Star Trek Online

Star Trek Online (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/index.php)
-   Star Trek Online General Discussion (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/forumdisplay.php?f=128)
-   -   Fleet Theft/Sales/Security: An Equity System Proposal (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=621831)

stoleviathan99 04-16-2013 09:41 AM

Fleet Theft/Sales/Security: An Equity System Proposal
 
So... I was part of Caspian Division. We had a T4.5 starbase and a T2 embassy. I haven't been in game a few weeks due to a bad motherboard but I gather that one of our inactive founders' accounts was hacked and the person on the hacked account booted everyone and has claimed the base and fleet for himself. Cryptic can't or won't do anything, which is frustrating but I imagine it's the result of well meaning but inflexible policies and limited manpower. The community, I've heard, has been awesome.

However, I think this presents some real issues when people have spent thousands of hours and spent hundreds of dollars on a product that can be stolen this easily. It makes me reluctant to participate in the Fleet system again.

Thinking about this, I have a proposal for a Fleet Equity system. It's really very simple.

The game already tracks lifetime fleet credit purchases. My idea is that, based on that total, there would be a starbase XP penalty when someone leaves a fleet based on their contribution total, which may include taking base amenities offline. Ie. boot everyone and the fleet gets knocked back to T0.

If someone gets booted, the penalty takes effect. When booting a person, you can discharge them dishonorably (nobody gets anything, the fleet loses progress) or honorably (the fleet still loses progress but the person gets sent an item which can be used to provide their new fleet with direct base XP, based on lifetime fleet credit). Either way, the fleet loses progress when someone gets booted.

If someone quits a fleet, they get nothing but get a choice whether the fleet they're leaving takes a progress penalty.

The point overall is to discourage fleet migration while encouraging amicable departures... And to make the hijacking of a fleet nearly impossible.

Thoughts?

lan451 04-16-2013 09:49 AM

First off, I'm sorry for your loss. I can't imagine what that feels like losing all that work. :(

As far as your proposal goes, I do have one major concern with it.

Quote:

Either way, the fleet loses progress when someone gets booted.
As a fleet leader I've had to boot people in the past due to behavioral issues. Either they got into a fight with other members or were inappropriate or disrespectful and we decided that person had to go. In the case of your proposal, my fleet would lose progress for booting a problem member and I can't say I like that.

Edit:

Quote:

If someone quits a fleet, they get nothing but get a choice whether the fleet they're leaving takes a progress penalty.
Not a fan of this either. If someone quits a fleet they shouldn't get an option to decide if they give that fleet a penalty or not. That's way too open to griefing.

Edit 2: Actually after reading more I can't back this in any way. Sorry.

abaddon653 04-16-2013 10:01 AM

I can honestly say that this is the first time I have ever gotten mad reading something on the forums. The mere fact that this has happened is a real head spinner, I mean you hear everyday about some one getting their account hacked, whether it is STO, tor, wow or whatever game you play you hear about it all the time. This is the first time I have ever heard of a whole fleet/guild being obliterated.

I would love to help you guys recover, who do I get a hold of to make arrangements?

crypticarmsman 04-16-2013 10:12 AM

Sorry,but IMO, this is a ridiculous proposal. People leave Guilds/Fleets all the time (for various reasons, sometimes not even related to anything anyone in the Fleet has done); and there is no reason a Guild/Fleet should be penalized due to this. Also, given the current Fleet member cap in STO, this would definitely penalize ANY Fleet that needs to make room for new members by removing inactive members who may have contributed a lot in their time, but (for whatever reason - STO burnout; found another MMO they enjoy more, etc.), have moved on. It doesn't mean they regret their time spent/contributions made while active in STO; just that they've found something else to do; (and as an example, currently our Fleet's policy is to kick anyone who hasn't logged in in over a year; and at some point, we will be getting to members who had contributed); yet under the above proposal, large Fleets who need the 'member space' could be massively penalized by doing so.

There would also be a situation where a large contributor, could then 'hold' his contributions over the Fleet leadership's head as it were and honestly (and this is the case in most MMOs); usually many Fleets/Guilds already have enough 'drama' as it is. The last thing the STO Fleet system needs is something like the above that would just add more unneeded 'drama' into the STO Fleet system.

you call it a "Fleet Equity System' proposal, but I fail to see the' Equity' myself.

mattimeo97 04-16-2013 10:17 AM

No.

No, no, no.

As the above poster said, we bump people all the time. Bank thefts, bad sports, bad behavior, people who are inactive without notice. Once per month we end up dumping a slew of people to open spots for new, active members. If someone takes a break without telling us, they are subject to this rule. X number of weeks, and bye-bye, with the caveat that you're welcome back any time if you were in good standing when we bumped you. It's nothing personal, but we can't hold slots and turn new people away based on the hopes that you MIGHT come back. So now we should be expected to backslide for the need to open up space in an already limited system? 500 members is all we get, and in an active newbie recruiting fleet like ours, we stay pretty close to capped out all the time. Once a month of this nonsense would see us never reaching T5.

frtoaster 04-16-2013 10:17 AM

I think a better solution would be to require some kind of vote or approval from the other leaders before a leader can be demoted or kicked out. It wouldn't prevent someone using a hacked account from looting all the provisions, but at least it would prevent them from taking control of the fleet.

kapla1755 04-16-2013 10:26 AM

As a fleet leader our solution to inactive founder/admiral/high council members was if we knew they were gonna be gone for awhile, they were demoted to a low rank unable to kick ppl etc if their account got hacked. Season 7 started off very bad for us we lost half the roster to ppl giving up on the game including 3 founders due to all the issues with season 7 launch. but we haven't had any other issues so far.

Sorry to hear about what happened to Caspian Division that really bites, but harming the rest of the fleets progress because someone got booted or decided to leave is a terrible idea.

Good Hunting

mattimeo97 04-16-2013 10:28 AM

Another thing I would add: If this person was high enough into leadership to kick everyone from the fleet, even this system wouldn't stop them. All they need to do is play with fleet ranks and purchase rights, and can deny everyone else the ability to use all those provisions, selling them only to who they wanted. Then they effectively drain the fleet of everything of value, all while the membership can sit and watch.

OP's issue, horrible as it is, would not have been solved by his proposal. (Because, let's face it, if Doofus-A hacks a leadership account, and can't get what they want from it, do you think they're going to balk at kicking everyone out and wrecking all your progress as vengeance? No.)

Fleet management needs a serious overhaul. Membership control (promotion, kicks, etc.) really needs to be its own separate tab from the roster (and not be available via right-clicking) and require an individual secondary password to access, with a 24 hour lockout after three failed attempts.

ussdelphin2 04-16-2013 10:29 AM

It does suck but it wont be the first time it has happened, it wont be the last. I don't think leaders should be able to kick other leaders IMO without at least a vote like frtoaster suggested. Are you sure this inactive member was actually hacked?

jermbot 04-16-2013 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattimeo97 (Post 9245001)
No.

No, no, no.

As the above poster said, we bump people all the time. Bank thefts, bad sports, bad behavior, people who are inactive without notice. Once per month we end up dumping a slew of people to open spots for new, active members. If someone takes a break without telling us, they are subject to this rule. X number of weeks, and bye-bye, with the caveat that you're welcome back any time if you were in good standing when we bumped you. It's nothing personal, but we can't hold slots and turn new people away based on the hopes that you MIGHT come back. So now we should be expected to backslide for the need to open up space in an already limited system? 500 members is all we get, and in an active newbie recruiting fleet like ours, we stay pretty close to capped out all the time. Once a month of this nonsense would see us never reaching T5.

This system would only hurt you terribly if you're kicking your fleets largest contributors every month.

If that's the case and your fleets biggest contributors are leaving or being kicked in droves, then I'd have to suggest you're doing something terribly wrong.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:02 AM.