test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Where STO is headed

15678911»

Comments

  • fovrelfovrel Member Posts: 1,448 Arc User
    Where STO is headed? Where no man has gone before, I guess. Well man? Not only man, woman, pig, Pigs in Space, I am referring to, anything. So, where nothing has gone before.
  • galman1galman1 Member Posts: 9 Arc User
    Okay all the Reader User License Agreement first.

    1, I am not picking on an individual. I will clump together groups instead as if they are responsible for it then should they all share.
    2. If you don't like negative posts about Discovery then ignore as I will be hammering it with my words.
    3. This is my game just as anyone else, instead of attacking how about looking at how their comments, suggestions, questions, not thumbs up or whatever with parts or all of the game could have validity when looked at from their side.
    4. Simply discounting comments as someone doesn't like them does not help the community. So lets turn it from me against you and you against someone else and so on and start laying down the issues that are problems and issues that do not look good for the image and future of the game. Remember if we want new blood we need to impress them when they join not several hours later when they find the problems.

    ---Now I speak - Mods, I have tried my best not to name anyone by name, I do mention cryptic, cbs, pwe, and those that like the Discovery or the overall state of the game. I could not find a way to jump over it without seeming aimless.

    I wish I could find my post where I said this ST Discovery was just going to further do damage to what we once knew as good ole Star Trek Online. So let me guess the Discovery officers will jump back and forth in time to do missions as you add them, or will they just be holodeck repeats.

    You are decimating the main plot lines for each faction. Fewer, smaller and buggy, sounds great, but I don't like Alpha Flakes.

    DOFF assignments we now have to wait even longer till they show up "correct". I now get "Experience Points" on many doff until your system says opps, and quickly renames them for what they are suppose to be. I have one question, how can adding the discovery part mess that up.

    Ships are not stopping at some planets. I still can't get any of my ships no matter the faction, to stop at DS9. Instead if you aren't watching they end up on the bottom of the map.

    The Tour of Galaxy, even in the middle of the circle I might have to turn left or right to get to the trigger that gives me credit, so I slow down and have to turn instead of looking at the larger picture (the map). How that got messed up I wish I knew, however if it has to be a certain object, then put the circle over the top of that instead.

    I know in some ways you aren't responsible for Discovery, as CBS pulls the purse strings and puppet strings. However you could tell CBS that a game needs a little more time to be tested before we toss it into the wild and fix as we go.

    Also how about an exchange of our sponsorship tokens for the different reps? What I have now are wasted and taking inventory but I hold on to them as I am sure after I get rid of mine, you will have some way to exchange them (now if there is a way I just haven't come across it yet!

    My jem toons thank you for all the fleet project resources, too bad you didn't allow them to stack beyond 100 and instead we lose all that inventory space - bank or personal till our fleet (if you are a big fleet with most things done, hard to come up with fleet projects that can help devoure some of these resources. However it is a great way to eat up inventory slots forcing one either to buy more slots or carry less of things.

    I still think the remasking, re-texture and different names used in the tutorial for the Discovery toons is by far the worst effort put forth for an introduction. As others have said here and elsewhere, just the same fed tutorial all new toons had to do or "skip". Please think about that, as having to go through a repasted tutorial with no option to skip, since I already have seen it at least 1 time with new Discv. toon and then on my first toon on the account and maybe more depending on when you added in the can skip option. Use your creative talent and do something better, more than likely too late now, but maybe the future.

    Can't say I am totally thrilled by the Battle at the Binary Star. You make one ship that can never, ever, ever be destroyed, just knocked off line. That sure brings no please to your teammates to all go after the thing, get it to become immune to everything while it recharges from damage. So much for the holosuite/deck/planet/space when you can't "change" the story or change the tactics, I even think the story ask us to come up with new ideas.

    So far the CBS Klingons all they do is just attack in waves after waves, so thrilled when I encounter them.

    Right now this game is being built from a deck of cards. How much more will the game go before the house of cards collapse. Make CBS come and read this stuff instead of you. Find out just what part of the community like Discovery or like how it was pasted in quickly. Why can't we have extended plot lines from the Klingon War to Discovery or VIL. While the writing of the story for the VIL I think was some of the best to date (it left you wanting to play the next mission - only other time, is when 2x xp is running out so not doing that on other plot lines)

    Please put voice in with the content, I have no intention to go back and play a mission so I can hear and not have to read the mission and talk between some who have voices and some who don't. Once again a tape and paste effort that doesn't make it stand out and can result in negativity going forward.

    Lastly, Please oh Please, design new ships for all factions that aren't just recycling the old and grey (no offense - ha ha). Does starfleet, the Romulans (both of them), the Klingons and a little Dominion, have NO ship designers that can build new ships never seen before. My first question, is the warp engine some sort of accordion that the engineers smash down or up to fit the ship using the current tech? What about, what was canon, that the nacelles had to away from the hull, which of course if it doesn't suit things it isn't canon. Just retrofitting old ships is just another alright lets create something so well can sell it. Why not add new console slot types or special starboard or port slots, or a backup part of the mains parts of the ship. I can't see how the Europa can fit the same warp/impulse/deflector/shield and all the conduits and stuff of much larger ships of the federation.

    There is an economic problem here. A military that (oh sorry exploration force) that needs more ships for more big losses, they aren't going to go and make 30 different sized warp engines, or dozens of shield formats. In addition the older ships being retrofitted and upgraded to current tech, any wonder if maybe gutting the ship just to fit new upgraded gear could run into problems with the general figure of the outerhull, meaning they can't put the same powerful shield on all ship types with problems. No I don't need 30 different sizes of Warp, Engines, Shields or Deflectors. So then represent that in the ships you are putting out.

    I don't know why I keep playing seeing how things have really changed over the last few months. I think it is because I have invested so much time and effort and a little money (seriously a small amount maybe $50 or less) and all I do is load up and become more depressed with what was fun, however I want to keep up so I keep playing. How long can one last.

    Lets me say to those who are fans of cbs,cryptic,pwe,Discovery, allow us critics to have our say and not shoot us down because we dared to challenge the forced static(yes static) quo flow of things. I thought games were made for gamers and not companies or a handful of players. I can flip my disputes over and see some good, but if you are too afraid to rattle the boat, we never will know down the road if it will remain afloat.

    So to those players who are furious that I attacked some parts of the game and most of all Discovery, these are my personal feelings and I am not attempting to force you to play by them or agree with them. Can't wait to see how this post is eras-treated as I have put a thumbs down on content over the last 1-2 months and other periods in my feelings over the game. You have a message board use it, ask for ideas, ask for suggestions and most of all reveal some ideas and see if they sink or float with the players. You might discover more willing to put in more cash for the items, ships, bonuses, services or whatever.

    Oh I am sure these last 2 elements are posted somewhere on the forums.
    1. Hmm, 20% off the Europa Class till the 19th, which then will rebound to normal 3k price. Well it is 3k right now with no discount shown or discussed, great.
    2. Complete a foundry mission for mission endeavour. Hmm, to complete something have to be able to get started with it and well with the foundry not working, is this another endeavour that is not going to be completed but wait till next time. I say give everyone 10,000 Zen and we will call it okay (really just kidding there) however if you have a calendar of things to do, you have the programmed list of the endeavours and any other issues fix rather than say next time (I haven't seen anything about this yet.)
  • sirsitsalotsirsitsalot Member Posts: 2,773 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    And now my post about what I think needs to happen with PvP…

    I think it needs to be removed from the core game and become its own separate thing. It needs to be divided into eras, with warring civilization playing into a clear Red vs. Blue model, since it has been made abundantly clear that, barring a core overhaul of the game's PvP mechanics, a Red vs Blue vs Green model is not possible. Let us define Red as the aggressor and blue as the defender...

    At any given time there could be multiple missions for an aggressor which have a specific goal that would benefit the aggressor faction. The moment a player of the aggressor faction engages in that mission, the corresponding defender mission opens up. When a player engages in the defender mission, a new slot opens on the aggressor side for another player to support lend support. If that happens then another defender slot opens up.

    If the map's player cap is reached, then new players can join a side only if someone on that side dies.

    The engagement is over when the aggressor achieves the goal or if all aggressors have been defeated.

    Once defeated a player cannot rejoin the same engagement.

    A single engagement can be over very quickly if an aggressor manages to complete the goal before a defender arrives, or if the defender defeats the aggressor before the aggressor completes the goal. Or it can be a lengthy campaign depending on how many unique players commit to the engagement and how good the defenders are at keeping the aggressors from achieving their goal. With coordinated efforts on the part of active player fleets, an engagement can become a protracted event lasting hours or days.

    Admirals not wishing to engage directly in PvP may deploy one of their admiralty ships to the engagement. It would be treated as an Aggressor Add or Defender Add and not count against the engagement's player cap. When an add is destroyed the next add warps in to take its place. Destroyed Adds do not return to the Admiral who deployed them. So playing a ship card this way is risky. Surviving Adds or adds that were deployed but never engaged will be returned to the admiral who deployed them.

    That's an interesting set of ideas. Not the sort of ideas that will have any traction whatsoever with STO's development team, since it's rooted around a type of game they collectively despise, but interesting.

    Discussing how the dev team may or may not be think about PvP or any other style of gameplay is not helpful. Even if it is true, they need to be professional enough to consider the game as a whole rather than just cherry-picking the parts they like. I personally detest PvP, but I understand the desire of those who like it to have, and advocate the support of a PvP system that can be engaging and fun and above all meaningful that is balanced unto itself.
    It would require a separate server, and separate mechanics to work. Too many 'behind the scenes' changes are necessary to apply it to the current game engine, queue layout and structure, but the concepts could be very workable for a game in teh right hands.

    The biggest change would be redefining how the Red vs Blue mechanics work. Not sure if it would need a new server, rather than being a separate layer on the existing one. But yes, there would need to be some significant behind the scenes overhauling to make it work. But hey... the existing PvP aspect is buggy and neglected anyway, so whatever it takes to fix that should be welcome.
    but we kinda had that already. STO's basic space and ground combat structure, when you carve off eight years of uncontrolled powercreep, is pretty good-the 'bones' of the original system make for a fairly respectable and even fun tactical scale game.

    It's just been mismanaged into the ground.

    which, unfortunately, is what I would suspect would happen if (maybe by hiring a subcontractor to do the work since nobody at Cryptic is capable of it) your proposed system were to be implemented.

    I cannot speak to that point. All I can do is toss around ideas for how the system could be handled.
    simply put, it's unreasonable to expect Borticus, Geko, Salamiinferno, or anyone else currently working for Cryptic Studios to grasp the purpose of a PvP game beyond the worst common stereotypes applied to the format. further, the entire staff is pretty much incapable of grasping game-balancing concepts beyond what is necessary to sell the next game-balance-breaker.

    Again, I am not going to discuss the competence or personal motivations if individual developers. They do what their bosses tell them. They do not have the level of autonomy you imply. Cryptic has always been a small team, and they have always suffered chicken-or-egg syndrome. They have only committed to addressing issues and providing content for things that their metrics tell them are subject of highest player interest, nevermind the fact that low interest, in many cases, stems from unaddressed technical issues or lack of content. But that is what happens when ANY company relies on ONLY the raw numbers to base HR allocations on. PWE is all about the money, so now the HR allocations are based on what makes PWE money more than it is based on player interest. So somehow, ANY sort of real overhaul to PvP, or any other system, will have to appeal to PWE's profit motive.
    The closest we've gotten to one of them grasping it, was Spartan's study leading to S13-which was poorly applied and drowned in the crib on release.

    Be that as it may, Even though I personally do not like PvP, I will continue to advocate for something that is a QOL improvement for that aspect of the game. They aren't doing anything to bring a real exploration aspect to the game either, so the aspect I am most interested in is in the same boat.
    unfortunately, your proposal, like pretty much every proposal including the ones I've posted, requires too many resources Cryptic simply doesn't have.

    I can accept that as the most logical reason why any sort of big addition or alteration won't occur. I refuse to accept that there's some sort of conspiracy on Cryptic's part to stick it to those who are wanting those aspects added or altered for the betterment of the game.
    It would require development team and leaders whom aren't wholly disgusted and appalled by the existence of PvP players, whom do not view the mode itself as a form of 'gaming cancer' that is only remotely necessary to reassure financiers temporarily that the team isnt' totally incompetent.

    this team would in turn need people who are not only willing to play PvP, but willing to play it without the developer-auto-kill mode engaged, in order to honestly and ethically test balancing modes and powers.

    in other words, you'd need to find, hire, and train a dev team for it that does not view PvP players as the enemy.

    Good luck with that one-the single thread among all of STO's (current) development team, is an antipathy toward the very idea of having to soil their product with PvP, and they are, universally, opposed to playing pvp games at all, which doesn't bode well for any of them having any sort of serious study into what makes wargaming between live players work in a fashion that actually builds up a player and gamer community that is stable and positive.

    simply put, it would have to be done by a completely different company if you want it to work, the psychological, and to an extent, Technical needs simply can't be addressed by the corporate culture at Cryptic studios.

    If this is truly the case, then Cryptic should just pull the plug on PvP completely. Rip it out like they did with exploration. But they won't. Why? Because they know they will not be able to weather the firestorm that will erupt in this community, and will spread all over the Internet, painting them and PWE in a very ugly light which they do not want or need.

    The good news is that STO is not going anywhere for the foreseeable future, and staffs change all the time. Maybe we'll get someone at PWE who recognizes the potential for profit associated with meaningful PvP AND meaningful exploration and direct Cryptic to address those aspects, whether they personally like them or not...
    "There can be no meeting of the minds between two parties
    if both parties are not willing to meet in the middle."
    -Ambassador Samuel J. Stone
  • bloodyrizbloodyriz Member Posts: 1,756 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    siotaylor wrote: »
    There'll be a new Picard series in a year or two, then DSC will be all but forgotten while we throw a collective fit over how Admiral Picard, Ambassador Picard (or whatever) is destroying what makes Trek Trek and it can't be canon and the sky is falling... Again!

    Tbh I'm rather looking forward to that. I mean if Patrick Stewart is playing Picard, it can hardly be another historical recon, can it?

    I think we've reached the point that people won't even bother unless they DO manage to do it right. hate to tell you this, but when it provides a sufficiently bad taste, a lot of people won't give the source another chance.

    for example, I will be waiting for Discovery's season 2 in the clearance bin at the local library before I give it a chance, and I'm inclined not to bother with Sir Patrick's bit unless it really looks seriously promising-and won't be giving it more than a free preview's chance, and that's because Discovery was that bad.

    History proves you wrong already. Neither TNG's nor DS9's first seasons were liked out of the gate; but there were enough fans for both shows that they survived and went 7 seasons each. I know many fans of both series think they were loved out of the gate, but that just wasn't the case - DS9 was moreso despised than TNG for being "Anti GR's vision" and "too dark" <--- Sound familiar? ;)

    I enjoyed TNG out of the gate, but the person who hooked me on TOS hated it from episode 1.​​
    signature.png
    We come in peace, SHOOT TO KILL!
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    Yes, and I'd hazard a guess good part of what makes most of what passes for TV these days unwatchable garbage drenched in cliche is trying to squeeze complex story arcs out of writing staff more suited for "episode of the week."
    And yet, Trek was at its worst when it did "episode of week" stuff. Look at all of the not even remotely veiled racist, imperialist, colonialist, content that made up most of TOS and early TNG. And the best of Trek, DS9, was when they stopped doing that!
    That's a matter of opinion. Personally, I wasn't all that impressed with DS9's war arc. I think the Dominion War was an overly drawn-out excuse to show more explosions.
  • tacticoolfugga#9235 tacticoolfugga Member Posts: 377 Arc User
    > @warpangel said:
    > somtaawkhar wrote: »
    >
    > warpangel wrote: »
    >
    > Yes, and I'd hazard a guess good part of what makes most of what passes for TV these days unwatchable garbage drenched in cliche is trying to squeeze complex story arcs out of writing staff more suited for "episode of the week."
    >
    >
    >
    > And yet, Trek was at its worst when it did "episode of week" stuff. Look at all of the not even remotely veiled racist, imperialist, colonialist, content that made up most of TOS and early TNG. And the best of Trek, DS9, was when they stopped doing that!
    >
    >
    >
    > That's a matter of opinion. Personally, I wasn't all that impressed with DS9's war arc. I think the Dominion War was an overly drawn-out excuse to show more explosions.

    I liked the DS9 war arc, but could have done without the Bajoran religion part of it. I wish Enterprise would have done the Earth/Romulan war instead of the Xindi arc. The reptilians flat out reminded me of Galaxy Quest. Or was it the other way around...can’t remember.

    I agree that TV these days is garbage. It’s this generation of creators. All they can do is reboot and TRIBBLE it all up.
  • jcswwjcsww Member Posts: 6,609 Arc User
    fovrel wrote: »
    Where STO is headed? Where no man has gone before, I guess. Well man? Not only man, woman, pig, Pigs in Space, I am referring to, anything. So, where nothing has gone before.

    Down the toilet with the Captain's Log?
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    Think of your favorite episodes of all time. Some of them are undoubtedly not part of large story arcs.
    Yes, but the followup question must be: is that a good thing?

    One of my favorite TNG eps was "The Vengeance Factor". It has faults, MASSIVE faults IMO. Namely, WHY would the Gatherers WANT to live on their cramped homeworld? They left because it was elbow-room only! Yet the A plot of the episode is about convincing the Gatherers to abandon the colony they'd build on another world and return to the over-crowded homeworld that they'd left. STO touched on this with the Acamar system patrol. It wasn't a good solution long term because there just wasn't enough room for everyone. Also it's part of why the Acamarian clans often fought wars; it was fighting over land and resources, not politics or ideology.

    To me the TNG episode felt like the beginning of a story, not the end. Sure, Yuta's dead, but is she the only one with micro-virus tech? Who made it? Would it be possible for another person to create a new, different one? also, what other insane things do the Acamarians know how to do? Yuta had been given some treatment to artificially extend her longevity. that's some next-level medical tech, even by Star Trek standards. Even if the Acamarians aren't the Federation's equal in most technological respects(Marouk claimed the Enterprise was twice as fast as her personal flagship, and the Gatherers used weapons and shields drastically inferior), they DID know a few things the Feds didn't. Also, those secrets are not common knowledge among the Acamarians. They're zealously guarded clan secrets used to give the clan an edge in combat against other clans. You could do a full-on GoT-in-space style series based on the Acamarian clans.

    But you'd have to re-cast Marouk, or say it's a new leader and Marouk died of old age(because Nancy Parsons died of old age, seriously, it was an elderly woman playing an elderly woman). Maybe have Chorgan get elected as the new clan council leader and decide to expand outward once more?
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    I liked the DS9 war arc, but could have done without the Bajoran religion part of it. I wish Enterprise would have done the Earth/Romulan war instead of the Xindi arc. The reptilians flat out reminded me of Galaxy Quest. Or was it the other way around...can’t remember.
    The DS9 war arc could've been OK, if it had been shorter. Two full seasons is just too long it got old. Babylon 5 did the Shadow War in half a season.

    The xindi arc could've been a bit shorter, too. Personally I would've resolved the xindi conflict in half a season at most and had Enterprise ally with them against he Sphere Builders for the continuation. Now the Sphere Builders were just kind of brushed aside by the sidekicks like an afterthought while The Captain was off finishing the real plot. And yeah, the xindi were so cliche (because of course the reptilians and insectoids always have to be the evil ones and the human-looking ones the good guys).

    I suppose they would've done the Romulan War eventually, if the show hadn't been canceled. But I did prefer the episodic 4th season to another long arc anyway.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    Um... actually.... the Xindi Insectoids were on the fence and didn't really support the idea. Oh also, building the doomsday weapon was a combined effort of all the Xindi races. it's just that some of the Xindi races changed their minds after meeting Humans.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • sirsitsalotsirsitsalot Member Posts: 2,773 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    Season 13 was the result of that happening, which is why it was internally sabotaged from the outset. You mention hoping they'd be "professional" enough but you miss something critical with Creatives-game developers develop the games and game types they, themselves, like to play. when you corner them into developing game-types they don't like to play you get precisely the mess that came with Season 13 (the original problems get cranked to 11.)

    Creatives as individuals maybe. But in a team environment for a game that by its very definition must support diverse playstyles on the part of its players, it should be required that there be a dedicated developer with both an understanding of and an interest in each specific playstyle. Of course, it would save the company money if they are fortunate to have understanding and interest in more than one playstyle. If that is not the case, then perhaps PWE should look into moving some people around. Foundry needs a dedicated dev, and it has nothing to do with PvP, so any one of the existing devs could be assigned to straightening that mess out. And PWE can afford to hire a PvP-centric dev to get that in order. And it would be nice if they would also hire an exploration dev to maybe give STO an open-world sand box layer.
    the team is VERY good at doing what they're actually interested in, well, with some exceptions, like managing reward structures to keep players engaged as opposed to relying on time-gates and randomized queues to make up for adopting a structure that had an obvious outcome before the first Rep system went live.

    That's an entirely different discussion all together.
    so basically they're great at doing artwork and schmoozing celebrities.

    Hey... I actually like that they can afford to bring as many veteran Trek actors in to reprise their roles. That is what PWE wants them to do, and they have given them the budget to do it. IF it were me calling the shots, I would have brought in unknown but talented voice actors to give voice to characters specific to original plotlines and leave the events and characters of the shows in the past, with the exception of cameos here and there. The expense would no doubt be less, and I would insist that more of the profit goes into development and improvement of gameplay systems... But then, I'm not the one calling the shots, so...
    as a former PvP 'activist' I believe Cryptic should own up to their incapability and remove the mode from their game, stop advertising it, and basically sh*t or get off the pot, because they've demonstrated they're not capable of managing the mode into an asset, instead creating and perpetuating a liability in the form of a game mode they're not competent (Due to lack of interest) in administering.

    The same could have been said about Exploration before they ripped it out with no real intention to replace it. I would rather have exploration back as it was than not at all. And I suspect that most players who still do PvP would say that they would rather have PvP as it is now than not at all.
    the proof of this is very simply thus: in 2012, with significantly fewer players on the rolls, PvP was an active, if still lesser, minority of players and was casual-friendly. in 2018, it's down to around 125 players out of millions that are active in it at all, and maybe 25 of those that are active in any sort of regular fashion.

    basically gone from somewhere in the low 20th percentile to "Too small to count".[/quote]

    I have to ask... Where are you getting these numbers?
    the quality of that player community is also significantly degraded, and the numbers aren't improving, this tends to demonstrate failure, in the most abject sense, for a game mode in a system like this one.

    Without the Star Trek name, that level of failure would already be drawing negative press. It has already generated enough negative word-of-mouth that any revamp will likewise result in MORE failure, because at this point, it's hard to imagine anyone giving them a third or fourth chance at salvaging it.

    I think they would come back. There is no monthly fee or purchase cost to deter someone from trying a new or improved feature. Worst that can happen is that they still don't think it's good gameplay and leave again. But then they also could think it IS good and stick around to play the game. After all, MANY who PvP do not do so exclusively. while the ability to PvP may be what keeps them coming back.

    That right there should be the incentive for PWE/Cryptic to give PvP more serious consideration. After all, the people who are not playing most certainly are not paying.
    "There can be no meeting of the minds between two parties
    if both parties are not willing to meet in the middle."
    -Ambassador Samuel J. Stone
Sign In or Register to comment.