Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,936
# 41
08-10-2013, 09:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmym View Post
Also, Caspian's problems were not brought on by an irate fleet leader. They were caused when one of our older, retired fleet members who had leadership status had their account hacked. I don't care who you are or how secure you think you are, every one of us is vulnerable to the ill intent of malcontents with computer skills.
In other words, this "solution" actually makes it worse, by making it impossible to remove a deceased leader: Any attempt to remove that leader puts your entire fleet on lockdown for two weeks per leader alt removed. Should that leader actually BE maliciously hacked, he will be able to stop you from removing him and further extend the time in which your fleet is stuck in lockdown by kicking one of your other leaders. Furthermore, he can grief the fleet by kicking every normal member, then putting the entire fleet on lockdown this way, rendering it impossible for those new members to use the fleet.

This is supposed to help?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 875
# 42
08-11-2013, 01:10 AM
I think that what is clearly confusing about the Fleet Leadership notes is the terminology being used. Currently, on Holodeck, to "Kick" a player is to remove them completely from the fleet roster. Which leaves an event politely stating that [character name] has left the fleet.

For these changes, I think it simply means to demote a player from Full Leadership to Provisional Leadership? Be that through the inactivity of a Leader or through choice by another co-Leader. This, IMO, makes more sense.

As for the automatic demotion due to inactivity, it is currently 90-days (or 3 months) on Holodeck. These changes would double that to 180 days (or 6 months). Clearly there has been feedback - not necessarily in these forums - of the opinion that 90 days was too strict a mechanic. I disagree and feel 90 days was about right.

What to do about co-Leaders who are determined by others to be unstable and not good for the roster? I think that kicking out completely that player resolves any concern for provisional waiting periods being too short. One can simply choose to re-invite that player back at lower Fleet rank should a cooling off period prove successful. But I suppose that depends more upon the democratic make-up of a fleet roster as to how one returns and in what capacity. Cryptic and GM's shouldn't need to be concerned with those choices on the player's part.

The only part that has me concerned is that should a Single Leader fleet have their leader flagged as inactive, the first player to login is automatically handed the Fleet Leader position. I realize this is an effort to move things along for some fleets. But can this player simply respond, "Thanks. But, no thanks."? So on and so forth until another player agrees to accept it?


STO Forum:
Where the Human Adventure is Just Beginning!

Exploring STO Since Pavement.
Tier 2 Constitution for Fleet Refit!
Give the Art Team time to fix the K't'inga << Link

Last edited by psiameese; 08-11-2013 at 01:15 AM.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 281
# 43
08-11-2013, 06:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by frostdamage View Post
No, the permission setting only allow you to change for your own rank and below. So rank 6 could be given permission to kick others at rank 6, but. They still wouldn't be able to affect rank 7.
I'm currently ingame to look at the permissions... There is only a permission to "kick any member from the fleet", with the mouseover mentioning nothing about only lower ranks. That means I can give Recruits the permission to kick Leaders (and anyone else in the fleet) if I wanted to do so. The permissions that affect only lower ranks are for promoting and demoting.

So the question remains: what happens if someone of a lower rank manages to get the permission to kick a Leader? Does the fleet go into the 2-week holding pattern, or does the Leader get automatically removed since the person doing the kicking isn't at the Leader rank? Is it possible to then kick all the leaders while bypassing the 2-week holding pattern?
Ensign
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1
# 44
08-11-2013, 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dabelgrave View Post
I'm currently ingame to look at the permissions... There is only a permission to "kick any member from the fleet", with the mouseover mentioning nothing about only lower ranks. That means I can give Recruits the permission to kick Leaders (and anyone else in the fleet) if I wanted to do so. The permissions that affect only lower ranks are for promoting and demoting.
The wording of the permissions are a bit misleading, if not outright false.

The way permissions works for kicking is that members with a rank that permits them to "Remove from Fleet", only have the option to remove other players in the Roster that is ranked below (and only below) them. If you were to give a recruit the ability to kick other players, she would only be able to do so with players of a lower rank, which would be nobody (if "recruit" is the entry level rank).

Similarly, someone just promoted to the highest possible rank can't directly kick anyone of their peers, just members with a lower rank than herself. A demotion would have to take place before a top ranking member would be able to be kicked.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 421
# 45
08-11-2013, 09:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by psiameese View Post

As for the automatic demotion due to inactivity, it is currently 90-days (or 3 months) on Holodeck. These changes would double that to 180 days (or 6 months). Clearly there has been feedback - not necessarily in these forums - of the opinion that 90 days was too strict a mechanic. I disagree and feel 90 days was about right.
its 30 days currently, not 90.

90 is too long, 180 is silly. extending the time and making the claim leadership automatic will cause problems for my fleet as it will necessitate a reworking of the fleet structure. Our current rank setup has 1 point of weakness, me. All these leadership changes will create additional complexity, confusion, and several points of weakness.
House of Sigma (channel KDFdefera for PvE requiring only KDF teams) List of KDF issues [my in-game handle @bootymcboots] (channel KDF Empire for KDF orientated discussion - still in development/growing)
Former PWE Community Team Lead
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,046
# 46
08-11-2013, 12:38 PM
Tribble is available to log into again

Cheers,

Brandon =/\=
Brandon "BranFlakes" Felczer | Former Community Team Lead for Perfect World Entertainment
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,206
# 47
08-11-2013, 01:58 PM
And yes, the D'Kyr's warp ring now changes color when you use an applicable shield.

And the D'Kyr is now on the Odyssey's separation tech, you can separate while moving.

But... now the warp ring does not stay horizontal after launching the Tal'Kyr, it returns to its pre-launch position... Canonically it is supposed to stay in it's retracted state... Fix please?

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/File...te_station.jpg

Edit: Upon further research, I can't seem to find any good evidence one way or the other which way the warp ring is suppose to be... Anybody?
Vice Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard

Last edited by kimmym; 08-11-2013 at 02:38 PM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,206
# 48
08-11-2013, 02:41 PM
Oh, and also, the engine trail effects are still not in the right place. I didn't test every set, but the reman set for sure was still wrong. As I recall the MACO set was wrong as well. One of the trails on the edge doesn't show at all. Might be the effect on the shields not the engine? Either way, it looks really bad.
Vice Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 875
# 49
08-11-2013, 11:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootyboots View Post
its 30 days currently, not 90.

90 is too long, 180 is silly. extending the time and making the claim leadership automatic will cause problems for my fleet as it will necessitate a reworking of the fleet structure. Our current rank setup has 1 point of weakness, me. All these leadership changes will create additional complexity, confusion, and several points of weakness.
30? I stand corrected then. But we agree that 180 days is too lenient if it's to be a formal fleet mechanic.
STO Forum:
Where the Human Adventure is Just Beginning!

Exploring STO Since Pavement.
Tier 2 Constitution for Fleet Refit!
Give the Art Team time to fix the K't'inga << Link
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 225
# 50
08-12-2013, 02:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmym View Post
But... now the warp ring does not stay horizontal after launching the Tal'Kyr, it returns to its pre-launch position... Canonically it is supposed to stay in it's retracted state... Fix please?

Edit: Upon further research, I can't seem to find any good evidence one way or the other which way the warp ring is suppose to be... Anybody?
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/D%27Kyr_type

Maybee the info is on the same page, with nice pictures ...
The only screen where u see the ring lowered is in the docked stage as in the picture ..
"When the warp drive was not in use, the ship's annular-warp nacelle was dropped into the vertical position; when the engines were powered down, or preparing to launch its auxiliary craft, the nacelle was folded horizontally into the primary hull."

Apparently this was seen in 3 different episodes of enterprise

"The D'Kyr-type starship docked at the station in "Bounty" had its "warp ring" tucked in the lower position. In "Impulse", the Seleya appears to have its warp drive partially recessed as well, as does the damaged Tal'Kir in "Future Tense". "

As for the other screen shots, there are several on there where it shows combat with or without a tal'kyr docked where it shows the ring up, and not lowered, which obviously takes place when not traveling at warp.

So without doing a review of the mentioned episodes and others featuring the vessel, it would seem that the ring is lowered when launching the support craft, and when docked, but is up when in normal flight or combat.

So in essence, screenshots would prove as much in this case as only a certified tech manual could prove more.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:27 PM.