glow on 2409 Starfleet academy.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing Discovery era vendor contacts to use TOS themed backgrounds.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing NPC characters to incorrectly hold a Tricorder.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing Red Alerts to display incorrect bonuses on the Landing Page.

    UI:
  • Reputation Donation UI has been updated to provide a cleaner more efficient user experience.
  • Disabled the PvE and PvP buttons on the mini map until the tutorial has been completed.
  • Added new “Operation Complete” when successfully completing all Task Force Operations.
  • Walker-class and Crossfield class will now use Discovery themed view screens.

    Character:
  • Resolved an issue that was causing many alien-gen costume parts to not be available to any character, of any race, gender, or faction.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing Discovery Starfleet uniforms to clip through the players character.
  • Resolved an issue that was restricting color customization on Khan’s outfit.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing beards on player characters to clip through the character.

    Content:
  • Resolved an issue that prevented Discovery captains from taking the Wasteland mission "Installation 18."
  • "Secrets of Nimbus" mission for Federation Captains is no longer available until after completing or skipping "The Galaxy at Large."
  • Resolved an issue that made the mission "Escalation" always available to Romulans, before reaching the Delta Quadrant mission group.
  • Resolved an issue that caused the mission "Darkness Before the Dawn" to refer to a removed sector block (Psi Velorum) in its mission directions for KDF-aligned Romulan captains.
  • Lonco system patrol now correctly has two groups of Romulan ships and two groups of Hirogen ships.
  • Resolved an issue that would occasionally cause encounters in the New Romulus warehouse to not be at the proper level.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing the enemies in “Tzenkethi Front” to remain in play after the TFO has been completed.
  • Limited the auto-hail for “Neutral Zone Diplomacy” until players are max level.
  • Removed access to deep water during “Melting Pot” without the use of a powerboard.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing the Discovery era Klingons to use incorrect weapons during the Holodeck simulation in the Discovery tutorial.

    Systems:
  • Resolved an issue which caused the Prototype Light Exploration Cruiser to be unavailable to some characters.
  • Removed Tractor Beam Repulsors from the U.S.S. Sebrova during the Discovery era Tutorial.
  • Resolved an issue that caused the Vor'ral and Fleet Vor'ral to display an incorrect Starship Mastery.
  • Increased Distress Call device duration to 45 seconds.
    • This change impacts the Nimbus Pirate Distress Call, the Phased-Waveform Beacon, and the Delta Alliance Reinforcements Beacon.
  • Adjusted Phased-Waveform Beacon damage output to be more in line with other Distress Call devices.
    • Reducing summoned Hur'q damage by approximately 30%.
  • Removed the Energy Credit value from Universal Kit Module - Cryo Visor Blast.
  • Resolved an issue that caused Cryo Visor Blast to incorrectly share an equip limit category with Toxin Dart Launcher.
  • Resolved an issue that caused Suppression Barrage to list an incorrect duration.
  • Increased the damage on the primary fire of the Discovery Phaser Full Auto Rifle to make up for it firing less overall shots.
    • Reduced the recharge on the secondary fire.
    • This item is now eligible for Re-Engineering.
  • Resolved an issue with the description on the Prototype Light Exploration Cruiser that listed it having Starship Mastery.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing the Dynamic Personal Mobility Shield to lose Root and Knockback resistance once it has been upgraded.
  • Resolved an issue that was causing the Dynamic Reroute Impulse Engines to not be upgradeable.
  • Resolved an issue which caused "All that Glitters" and "Capture the Flag" to reward MK II Kit Modules and Frames.
    • They now reward based on the players level.
  • Resolved an issue that caused some projectile-specific bonuses to not affect energy projectiles.
  • Resolved an issue that could make it difficult to search for Special Requisition Pack – Hur’q Ravager Escort Carrier [T6] or Special Requisition Pack – Hur’q Assembly Multi-Mission Science Vessel [T6] on the exchange.
  • Resolved an issue where Discovery era Klingons would occasionally appear as though they were using a knife instead of a rifle.
  • Updated description on Phaser Rifle received during Discovery era tutorial.
  • Replaced a duplicate Deflector Dish reward in the Discovery era tutorial with a Warp Core upgrade instead.
  • Removed "New" tag from Replica Grand Nagus Outfit and Tycoon Tailed Suit in the Lobi Store.
    • Added "New" tag to Attendant Companion (Non-Combat Pet Pack)
  • The uncommon-quality Phaser Pistol rewarded during the Discovery era tutorial is now correctly Mk I instead of Mk 0.
    • Existing versions can still be upgraded.
  • Minor text updates to Command and Temporal Operative specialization passives.
  • Minor typo updates on various powers where “multiple” was misspelled.
  • Updating tooltips on Ground Armor Regeneration to be more accurate.
«1

Comments

  • where2r1
    where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    Does the completing the "Claim T6 Reputation" project on any of the Reps still cause the Skill Tree to go Invalid and remain invalid even after a "Retrain"?

    BTW...this can not be cleared with a "Respec" token because the option is gone when the Skill Tree is Invalid.
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • bendalek
    bendalek Member Posts: 1,781 Arc User
    Let's hope they also fixed the costume unlock on Rep Armor sets for those that started 1 of the 3 pieces before the introduction of Tier 6 and finished the third piece after, so far I've had 3 toons on 3 different reps have this problem.
    Oh, hoho hohhhhh, Oh,, hoho, hohhhhh
    My%20STO%20Sig%20Clear_zps5etu86s1.png
  • where2r1
    where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    bendalek wrote: »
    Let's hope they also fixed the costume unlock on Rep Armor sets for those that started 1 of the 3 pieces before the introduction of Tier 6 and finished the third piece after, so far I've had 3 toons on 3 different reps have this problem.

    It looks like they did quite a bit of work on costumes this round. You should download Tribble and take a looksie.
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • tunebreaker
    tunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    "Increased Distress Call device duration to 45 seconds."
    "Reducing summoned Hur'q damage by approximately 30%."

    This is travesty, seriously. You increase their duration by almost twice, reduce the damage only by 30% and think that'll be a nerf?

    Also, am I correct in assuming that the 30% damage reduction will be to their base only, and you'll still keep the "your own stuff will buff the spawned swarmers" interaction? Which will essentially mean I'll predict an overall BUFF to the swarmers instead.

    Well played, Cryptic.
  • seaofsorrows
    seaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,893 Arc User
    "Increased Distress Call device duration to 45 seconds."
    "Reducing summoned Hur'q damage by approximately 30%."

    This is travesty, seriously. You increase their duration by almost twice, reduce the damage only by 30% and think that'll be a nerf?

    Also, am I correct in assuming that the 30% damage reduction will be to their base only, and you'll still keep the "your own stuff will buff the spawned swarmers" interaction? Which will essentially mean I'll predict an overall BUFF to the swarmers instead.

    Well played, Cryptic.

    Agreed, this is a baffling change to say the least.
    animated.gif
    Discovery is good, it's you that sucks.
  • duncanidaho11
    duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,619 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    "Increased Distress Call device duration to 45 seconds."
    "Reducing summoned Hur'q damage by approximately 30%."

    This is travesty, seriously. You increase their duration by almost twice, reduce the damage only by 30% and think that'll be a nerf?

    Also, am I correct in assuming that the 30% damage reduction will be to their base only, and you'll still keep the "your own stuff will buff the spawned swarmers" interaction? Which will essentially mean I'll predict an overall BUFF to the swarmers instead.

    Well played, Cryptic.

    Agreed, this is a baffling change to say the least.

    Context is for kings:
    This change [45sec] impacts the Nimbus Pirate Distress Call, the Phased-Waveform Beacon, and the Delta Alliance Reinforcements Beacon.
    They're making a general update to the item type while nerfing the disparity between Nimbus/Delta and Hur'Q reinforcements.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • tunebreaker
    tunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User
    "Increased Distress Call device duration to 45 seconds."
    "Reducing summoned Hur'q damage by approximately 30%."

    This is travesty, seriously. You increase their duration by almost twice, reduce the damage only by 30% and think that'll be a nerf?

    Also, am I correct in assuming that the 30% damage reduction will be to their base only, and you'll still keep the "your own stuff will buff the spawned swarmers" interaction? Which will essentially mean I'll predict an overall BUFF to the swarmers instead.

    Well played, Cryptic.

    Agreed, this is a baffling change to say the least.

    Context is for kings:
    This change [45sec] impacts the Nimbus Pirate Distress Call, the Phased-Waveform Beacon, and the Delta Alliance Reinforcements Beacon.
    They're making a general update to the item type while nerfing the disparity between Nimbus/Delta and Hur'Q reinforcements.

    You're clearly not aware of the *damage* disparity between Nimbus/Delta vs Hur'q reinforcements, are you? The DPS ceiling of Delta reinforcements is ~20k, by my observations, and somewhere close to 10k for Nimbus (both are also overperforming, imo, for being spawnable, NPC controlled ships, and considering how that's probably more than at least half of STOs playerbase, but fair enough, it's not too horrible). Meanwhile, I've seen Hurq swarmers doing 180k DPS alone. 30% of the reduction isn't going to do anything to even remotely balance them. Also, if we go by simple math and take the reduction of 30% into account as final modifier (probably isn't that easy), then the damage ceiling of the swarmers was still actually buffed by 26% (0.7*45/25).
  • mustrumridcully0
    mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,958 Arc User
    Reputation Donation UI has been updated to provide a cleaner more efficient user experience.

    Is that only half-finished? Because for now, it seems not really more efficient.
    mC7ssYq.jpg
    Cleaner might be justifiable, since are no longer 3 sections that are always empty from a time when there were still other things to contribute than just EC, Expertise and Marks. But you still need the same amount of clicks as before. Clicking on the "+" button just opens the regular contribute window and you still have to confirm that.
    And the thing you need to click to open the contribute screen is smaller and thus harder to hit.

    It would be easier if I really just needed to add on the + and it would automatically fill the project. There is really no reason whatsoever to allow the player to contribute less resources than whatever is needed to fill the button. It's not like you get paid an interest rate on partial contributions or have to pay tax on your EC or Marks while they remain uncommitted to a project.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • duncanidaho11
    duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,619 Arc User
    edited October 2018

    You're clearly not aware of the *damage* disparity between Nimbus/Delta vs Hur'q reinforcements, are you? The DPS ceiling of Delta reinforcements is ~20k, by my observations, and somewhere close to 10k for Nimbus (both are also overperforming, imo, for being spawnable, NPC controlled ships, and considering how that's probably more than at least half of STOs playerbase, but fair enough, it's not too horrible). Meanwhile, I've seen Hurq swarmers doing 180k DPS alone. 30% of the reduction isn't going to do anything to even remotely balance them. Also, if we go by simple math and take the reduction of 30% into account as final modifier (probably isn't that easy), then the damage ceiling of the swarmers was still actually buffed by 26% (0.7*45/25).

    I've also seen Hur'Q swarmers explode the moment they've been called. Meanwhile, Delta reinforcements tend to survive in combat pretty well. That's a tradeoff. DPS between the two shouldn't be equalized [even approximately] and I would ask in what context you're seeing 180k DPS (from my experience that seems the product of an ideal scenario where they're able to sit on a single high HP target for the duration and take no fire. That's definitely going to result in high numbers but pose only a restricted problem to gameplay which shouldn't be met by an uncomplicated hammer. 30% seems like a reasonable first step and if they continue to dominate population performance data I might look at their speed or health more than damage output.)
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • pfft2
    pfft2 Member Posts: 37 Arc User

    I've also seen Hur'Q swarmers explode the moment they've been called. Meanwhile, Delta reinforcements tend to survive in combat pretty well. That's a tradeoff. DPS between the two shouldn't be equalized [even approximately] and I would ask in what context you're seeing 180k DPS (from my experience that seems the product of an ideal scenario where they're able to sit on a single high HP target for the duration and take no fire. That's definitely going to result in high numbers but pose only a restricted problem to gameplay which shouldn't be met by an uncomplicated hammer. 30% seems like a reasonable first step and if they continue to dominate population performance data I might look at their speed or health more than damage output.)

    This is definitely the hottest take. The hurq novelty device should have damage that utterly trivializes the whole ship build for 98% of the playerbase ... because a different novelty device with ~95% less damage potential summons ships that might live a little longer.

    Now that's good thinking.
  • tunebreaker
    tunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User

    You're clearly not aware of the *damage* disparity between Nimbus/Delta vs Hur'q reinforcements, are you? The DPS ceiling of Delta reinforcements is ~20k, by my observations, and somewhere close to 10k for Nimbus (both are also overperforming, imo, for being spawnable, NPC controlled ships, and considering how that's probably more than at least half of STOs playerbase, but fair enough, it's not too horrible). Meanwhile, I've seen Hurq swarmers doing 180k DPS alone. 30% of the reduction isn't going to do anything to even remotely balance them. Also, if we go by simple math and take the reduction of 30% into account as final modifier (probably isn't that easy), then the damage ceiling of the swarmers was still actually buffed by 26% (0.7*45/25).

    I've also seen Hur'Q swarmers explode the moment they've been called. Meanwhile, Delta reinforcements tend to survive in combat pretty well. That's a tradeoff. DPS between the two shouldn't be equalized [even approximately] and I would ask in what context you're seeing 180k DPS (from my experience that seems the product of an ideal scenario where they're able to sit on a single high HP target for the duration and take no fire. That's definitely going to result in high numbers but pose only a restricted problem to gameplay which shouldn't be met by an uncomplicated hammer. 30% seems like a reasonable first step.)

    "since Delta reinforcements survive longer, the DPS disparage of ~20x is no consequence"
    Uhh... sure. I'll have whatever grade of weed you're having.

    Sure, 180k is an outlier, but so is 20k for Delta. Average number for swarmers is somewhere around 70k based on my experience, meanwhile it's around 5k for Delta ships. No matter the theoretical survivability difference, the swarmers survive long enough in 99% of the cases to do ridiculous amount of damage. That's what counts. The Delta thingies can very well survive 10 minutes longer for all I care, but if they do close to nothing dmg-wise, what's the point of them existing anyway?
  • duncanidaho11
    duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,619 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    pfft2 wrote: »

    This is definitely the hottest take. The hurq novelty device should have damage that utterly trivializes the whole ship build for 98% of the playerbase.

    If that's not wild exaggeration then it damn well would have showed in Cryptic's population-level performance data and 30% wouldn't be what this update is carrying (invalidating most builds invalidates RPG gameplay incentives and paid microtransactions. It's irrational to think that Cryptic would be blasé about effectively killing their game.) As it is we only have that 30%. Therefore it's worth re-evaluating hypotheses and the context for DPS calculations while calling for further nerfs. Ie. look at how Hur'Q perform in gameplay (ex. survival rate) as well as in DPS trackers (providing citation to queue for comparability and to help explain any irregularities that may be present. Ex. presence of a big, soft target for Hur'Q to continuously munch on.) There's reason to suspect now (ie. Cryptic making an unexpectedly small change) that their internal population level data might not be showing the same magnitude of results as our published results from DPS trackers.

    You don't have to drop the argument and take 30% as just and final, just take a surprising result as a call to double check the proposition and appropriately refine said argument from there.
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • tunebreaker
    tunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User
    pfft2 wrote: »

    This is definitely the hottest take. The hurq novelty device should have damage that utterly trivializes the whole ship build for 98% of the playerbase.

    If that's not wild exaggeration then it damn well would have showed in Cryptic's population-level data and 30% wouldn't be what this update is carrying. As it is we have that 30%. Therefore it's worth re-evaluating hypotheses and the context for DPS calculations. Ie. look at how Hur'Q perform in gameplay as well as in DPS trackers (and provide citation to queue when giving those figures, it does depend on what you're playing.)

    You can tell that the hurq beacon's doing insane damage by the way the gateway can just disappear in a blink of an eye. So even if you don't see 180k (or whatever numbers you believe are high performing) every time, the fact that ships just get obliterated in a matter of seconds should be evidence enough that something's not exactly WAI. You don't really see it with Delta or Nimbus summonables.
    Also lol @ believing Cryptic has any clue when it comes to making balancing decisions.
  • pfft2
    pfft2 Member Posts: 37 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    pfft2 wrote: »

    This is definitely the hottest take. The hurq novelty device should have damage that utterly trivializes the whole ship build for 98% of the playerbase.

    If that's not wild exaggeration then it damn well would have showed in Cryptic's population-level data and 30% wouldn't be what this update is carrying. As it is we have that 30%. Therefore it's worth re-evaluating hypotheses and the context for DPS calculations. Ie. look at how Hur'Q perform in gameplay as well as in DPS trackers (and provide citation to queue when giving those figures, it does depend on what you're playing.)

    Ah, the classic appeal to Cryptic's infallibility. "If I were wrong, Cryptic would have done something different!" That's kind of the point of this conversation, man. We're debating whether Cryptic - who sat on this Hurq swarmer issue for months, even as every major parser cut them from eligibility, and then to top it off, copy-pasted the same bugged hurq swarmers to create a couple of new (and broken) traits - has figured out, finally, how to handle this issue appropriately.

    If you take the patch notes at face value, the answer is no. The swarmers will get a 30% damage reduction, but that's offset by a near doubling of their uptime.

    This isn't just a matter of parses being messed up, by the way. When someone pops the hurq beacon e.g. at the end of ISA, you notice it, viscerally; the gateway can just vanish in an eyeblink. What's crazy about the swarmers isn't so much the number of 180k DPS. What's crazy is that they do so much damage over a 25-second period that their total damage contribution can be averaged to 180k over a 2-3 minute queue.

    It's really baffling that anyone would leap to defend this situation.
  • duncanidaho11
    duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,619 Arc User
    edited October 2018

    You can tell that the hurq beacon's doing insane damage by the way the gateway can just disappear in a blink of an eye. So even if you don't see 180k (or whatever numbers you believe are high performing) every time, the fact that ships just get obliterated in a matter of seconds should be evidence enough that something's not exactly WAI. You don't really see it with Delta or Nimbus summonables.
    Also lol @ believing Cryptic has any clue when it comes to making balancing decisions.

    But I don't see that. Hur'Q swarmers do good damage but I've never found them to outperform my own ships (~50k). In heated combat they also don't tend to survive for very long either (try Counterpoint.) They are good but even now there's times when it's better to deploy delta for holding more fire and deploying accessory abilities. Maybe you should look into the gateway example a bit more and try comparing that to other kinds of large targets (are resistances working as they should for ex and are the swarmers drawing any threat?)

    Also, you do realize that you are trying to make a persuasive argument to the devs? Hold the attitude (it doesn't help) and dive into the mechanics to make your case. If you can only laugh off a complication, you haven't' investigated it thoroughly.
    pfft2 wrote: »
    If you take the patch notes at face value, the answer is no. The swarmers will get a 30% damage reduction, but that's offset by a near doubling of their uptime.

    Assuming they tend to survive to the end of their life. If that's not happening (my experience with swarmers, they're very susceptible to warp core breaches and any AOE) then the duration change is moot. What you're asking is Cryptic to balance the game according to restricted DPS testing. I'm saying "hold on, this might not be working out as we think it does across the game. Maybe this is a restricted problem and further investigation may be necessary." If you can't fill that hole in your argument then the call for further nerfs is weakened (incidentally, I'd have been more comfortable with -50% but I'm not going to call the difference a travesty without looking at the matter more myself.) Go back, test with an eye to explaining why the devs might not be seeing these results in the population data we know they reference (always be wary in your arguments when someone has data that you don't, it creates pitfalls), and if you can do that and still identify a problem then there's going to be a much more persuasive case for further Hur'Q nerfs.

    I want the game to be as good as it can be, full stop. That's not helped when folks rest on their assumptions.
    This isn't just a matter of parses being messed up, by the way. When someone pops the hurq beacon e.g. at the end of ISA, you notice it, viscerally; the gateway can just vanish in an eyeblink.

    No, that's literally describing how the parses are potentially being "messed up." Swarmers are doing massive damage against certain soft targets. Expand the range of testing outside the core STF's and the most opportune moments.
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • tunebreaker
    tunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User

    You can tell that the hurq beacon's doing insane damage by the way the gateway can just disappear in a blink of an eye. So even if you don't see 180k (or whatever numbers you believe are high performing) every time, the fact that ships just get obliterated in a matter of seconds should be evidence enough that something's not exactly WAI. You don't really see it with Delta or Nimbus summonables.
    Also lol @ believing Cryptic has any clue when it comes to making balancing decisions.

    But I don't see that. Hur'Q swarmers do good damage but I've never found them to outperform my own ships (~50k). In heated combat they also don't tend to survive for very long either (try Counterpoint.) They are good but even now there's times when it's better to deploy delta for holding more fire and deploying accessory abilities. Maybe you should look into the gateway example a bit more and try comparing that to other kinds of large targets (are resistances working as they should for ex and are the swarmers drawing any threat?)

    Also, lol @ believing that trolling devs is something to team with constructive argumentation. You do realize that you are trying to make a persuasive argument? Hold the attitude (it doesn't help) and dive into the mechanics to make your case. If you can only laugh off a complication, you haven't' investigated it thoroughly.

    Congrats. Even Bort sees they're overperforming. Sure, me and him disagree (apparently heavily) about the degree of it, but even he acknowledged they're ridiculous atm. You can lose the condescending attitude yourself as you've displayed over and over again you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

    And about "trolling the devs", well yeah, I've been in game for long enough and educated myself about game mechanics to a degree to see that the devs have extremely hard time getting things right. It's always something either overperforming or underperforming, by ridiculous margins. And if something *is* overperforming and gets nerfed, the nerf will be ultimate death sentence (see FAW, Feedback Pulse, Plasploders and so on). So excuse me, but I don't currently have much faith left in them and every step they make without actually fixing anything (just like this here) kinda angers me further.

    Sure, those are tribble notes and "subject to change" - but that's exactly why I'm complaining, so they'd understand that this actually *needs* to be changed. If only folks like you posted here, I doubt they would've bothered to even touch the damn beacon.
  • pfft2
    pfft2 Member Posts: 37 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    But I don't see that. Hur'Q swarmers do good damage but I've never found them to outperform my own ships (~50k). In heated combat they also don't tend to survive for very long either (try Counterpoint.) They are good but even now there's times when it's better to deploy delta for holding more fire and deploying accessory abilities. Maybe you should look into the gateway example a bit more and try comparing that to other kinds of large targets (are resistances working as they should for ex and are the swarmers drawing any threat?)

    You seem to be under the impression that this situation calls for nuance and fine tuning. We disagree. People have been making constructive arguments about this issue since the Swarmers were introduced. Not only were we ignored on that point, but Cryptic copy-pasted the same bugged pets for new traits introduced a couple weeks ago.

    When a novelty device (as all pet-summoning devices are) can outperform the average player by a factor of let's say 9, even if it's only on a few maps (the game's most popular maps), then that's a problem you flatten with a sledgehammer, not one that you endlessly massage for hidden wrinkles. Most game devs would have hotfixed a problem like this within the week.

    Let me put it this way: your best recorded parse, going by the @handle in your signature, is 31k (EDIT - sorry, read the wrong number). Every build choice you made, every piece of gear you grinded for, every trait you strived to afford - all of them are completely obliterated by that one dopey 15-minute-cooldown device you picked up in the Home mission. You've spent countless hours making a ship that suits you only to become little more than a swarmer summoning bot. How does that make you feel? Is that good game play?
    Also, lol @ believing that trolling devs is something to team with constructive argumentation. You do realize that you are trying to make a persuasive argument? Hold the attitude (it doesn't help) and dive into the mechanics to make your case. If you can only laugh off a complication, you haven't' investigated it thoroughly.

    LOL @ the idea that Gruber isn't among the most helpful and knowledgeable players in this community. How's this for persuasive argument? How's this for nuance and complication?

    We've been at this stuff for awhile now. That our tone has shifted to the negative of late is a commentary on Cryptic's performance (and their sometimes obnoxious commentary). Our tone is also completely irrelevant. You're reaching, because you don't have anything particularly interesting to say, except "in my anecdotal experience i like my overpowered hurq beacon."
  • tunebreaker
    tunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    I will also add that the Hurq beacon has been in it's bugged state for over 3 months now. We've been expecting Cryptic to first acknowledge and then fix it from almost day one, as it got reported very quickly. But no, instead they copy-paste the swarmers summoned by it into a personal trait, making situation even worse, and then now display us with a "fix" that by all accounts looks more like a buff to me. No surprise we've shifted into "negative and snarky tone" area.
  • duncanidaho11
    duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,619 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    pfft2 wrote: »

    You seem to be under the impression that this situation calls for nuance and fine tuning. We disagree. People have been making constructive arguments about this issue since the Swarmers were introduced. Not only were we ignored on that point, but Cryptic copy-pasted the same bugged pets for new traits introduced a couple weeks ago.

    When a novelty device (as all pet-summoning devices are) can outperform the average player by a factor of let's say 9, even if it's only on a few maps (the game's most popular maps), then that's a problem you flatten with a sledgehammer, not one that you endlessly massage for hidden wrinkles. Most game devs would have hotfixed a problem like this within the week.

    Let me put it this way: your best recorded parse, going by the @handle in your signature, is 24k. Every build choice you made, every piece of gear you grinded for, every trait you strived to afford - all of them are completely obliterated by that one dopey 15-minute-cooldown device you picked up in the Home mission. You've spent countless hours making a ship that suits you only to become little more than a swarmer summoning bot. How does that make you feel? Is that good game play?

    No and I'm fully on board with nerfs that maintain (to put it simply) the game. My point is that there's a disconnect between what the devs did and what we're seeing in parses and certain TFO's. You're getting angry with that because you felt that a much bigger change was justified. But, look at the argument. Is it water tight? From what I've seen on these forums and in-game: no. Swarmers can do massive damage in some TFO's (coorborated thorugh parsing) but they can also be a complete wash in others (ie. those where enemies employ AOE effects or many small targets [and many warp core breaches].) Average that out and the result is probably obscured population-level performance data. We know Cryptic looks at population-level performance data. They might have hedged this nerf in light of it (accepting certain over-performance to avoid making the device too niche for the general player base.)

    So, adjust tack, expand testing, and come back at the problem with this potential complication taken into account. It will help the call for further nerfs and mechanical changes to swarmers to bring them into line with where they should be (ie. an alternative to delta for some situations.)
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • pfft2
    pfft2 Member Posts: 37 Arc User

    No and I'm fully on board with nerfs that maintain (to put it simply) the game. My point is that there's a disconnect between what the devs did and what we're seeing in parses and certain TFO's.

    Was the game desperately in need of the hurq beacon? Would the game suffer in any meaningful way if the beacon had simply been removed when this buggy behavior was first noted, back in July? No, the hurq beacon was and remains a novelty item, essentially fluff. That's the disconnect. You counsel a cautious, thorough approach to balancing this completely superfluous item, when countless other problems in the game deserve more attention.
    This isn't just a matter of parses being messed up, by the way. When someone pops the hurq beacon e.g. at the end of ISA, you notice it, viscerally; the gateway can just vanish in an eyeblink.

    No, that's literally describing how the parses are potentially being "messed up." Swarmers are doing massive damage against certain soft targets. Expand the range of testing outside the core STF's and the most opportune moments.

    Just a note on this, because I probably didn't state it clearly enough: what I mean is that the swarmers' burst damage is insane in a way that a DPS number can't express by itself. To put it in perspective, if a player does 180k DPS over a 3-minute queue, then that means he delivered 180,000 * 180 = 32.4 million damage over 180 seconds. If a swarmer pet summon averages 180k over a 3 minute queue, that means the swarmers did the same 32.4 million damage over their 25 second lifespan, or 32,400,000 / 25 = 1.296 million DPS while they were active.

    In other words, the swarmers can trivialize game encounters more than even their absurd numbers may suggest, on first blush. It's an effect players can feel, quite clearly, without ever glancing at a parser.
  • tunebreaker
    tunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User

    So, adjust tack, expand testing, and come back at the problem with this potential complication taken into account. Is that so hard?

    Frankly, we don't have to do anything. We as players have identified the problem, we have the data they are overperforming and we have delivered it to the people who it concerns. It's not our job to fully investigate *why* or does it perform like that absolutely everywhere. No one pays us to do that. It's as if we're just players, not paid testers - shocking, right?! As a matter of fact, I believe we already spoonfeed the devs too much, but that's because we, ultimately, genuinely care about the game and want it to thrive.
  • alcaatraz
    alcaatraz Member Posts: 112 Arc User

    So, adjust tack, expand testing, and come back at the problem with this potential complication taken into account. Is that so hard?

    So, I suspect I'm going to get a lot of flack for this, but this is STO with a rich history of things that while might have been tested are not done so in a player base environment, and note this isn't directed to you Duncan, but just some thoughts I had after reading.


    Players (like myself and many others) who strive to fully understand and explore the games inner workings, develop new ways to increase performance, and so on, all have a very large internal library of game items. We think of everything beyond just level one, sometimes up to level 3 interactions. This is a good example of something which takes these 2nd and 3rd order interactions beyond what a 'typical' person would...but thats what happens when you have people with a 7 year long list/library of items built up (mine is only about 3 years now of playing, but I'm an edge case, lots like me have been doing this for a very long time.

    Going back to the player based testing environment; I find it very hard to believe that magnitudes for traits and items are seriously difficult to change. To me these would just be that...numbers. So it would be very easy to go back and tweak these numbers to make things worth using but at the same time not overly performing. Traits which spawn things like the Hur'q and delta and nimbus beacons are hard to tweak on the fly like this but I have many other examples of things which would be hugely benefited by this simple base value tweaking.

    I don't think this will happen.
    • This is the same dev team which changed something to have a 97.5% damage output decrease and still considered them to be fine even though every single person I talk to dismisses this item; regardless of who it is. Ive meet people post change which go and get this item and a disappointed by how terrible they are and wonder what their doing wrong. Its not just a parse thing in one single case. The tooltip reads in the tens or low hundreds in most cases.
    • This is the same dev team which releases broken things which cause INFINITE damage (not the problem once its fixed) but on the same day adjust magnitudes because the players were using the broken item they just released...what prompted this value change? No one has seen how the player base used this item as it was intended to on release, so what justifies the magnitude change?
    • This is the same dev team which will take the mass screaming for a nerf, without the mass understanding what was wrong with a power in the first place, and then end up with a power which is really quite terrible outside its 3rd rank power.
    • This is the same dev team which releases items and other payed for content which is horridly broken and performs nothing like it was supposed to and then never fixes it, and quite frankly seems to ignore it all together.

    I can give you explicit examples of all of these...but the main thing to look at here is that we (as players) have a precedent for expecting things to be nerfed, broken, and otherwise not balanced at all, or grossly under or over performing.


    I don’t think anyone expects perfection, we’d just like to see some basic competency in what their changes do to an item and anything that might be a first level correspondent. I'm also aware this is no single persons fault, nor is it the fault of an entire department. This is probably and in all honesty the fault of increased pressure to just get content out faster and faster, which causes problems when something goes haywire. This might see immediate cash influx (and makes it seem to the players as everything being a cash grab), and wont have immediate effects; but eventually there will be enough issues and enough problems that everyone will notice it, and eventually things will be so wrong that new players will not want to commit money to it.

    QA isn't something to be done once and then forgotten about. We had a 'balance pass' season and nothing from that has been touched since. That's not balance, that's mass nerfing and buffing. Balance is something to be maintained constantly and we as players don't get to see it much anymore. There's no contact or even acknowledgement that something is wrong or isn't performing up to the standard desired by either the players or devs. Luckily this is an environment where no one will die if things go wrong, so there's very little risk to minor tweaks in values and so on over time to try and zero in on a value that works best.

    Then we have the introduction of an Item like the swarmers. I've seen many arguments for them, mostly relying on how they don't do great in certain situations (which is fine, not everything should work the same against everything), but its that they were citing things that were years old, or in different metas, and of completely different natures. Most of the arguments for them are full of holes, and the biggest one is that it brings up player damage across the board. To me that's terrible design. Not only (as was said) does it undermine all the work people have done to get their gear to a point where they are, but it creates an artificial feeling of placement into a level that they are not ready for.

    I would not want to do elites with someone who gets 50%-95% of their supposed damage from a single item, that person isnt ready (they won't have the durability, they wont have the sustained damage, they won't have the knowledge or skill to exist in said environment). That's not to say that I won't ever take them, just not as they are then.

    But it does something much worse, and that is it stifles the necessity for improvement and innovation. If you have a one click button that is a 'does all solve all', what are the chances people are going to look for ways to match that with everything else? I would suspect that a large portion of people who rely on this will stop attempting to improve their self. It might be an extreme outlook but it's justified. People inherently will not want to change if they feel they are doing very well. Come the day that they are pressed into doing more difficult content where the 'does all solves all' button doesn't do well and they fail, what are the chances they blame the system and the game for allowing them to do so rather than themselves?


    So here we get to the important part: what can we expect?

    Well...nothing. This is how it is. No matter how much we comment or how many bug reports we submit or how vocal we are, this will not change. As I said, this is likely due to upper management (or even higher...IP owners and holders) wanting to push things out faster. The devs we interact with are very unlikely to be able to make any of the things go away. The Level 63 powers which are now half a year old still do not scale up with the amount of targets near you. The last 9 ship releases have all had major issues on launch which now the Vor'ral being fixed brings the grand total of problems to about 12 I can remember from the last 4 alone.

    We have item interactions that continue to be able to produce an infinite amount of damage and durability (i was shrugged off on this one so maybe that's WAI...i doubt it).

    Is there a solution....yes. Will it be the one taken....probably not if the current method of release as much content as fast as possible is to be maintained. The issue of swarmers is not with the item itself but of a much larger one in my opinion, and that is the devs don't understand the players, or are not given the opportunity to interact with them and get a feel for what would be good performance levels.


    Oh, and to the swarmers dying to early....I've yet to see them not last the full duration when others use them around me (I refuse to use the item because of what it does).
    --- @alcaatraz || I make tanks and do crazy maths stuffs ---
    "I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul."
  • where2r1
    where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    Am I supposed to be getting Level IV (4) boxes from filling T6 Rep??????

    Let me open a few of these and see what comes out of them.....Hmmm... Mark 12 gear Blues and Purple.
    Hell, I guess, that sounds right.

    I can't remember what Level # the boxes had two weeks ago... LOL!

    +++++++++++++++++++

    I can only say....whoa those "+" boxes are tiny, tiny, tiny.....and why doesn't clicking on the plus just fill without going through another click box? I liked it better the last time...no "+" just went straight to the fill interface.

    And is this going to be sticking around: no back up project "waiting in the wings"????

    And with everything squished so small....there is still no space for the over all progression bar for the Rep on every project page:

    https://i.imgur.com/Z8lkdDD.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/4dzQxBb.jpg
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • where2r1
    where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    Still seeing my Skill Tree go invalid after completing a "Claim T6 Reputation" project.

    BEFORE Claiming T6 Rep : https://i.imgur.com/2mXmiBK.jpg
    AFTER Claiming T6 Rep Project : https://i.imgur.com/AKmxipZ.jpg

    It does not matter if it is on a Federation, Klingon or Romulan character. It does not matter which one of the 12 Reputations I complete the project on. This happens every time. ????? I don't know why?


    The chat window looks like this: https://i.imgur.com/mVcMpVh.jpg

    See all I did was claimed the T6 Reputation project and get that reward.
    Upon Retrain, the Skill Tree goes blank....but "Skills Invalid" never goes away.

    Status after clicking "Retrain" Button: https://i.imgur.com/ChBWTBn.jpg

    Notice I have all my Skill points listed at the bottom....nothing in the skill tree it is blank.
    BUT the Skills Invalid remains....along with the Retrain Button.

    When I start refilling the Tree: https://i.imgur.com/I6uPWlt.jpg
    I have to double click on the skill tree box to get the purchase dialog to pop up.
    As there is no purchase button available at the bottom of the tree.

    Anyone have any ideas of what I should try?

    +++++++++++++++

    Continuing onward.... completely allocated my skill points back into the tree....even filling out the extras on the bottom bar. Both on Ground and Space....see skill points say "0". Still the program tells me my "Skills Invalid" and have the Retrain button.

    https://i.imgur.com/ERZe9zy.jpg

    IS this a fake "Retrain" button? Maybe??? Let me click it again.....
    Nope not fake. It puts me through another respec.
    Skill Tree is back to blank and I have all the skill points listed for me at the bottom.
    Post edited by where2r1 on
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • sheriden1982
    sheriden1982 Member Posts: 11 Arc User
    "Reputation Donation UI has been updated to provide a cleaner more efficient user experience."

    Please for the love of god make it a submit all button! The change has made absolutely no difference... I just looks different but functions the same, I don't see how this is efficient?
  • duncanidaho11
    duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,619 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    alcaatraz wrote: »

    So, I suspect I'm going to get a lot of flack for this, but this is STO with a rich history of things that while might have been tested are not done so in a player base environment, and note this isn't directed to you Duncan, but just some thoughts I had after reading.

    I hope not, it was a good read. Players have the time, dedication, and motivation to explore areas of the game that the devs can't (either because of realities or inclinations.) The Foundry community is another example. I wouldn't put it so much on the specifics of management but core to the difference in perspective held by top tier players and developers. They're operating in very different environments. Ideally, there's cross over so compromises are reached between satisfying a population (per business) and satisfying niche interests (ex. higher-tier DPS.) But just as well that can also cause issues if the game becomes dedicated solely to the meta game and feeding there of (something I have seen in other communities.)
    Players (like myself and many others) who strive to fully understand and explore the games inner workings, develop new ways to increase performance, and so on, all have a very large internal library of game items. We think of everything beyond just level one, sometimes up to level 3 interactions. This is a good example of something which takes these 2nd and 3rd order interactions beyond what a 'typical' person would...but thats what happens when you have people with a 7 year long list/library of items built up (mine is only about 3 years now of playing, but I'm an edge case, lots like me have been doing this for a very long time.

    To this point, given that most players don't consider those higher levels of interactions it's worth questioning where an issue is taking place. Are Hur'Q swarmers achieving 180k base damage or 180k with synergy? If the former then 30% is unfathomably low and the game should be an apocalyptic hellscape by now, ruled at all levels by our insect overlords. But if the issue is with how these pets are interacting with buff combinations then deeper cuts would likely nuke the beacon for the bulk of STO's population (just to pull the swarmers low enough that it would satisfy a restricted group of top tier players operating in an atypical environment.)

    Being able to make that distinction (in light of Cryptic likely making a change with the wider population in mind) between levels of overperformance through less restricted player-side testing would help make a better argument for further changes, including those that more directly target the issue for meta without severely impacting the bulk of the population (ie. disastrous buff interactions for swarmer DPS.) That may take more time (restricted problem of 2+ level interactions would need to work its way through dev workload) but it has the best chance (though definitely not certain because of the realities of development) of reaching a sufficient compromise. My point was to advise that over raw hostility (gets us absolutely nowhere, no matter who's doing it.)
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • alcaatraz
    alcaatraz Member Posts: 112 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    To this point, given that most players don't consider those higher levels of interactions it's worth questioning where an issue is taking place. Are Hur'Q swarmers achieving 180k base damage or 180k with synergy? If the former then 30% is unfathomably low but if the issue is with how these pets are interacting with buff combinations then deeper cuts would nuke the beacon for most players (just to pull the swarmers low enough that it would satisfy a restricted group of top tier players operating in an atypical environment.)


    When I got these (the week they came out), I did do an ISA with them to see how they stack up...and I got ~200k, 96k of which was my normal ship. I took this onto my brand new Jem'hadar with the worlds worst budget build (very rare mk ii gear and a handful of heal clicky consoles) and the swarmers did an astounding 135k in a Tzenkethi Red alert; the highest other player was 12k. Note this was while it had a 25s uptime....which works out to a spike damage of about 2.16 billion damage in a 400s alert.

    I will admit that maybe there's some magic buff's going on here, where +all damage is taking part in it....but this is still absurd. I would even be tempted to believe there's some crazy log issues going on here (which is why the Valdore console parses so high).

    --

    I have yet to use it since that day, I hold it as policy to not use bugged items and abilities if I can help it (captain abilities are a big hard to not use) and this falls into that as far as I'm concerned.
    --- @alcaatraz || I make tanks and do crazy maths stuffs ---
    "I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul."
  • duncanidaho11
    duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,619 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    alcaatraz wrote: »
    To this point, given that most players don't consider those higher levels of interactions it's worth questioning where an issue is taking place. Are Hur'Q swarmers achieving 180k base damage or 180k with synergy? If the former then 30% is unfathomably low but if the issue is with how these pets are interacting with buff combinations then deeper cuts would nuke the beacon for most players (just to pull the swarmers low enough that it would satisfy a restricted group of top tier players operating in an atypical environment.)


    When I got these (the week they came out), I did do an ISA with them to see how they stack up...and I got ~200k, 96k of which was my normal ship. I took this onto my brand new Jem'hadar with the worlds worst budget build (very rare mk ii gear and a handful of heal clicky consoles) and the swarmers did an astounding 135k in a Tzenkethi Red alert; the highest other player was 12k. Note this was while it had a 25s uptime....which works out to a spike damage of about 2.16 billion damage in a 400s alert.

    I will admit that maybe there's some magic buff's going on here, where +all damage is taking part in it....but this is still absurd. I would even be tempted to believe there's some crazy log issues going on here (which is why the Valdore console parses so high).

    --

    I have yet to use it since that day, I hold it as policy to not use bugged items and abilities if I can help it (captain abilities are a big hard to not use) and this falls into that as far as I'm concerned.
    I just ran Argala (holodeck) to isolate a few variables and try to keep to an isolated window where I attacked targets for about as long as the pets (get to how these guys are performing in granular detail relative to a player without worrying about interpreting data from a full run.) I did ~1.5 mil total damage with weapons, build wasn't pet or team focused and I stuck to boff powers (no firing while beacon in use except for some auto-fire slips.) Swarmers did 107,799 total damage (3.6x my black alert for context) to a couple targets before expiring (I held threat, no enemy AOE.) By contrast, Delta flight (the more important comparison) did 212,962 damage (separate run) compared to 1.2 mil in player weapon damage. The difference between player damage is probably just down to the length of the combat log and variation in boff use (I don't macro or keep to a set pattern.) Each beacon though went the full distance against the same wave. After your post I was expecting more of a bloodbath...but yeah.

    Edit: also no anomalous observations, Hur'Q were not insta-killing their targets.

    Swarmers could have done more damage if I deployed them right on top and behind a target to minimize travel time and positioning before firing (Delta gets right to it). But, they also wouldn't have deployed gravity well or done AOE. More runs for an average (only had so much time tonight) would also be better able to accurately assess which beacon actually has higher damage (107k total damage is underperforming) but I don't see how these guys could be pushing massive numbers to most targets ATM without more synergy (base mechanics seem fine.)
    Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • pfft2
    pfft2 Member Posts: 37 Arc User
    edited October 2018

    To this point, given that most players don't consider those higher levels of interactions it's worth questioning where an issue is taking place. Are Hur'Q swarmers achieving 180k base damage or 180k with synergy? If the former then 30% is unfathomably low and the game should be an apocalyptic hellscape by now, ruled at all levels by our insect overlords. But if the issue is with how these pets are interacting with buff combinations then deeper cuts would likely nuke the beacon for the bulk of STO's population (just to pull the swarmers low enough that it would satisfy a restricted group of top tier players operating in an atypical environment.)

    Being able to make that distinction (in light of Cryptic likely making a change with the wider population in mind) between levels of overperformance through less restricted player-side testing would help make a better argument for further changes, including those that more directly target the issue for meta without severely impacting the bulk of the population (ie. disastrous buff interactions for swarmer DPS.) That may take more time (restricted problem of 2+ level interactions would need to work its way through dev workload) but it has the best chance (though definitely not certain because of the realities of development) of reaching a sufficient compromise. My point was to advise that over raw hostility (gets us absolutely nowhere, no matter who's doing it.)

    Again, you're giving this more thought than it deserves. If the hurq beacon were some sort of crucial system, or a whole class of abilities/items (say, if we were discussing phaser weapons en mass), then your counseling caution would be absolutely valid. We don't want to nerf "normal" players into the ground based on the preferences of a small group of players. Of course we don't.

    But this is a novelty item. It's been hideously broken for going on four months now. The developers have actually compounded that mistake by copy-pasting the same broken pets into traits introduced in AoD. Yet you say we should take more time.

    At what point can we simply wash our hands of this nonsense? Why is getting the hurq beacon's damage output just right, for every situation, so important to you? I have to say that your posts here smack of willful contrarianism. Even your recent test in Argala leads one to wonder why you care so much: you managed to find a situation in which the delta alliance beacon outperforms the hurq beacon - congratulations! But if the delta beacon won in your test, why do you need the hurq one again? The two items are on the same 15m cooldown, after all; you can only use one per quarter hour.

    The hurq beacon absolutely annihilates several extremely popular queues. Saying, "oh but in Argala I managed to make it suck" doesn't address the problem, which is wildly disproportionate to the swarmers' importance. To the extent that hurq beacon has any right to exist at all, it's as a tiny and perhaps thematically pleasing supplement to any ship's performance - the gameplay equivalent of flavor text, a piece of memorabilia from the VIL story arc. The devs could cut the thing's damage by 99% tomorrow and the only people who would even likely notice are those who are heavily leaning on its broken performance.
  • crypticarmsman
    crypticarmsman Member Posts: 3,897 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    mC7ssYq.jpg

    Wow - you'd think with all the space on the right, instead of a green + symbol; they have left a button that still says 'contribute'.

    I can guarantee some players will be confused by the new layout in that regard.

    Amazing that after 8 years online the K.I.S.S. method (aka "Keep It Simple, Stupid") most developers use as a benchmark is abandoned by Cryptic and they continue to iterate somewhat confusing implementations of various UI elements in the name of 'revamp'.

    Hell, I'll never understand why - TO THIS day, if you're on ESD in Earth orbit the 'beam out' icon in a small 'stich figure man' in the upper right of the mini map...

    But if you're on Earth at SFA you actually have a button in the lower part of your screen for Beam Out and the stick figure is grayed out...

    My point? Again after 8 years they can't even be bothered to unify the UI in how it operates for the above beam outs - the player is required to remember and use two different methods depending on the map their on.

    PLUS - if you're on SFA, you get the option to beam up in ESD 'system space' or Sol Sector space. If you're on ESD you can ONLY beam out into ESD system space; and only bean to SFA from the main transporter pad (I thought this was the 24th century - IE why can't I have the option to beam down to SFA or out to ESD system space OR Sol Sector space?)

    For all their talk about 'cleaning up' outdated elements of STO - it's amazing they don't seem to think unifying how UI elements work across the game to ONE standard is worth the time/effort.

    And then they sit at meetings wondering WHY new players are confused about some gameplay aspects. LOL!
    Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012
    TOS_Connie_Sig_final9550Pop.jpg
    PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."