View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
12-17-2011, 02:06 PM
Hadn't considered that, may have to use it as a "workaround," but honestly I'd rather the system just gets FIXED so it MAKES SENSE... Workarounds wouldn't be necessary if things just worked right to begin with. But, I know it's a "new system" and the bugs need some time to sort themselves out. So, here's hoping.

Long and short of it, for those who prefer not to sit through long rants (sorry, needed to get frustration off chest):

If DOFF drops from completed recruiting assignments are truly going to be RANDOM, then there should be NO names displayed in the Completed Assignments screen under Rewards, 'cause it sets up an unreasonable expectation in the mind of the end user that the displayed DOFFs are what you WILL ABSOLUTELY RECEIVE when you click "claim rewards." If you then do not receive said DOFFs, then it's basically false advertising, and the end user gets frustrated and wants to bash some heads. Y'know?


My opinion, collecting rewards shouldn't get 'held up' due to artificial limits on 'slots' for collected items like BOFFs / DOFFs (I don't care as much about inventory slots, which relatively make sense and you can sell your items easily enough). I just feel like BOFFs/DOFFs need to go into an unlimited 'pool' of discrete 'candidates' from which you can pick and choose at your leisure AFTER you've seen exactly who your candidates are.

I don't see any reason why the pool should be restricted in number. It's just way too artificial. And I know from working with databases that you can just set up a one-to-many relationship between a character & their list of BOFFs or DOFFs, and there's no reason such a list should need to be capped arbitrarily. Databases can handle such relationships with ease. The interface just maybe needs some minor tweaking to deal with breaking up or in some way sorting longer lists, but it should be doable. I know, I know. Limited programming resources. But, once it's done and makes sense, it's largely done and hopefully won't need to be revisited repeatedly later. And then users will be less frustrated and stop b!tch!ng about it, 'cause it'll be 'fixed'...