i play on console (ps4) and we dont have any penalties for low dps, so i cant realy say anything about that..
but everything i wrote in my initial post, of course is open to debate! i realy look forward to any additions, corrections etc, that you guys can make
"-) people not activley contributing, to even mission goals, get negative honor"
this actually would very rarly be the case. i think, it is realy hard to not contribute to ANY goal in a whole TFO.
i am not saying, that people have to contribute to EVERY goal
one situation for this would be p.e. in "days of doom", where people maybe only attack the planetkiller, and neither deliver warpcores nor protect the station
“positive honor groups only would have a better chance to complete optional targets, since there wouldn't be speedruners around, that ends a TFO to early.”
But you’re not looking at it from the other side. What about people like me that are not speed runners but due to our build end up with negative honour. We end up being separated from the playstyle of the positive honour group.
Most TFO’s cannot be ended early anyway due to all the hidden time gates so I am not even sure what you are trying to archive. In things like ISA/E it’s the so called “speed runners” that do the optionals and would get high honour while it’s the so called normal players (not speed runners) that tend to fail the optional so end up with negative honour.
I just don’t understand how this honour system can work in a fair positive way with how you describe it.
“positive honor should only come from things, that realy proove, that someone is activly going for optional targets. p.e. rescuing a ship, closing an errant rift, etc..”
Which is the problem. That’s not fair. I don’t do that because
A: my ship is to slow before its even turned in the right direction the Escort has done the task
B: as an Engineer many of the optional are preferred to be done by other class’s.
C: If I am off doing the optional I am not benefiting the group doing my task.
D) Due to my playstyle I cannot interact with more then 80% of the optional's in game. Why should I get punished with negative honor due to that?
What if my role is the nanny or healer or agro management? your system in its current form will give all them negative hour for being helpful and benefiting the group.
The other problem is many of the optional’s need 1 person to do them. So in each run 4 people will get negative honour, 1 person gets positive. This isn't as simple as it looks once you dive into different playstyles and different TFO's. Plus who gets to decide which playstyle's are classed as high honour and bad honour?
That queues as Healer or Tank goes DPS anyway is also an issue with WoW (especially in LFR raids), I cannot remember if it was an issue in GW2 or SWTOR as it's been so long since I last played those, only reason it isn't an issue in FF14 is that roles are more or less hard locked (you can't queue as a tank then switch to a DPS job when the queue pops) even though I personally prefer being the off-tank/extra DPS depending on the raid in FF14 (the second tank in normal raids is extra DPS if a tank swap is not needed), if I'm needed to tank I'll tank.
second issue related to this is that STO playerbase isn't that huge and console playerbase is even smaller (as STO start on PC). To explain why this is an issue lets say there's 9 players at certain "honor bracket" now if all of them want to play random TFOs the first 5 get to play while the 4 others need wait until the TFO group is done since they're permanently 1 short of a queue pop, now queue times for randoms are what 15 mins at max at least on PC and generally more around 1-2 mins. TFOs can be anything from 10 to 30 minutes long not that much when playing but that's a long time to wait all the time.
Also depending on how narrow or wide the "bracket" in which people can queue together is this can be even worse, if you can queue with people with exactly the same amount of "honor" as you, no one gets to queue as Pottsey pointed out what you do (or even can do) depends on both the TFO and your playstyle (of which there's several not just 2) so everyone would get just a little bit different amounts of "honor" so finding 5 players with the exact same amount of "honor" consistently is pretty much impossible.
OP, wouldn't you be better off just doing private queues with like-minded people? I don't want to be rude or anything, but that would solve everything...
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
To echo @coldnapalm 's comments, the implementation of any code routine is as simple or complex as all of the other code routines it must interact with (STO - complex interactions, long bug list, as we are all familar with), and to say that you appear to underestimate the complexity of evaluating all of the conditions you are describing to provide the data your simple counter requires is a gross understatement.
Gonna agree with angrytarg. Seems like it would be easier for people like OP to find a friend group, or a private group where everyone that joins is in agreement of doing every task in the queued taskforce missions.
No reason for the devs to add a system that singles out and marks the serious farmers who speedrun missions and skips the under-rewarding optionals, and people who got the tactics for doing them down to the second... as doing something negative, since this is what most gamers do.
Heck back in the old days before the Reputation system where you had to earn the sets parts as random low-chance drops from playing the missions... I was part of a group that farmed the Borg STFs multiple times daily to get the set rewards...
We took it every serious that people knew what to do in each mission before they could join, and that people could keep up so we didn't use more time than needed on them.
If we had to use time on every single optional side thing, and other things that could be skipped... we would have run ourself dried-out dead on them long ago.
Don't get me wrong, I love doing optionals, and would love more teams did them... But a lot of teams I end up with these days, skip them, since they don't really reward anything extra thats worth it.
Clearly I would end up getting a lot of negative honor for joining random teams, dispite I want to do the optionals.
What the devs really need to do is upgrade the bonus rewards for going after optional things, so people are more inclined to do them.
"Please, Captain, not in front of the Klingons." Spock to Kirk, as Kirk is about to hug him.
Star Trek V: "The Final Frontier"
To echo @coldnapalm 's comments, the implementation of any code routine is as simple or complex as all of the other code routines it must interact with (STO - complex interactions, long bug list, as we are all familar with), and to say that you appear to underestimate the complexity of evaluating all of the conditions you are describing to provide the data your simple counter requires is a gross understatement.
I've found that people in the forums often under estimate the amount of work needed for things they ask by a rather large degree (or work needed for things in general).
> @westmetals said: > Oh look, once again assuming that having enough contacts to be able to make a private team 24/7 is a "small amount of effort" that is reasonably possible for everyone.
Most people don't play that long 😋 but there are plenty of channels or fleets so there shoukd be people from any time zone around. It's in any case a easier solution than to rewrite the game to cater to a specific wish of a select group of players.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
@nixie50@vetteguy904@seaofsorrows
at no point did i try to force anyone playing in any way, and i want to enourcage you to read my initial post more carefully..
it is neithter a punishment nor a real rewarding system - it is just grouping mechanism - everyone would just get grouped together with people sharing the same playstyle.. so where exactly do you guys see any punishment?
i think you are taking the term "honor" too seriously..
maybe see it more as a speedrunner/completionist system.
It's deliberate punishment for speedrunners, BECAUSE you are assigning them negative honor (dishonor?) which is putting them in the same group as AFKers. Your "grouping system" would wind up grouping optional junkies like you with like-minded people (which is fine, as far as it goes) but condemns the speedrunners to end up with the AFKers, which would make speedruns even harder and more frustrating for those players, which most certainly is punishment.
Modifying your system to give speedrunners neither positive nor negative honor, but instead leave them at 0, would at least alleviate this issue, resulting in 3 distinct groups: 1) optional hunters, 2) speedrunners, and 3) the wretched hive of scum and villainy (tm).
However, I am very much afraid that this is all academic. A system like you propose (even with my suggestion), would be open to easy mis-assignments of honor (or the reverse), due to circumstances beyond anyone's control.
Example: During a Breach Event a couple of years ago, I wound up getting lag and rubber-banding BADLY. Normally I'm a speedrunner, but in that run, although I was at my keyboard and desperately trying to move my ship, I was stuck in a wall, and no amount of typing "/stuck" in the console would alleviate it. My ship was still in that wall when the Voth ship blew up.
Now I didn't (couldn't) contribute to that run, and didn't (couldn't) even move after the beginning. So any system would have flagged me as an AFKer, which I certainly am not.
Yes, that was an extreme case, but accidents and connection issues can happen to anyone. What if a stray torp or Sci hazard of yours accidentally happens to deal the last point to the boss before the optionals are won. Should you get negative honor for obviously being a speedrunner in that case? To a computer judging the system, intentions don't matter, only the results.
You raise some interesting points. As a speedrunner (in the Events, anyway. I don't run TFO's for fun), I'd be just as happy to never be grouped with you, as you would be to never be grouped with me. I have vivid memories of the hyper-partisan "discussions" that resulted here over the original Arena of Sompek, before the merciful revamp. But given the fact that a system like yours would require computerized judging (they certainly won't hire an employee or 12 to watch this full time), I doubt it could come to pass.
But perhaps, at least, you now see why people thought you were trying to punish people who don't play like you. Lumping everyone else in the same pit as the AFKers (even unintentionally) can come across that way.
I like the OPs idea. But TFOs are deeply TRIBBLEd up beyond redemption . Best approach as it is: Turn off the chat, do your thing for the marks/event goals required and hope its over soon.
Would the person who cloaks up and skoots through the meaningless trench section of the event breach be given negative honour even though they're helping the group progress quicker?
Or how about the person in storm the spire who's running a slower ship and knows that there's no point going after the bonus dread so instead heads for the escapees?
Or the one who finds certain things unplayable because of the massive amount of visual spam the game forces onto players screens (even though it causes performance issues on console) or randoms into that TOS themed TFO which cryptic added a nauseating grain filter because apparently every episode TOS was filmed during a sandstorm.
You are the type of person that needs their name at the top of some DPS list. Good for you!
As this game should be played for fun, your thought process is detrimental to it, you call gamers out that are not up to your apparently high standards of knowledge and performance.
I agree that people like you are indeed special and should be grouped with like minded individuals, and kept together, never interacting with the rest of the gamers in Star Trek Online that want to have fun and go into TFO's, and not be "judged" by people like you because they "do not contribute" to your apparently high standards.
Your Honor system has merit though. It would prevent people like you from posting more garbage like you just did as you would be grouped together forever in your own little worlds, never to be bothered by "common folk"
Wow, not even April first yet and there is movement in the bushes. By all means, let's begin the separation of players based on "contribution" lol, in an already low population game to keep you and your kind satisfied.
I don't know about the rest of the people reading this but I am already feeling warm and fuzzy.
There is no worse feeling in the world than the moment during an argument you realize you are wrong.
your proposed reputation system will do exactly nothing but cause heartburn in the playerbase. I've never done Gravity Kills. I decide to random TFO, and I get Gravity Kills. so I don't participate fully (not knowing all the objectives) and by your system I get dinged with negative honor.
so that brings me to this:
1. you are forcing a certain player expectation, and are given a reward, and i assume this honor system has some benefit, improved DPS, defense, SOMETHING, because if it does not, then it's not worth paying a dev to code it. Not that they would code it anyway, because it's work that in no way shape or form will bring money into the game.
2. Unless there is some severe impediment to having this negative honor, the AFKers are not going to give a T-Rex TRIBBLE. If it does, that's naming and shaming which is probably in violation of the Terms of Service, and in some jurisdictions, actionable in a real world court. You really think Cryptic will open themselves up to that?
the answer to AFKers is simple. Do not do Random TFOs and play them in a pre-made group. If you Pug, expect that there will be a griefer of some sort. that why I will not do a TFO unless it's part of a ship grind, and even then, it better be an account unlock.
That's my opinion, anyway
You know what, I want runs to end as soon as possible...so how about if I suggest they make an honor system that measures damage and assigns scores for it so people who do as much damage as me only gets grouped with me. Does that sound like a reasonable and sound request to you? Because you are basically asking for the same thing...only with different criteria and a MUCH harder to code system. Yes the if and or chain for what you outlined is easy enough to code...but the program has to also DETECT if those things are happening and if you think that is gonna be easy, you are a TRIBBLE programmer. How do you determine what is or is not contribution to completion of a map? That alone to get right is looking at more AI than ENTIRE GAMES to get right. And as for AFK, how do you determine if somebody is ACTUALLY AFK is suffering from lag? Or a DC? You realize there is not a netcode in existence that can do that...right? RIGHT? You want they to make code that NOBODY HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO YET for you idea...and it is EASY to do? You realize that this game does NOT kick you from a queue if you DC...right?!? Because if they did...with the absolutely terrible connect issues this game has, there would be bloody riots about not being able to finish queues...and especially EVENTS that they run constantly and seems to be the lifeblood of this game right now.
And finally if you have the system disabled due to low playerbase, your idea is WORTHLESS from the get go. We don't have the playerbase to support the 3 levels of stratification we have NOW. Even if they could somehow manage the impossible levels of coding your idea requires, it will never EVER kick in to begin with and so will be just a giant waste of time and effort and money on their end.
You idea is bad from a concept PoV, it's terrible from a practical implementation PoV...it's all in all just a bad idea...PERIOD.
now that makes more sense. if you do up to 5,000 dps you are group 1 if you exceed 10,000 group 2 so on and so forth. That prevents some4 uber DPS guy coming in and killing everything before I can push BFAW. It also give me a goal, I WANT to get to that 25K level, and so forth. Kind of like T ball Pee wee and so fort sport leagues. There could even be a gauge (which already exists in game) that tells you if what your group is trying is easy, moderate hard or don't bother you will all die.
Now before someone says if you are in X group, then you cannot get a better build, that's nonsense. Player X may do 500,000 DPS in her Lockbox ship, but maybe She is trying her hand at science magic, and is in the 25K group. there are the opportunities (If player X decides to,) "Hey Player G, I see you are using this. If you do X,y,and Z, you can maybe double your DPS."
which would be a lot better than "Hey superloser, stop playing MY Game because I'm awesome and one shot Tac cubes" which i have been on the receiving end of.
but in the end, this honor system proposal is not the answer to any issue in STO
Why not make it a passive system? Similar to the endeavors system. If you're in a team that completes the objective you get the bonus reward, if your team doesn't then you get the standard reward. You could make the rewards for each objective boost your ability to complete the others. Or add it directly to the endeavors system, competing optional tfo objectives gives you endevor xp.
As for afkers. Add some interaction gates. Like you need to complete a number of tasks count as active. Maybe; 1. Dps threshold based on tfo difficulty and type. 2. Leave the start area before certain objectives complete. 3. Add an area players need to form up after tfo completion with a time limit to reach it. Maybe with partially random emergence points. 4. Support based threashold, healing other players/npc.
And just require that you do a certain number of them. In this case. Like 3 out of 4
As a time traveller, Am I supposed to pack underwear or underwhen?
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Comments
thank you for your post
i play on console (ps4) and we dont have any penalties for low dps, so i cant realy say anything about that..
but everything i wrote in my initial post, of course is open to debate! i realy look forward to any additions, corrections etc, that you guys can make
"-) people not activley contributing, to even mission goals, get negative honor"
this actually would very rarly be the case. i think, it is realy hard to not contribute to ANY goal in a whole TFO.
i am not saying, that people have to contribute to EVERY goal
one situation for this would be p.e. in "days of doom", where people maybe only attack the planetkiller, and neither deliver warpcores nor protect the station
Most TFO’s cannot be ended early anyway due to all the hidden time gates so I am not even sure what you are trying to archive. In things like ISA/E it’s the so called “speed runners” that do the optionals and would get high honour while it’s the so called normal players (not speed runners) that tend to fail the optional so end up with negative honour.
I just don’t understand how this honour system can work in a fair positive way with how you describe it.
Which is the problem. That’s not fair. I don’t do that because
A: my ship is to slow before its even turned in the right direction the Escort has done the task
B: as an Engineer many of the optional are preferred to be done by other class’s.
C: If I am off doing the optional I am not benefiting the group doing my task.
D) Due to my playstyle I cannot interact with more then 80% of the optional's in game. Why should I get punished with negative honor due to that?
What if my role is the nanny or healer or agro management? your system in its current form will give all them negative hour for being helpful and benefiting the group.
The other problem is many of the optional’s need 1 person to do them. So in each run 4 people will get negative honour, 1 person gets positive. This isn't as simple as it looks once you dive into different playstyles and different TFO's. Plus who gets to decide which playstyle's are classed as high honour and bad honour?
second issue related to this is that STO playerbase isn't that huge and console playerbase is even smaller (as STO start on PC). To explain why this is an issue lets say there's 9 players at certain "honor bracket" now if all of them want to play random TFOs the first 5 get to play while the 4 others need wait until the TFO group is done since they're permanently 1 short of a queue pop, now queue times for randoms are what 15 mins at max at least on PC and generally more around 1-2 mins. TFOs can be anything from 10 to 30 minutes long not that much when playing but that's a long time to wait all the time.
Also depending on how narrow or wide the "bracket" in which people can queue together is this can be even worse, if you can queue with people with exactly the same amount of "honor" as you, no one gets to queue as Pottsey pointed out what you do (or even can do) depends on both the TFO and your playstyle (of which there's several not just 2) so everyone would get just a little bit different amounts of "honor" so finding 5 players with the exact same amount of "honor" consistently is pretty much impossible.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
No reason for the devs to add a system that singles out and marks the serious farmers who speedrun missions and skips the under-rewarding optionals, and people who got the tactics for doing them down to the second... as doing something negative, since this is what most gamers do.
Heck back in the old days before the Reputation system where you had to earn the sets parts as random low-chance drops from playing the missions... I was part of a group that farmed the Borg STFs multiple times daily to get the set rewards...
We took it every serious that people knew what to do in each mission before they could join, and that people could keep up so we didn't use more time than needed on them.
If we had to use time on every single optional side thing, and other things that could be skipped... we would have run ourself dried-out dead on them long ago.
Don't get me wrong, I love doing optionals, and would love more teams did them... But a lot of teams I end up with these days, skip them, since they don't really reward anything extra thats worth it.
Clearly I would end up getting a lot of negative honor for joining random teams, dispite I want to do the optionals.
What the devs really need to do is upgrade the bonus rewards for going after optional things, so people are more inclined to do them.
Spock to Kirk, as Kirk is about to hug him.
Star Trek V: "The Final Frontier"
I've found that people in the forums often under estimate the amount of work needed for things they ask by a rather large degree (or work needed for things in general).
> Oh look, once again assuming that having enough contacts to be able to make a private team 24/7 is a "small amount of effort" that is reasonably possible for everyone.
Most people don't play that long 😋 but there are plenty of channels or fleets so there shoukd be people from any time zone around. It's in any case a easier solution than to rewrite the game to cater to a specific wish of a select group of players.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
It's deliberate punishment for speedrunners, BECAUSE you are assigning them negative honor (dishonor?) which is putting them in the same group as AFKers. Your "grouping system" would wind up grouping optional junkies like you with like-minded people (which is fine, as far as it goes) but condemns the speedrunners to end up with the AFKers, which would make speedruns even harder and more frustrating for those players, which most certainly is punishment.
Modifying your system to give speedrunners neither positive nor negative honor, but instead leave them at 0, would at least alleviate this issue, resulting in 3 distinct groups: 1) optional hunters, 2) speedrunners, and 3) the wretched hive of scum and villainy (tm).
However, I am very much afraid that this is all academic. A system like you propose (even with my suggestion), would be open to easy mis-assignments of honor (or the reverse), due to circumstances beyond anyone's control.
Example: During a Breach Event a couple of years ago, I wound up getting lag and rubber-banding BADLY. Normally I'm a speedrunner, but in that run, although I was at my keyboard and desperately trying to move my ship, I was stuck in a wall, and no amount of typing "/stuck" in the console would alleviate it. My ship was still in that wall when the Voth ship blew up.
Now I didn't (couldn't) contribute to that run, and didn't (couldn't) even move after the beginning. So any system would have flagged me as an AFKer, which I certainly am not.
Yes, that was an extreme case, but accidents and connection issues can happen to anyone. What if a stray torp or Sci hazard of yours accidentally happens to deal the last point to the boss before the optionals are won. Should you get negative honor for obviously being a speedrunner in that case? To a computer judging the system, intentions don't matter, only the results.
You raise some interesting points. As a speedrunner (in the Events, anyway. I don't run TFO's for fun), I'd be just as happy to never be grouped with you, as you would be to never be grouped with me. I have vivid memories of the hyper-partisan "discussions" that resulted here over the original Arena of Sompek, before the merciful revamp. But given the fact that a system like yours would require computerized judging (they certainly won't hire an employee or 12 to watch this full time), I doubt it could come to pass.
But perhaps, at least, you now see why people thought you were trying to punish people who don't play like you. Lumping everyone else in the same pit as the AFKers (even unintentionally) can come across that way.
Just my 2 EC. Thanks for reading.
[Edit: for clarity]
Or how about the person in storm the spire who's running a slower ship and knows that there's no point going after the bonus dread so instead heads for the escapees?
Or the one who finds certain things unplayable because of the massive amount of visual spam the game forces onto players screens (even though it causes performance issues on console) or randoms into that TOS themed TFO which cryptic added a nauseating grain filter because apparently every episode TOS was filmed during a sandstorm.
As this game should be played for fun, your thought process is detrimental to it, you call gamers out that are not up to your apparently high standards of knowledge and performance.
I agree that people like you are indeed special and should be grouped with like minded individuals, and kept together, never interacting with the rest of the gamers in Star Trek Online that want to have fun and go into TFO's, and not be "judged" by people like you because they "do not contribute" to your apparently high standards.
Your Honor system has merit though. It would prevent people like you from posting more garbage like you just did as you would be grouped together forever in your own little worlds, never to be bothered by "common folk"
Wow, not even April first yet and there is movement in the bushes. By all means, let's begin the separation of players based on "contribution" lol, in an already low population game to keep you and your kind satisfied.
I don't know about the rest of the people reading this but I am already feeling warm and fuzzy.
so that brings me to this:
1. you are forcing a certain player expectation, and are given a reward, and i assume this honor system has some benefit, improved DPS, defense, SOMETHING, because if it does not, then it's not worth paying a dev to code it. Not that they would code it anyway, because it's work that in no way shape or form will bring money into the game.
2. Unless there is some severe impediment to having this negative honor, the AFKers are not going to give a T-Rex TRIBBLE. If it does, that's naming and shaming which is probably in violation of the Terms of Service, and in some jurisdictions, actionable in a real world court. You really think Cryptic will open themselves up to that?
the answer to AFKers is simple. Do not do Random TFOs and play them in a pre-made group. If you Pug, expect that there will be a griefer of some sort. that why I will not do a TFO unless it's part of a ship grind, and even then, it better be an account unlock.
That's my opinion, anyway
now that makes more sense. if you do up to 5,000 dps you are group 1 if you exceed 10,000 group 2 so on and so forth. That prevents some4 uber DPS guy coming in and killing everything before I can push BFAW. It also give me a goal, I WANT to get to that 25K level, and so forth. Kind of like T ball Pee wee and so fort sport leagues. There could even be a gauge (which already exists in game) that tells you if what your group is trying is easy, moderate hard or don't bother you will all die.
Now before someone says if you are in X group, then you cannot get a better build, that's nonsense. Player X may do 500,000 DPS in her Lockbox ship, but maybe She is trying her hand at science magic, and is in the 25K group. there are the opportunities (If player X decides to,) "Hey Player G, I see you are using this. If you do X,y,and Z, you can maybe double your DPS."
which would be a lot better than "Hey superloser, stop playing MY Game because I'm awesome and one shot Tac cubes" which i have been on the receiving end of.
but in the end, this honor system proposal is not the answer to any issue in STO
As for afkers. Add some interaction gates.
Like you need to complete a number of tasks count as active. Maybe;
1. Dps threshold based on tfo difficulty and type.
2. Leave the start area before certain objectives complete.
3. Add an area players need to form up after tfo completion with a time limit to reach it. Maybe with partially random emergence points.
4. Support based threashold, healing other players/npc.
And just require that you do a certain number of them. In this case. Like 3 out of 4
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Occidere populo et effercio confractus