Of COURSE we don't have to grind or buy from the cstore.
We can always choose to have sucky low end equipment.
That is what you use, right? Of course you do, I bet you defeat elite STFs using level II stuff.
Hey, if your goal is to defeat elite STF's, what do you know, that's exactly the group of people STO's economy is targeting!
Those who can be satisfied with defeating the normal STF's or heaven forbid not even play the STF's because of their story shortcomings and combat-heavy (or should I say 'only') focus... those bunch, get to play STO entirely for free spending their time.... having fun!
Cool concept, eh?
EDIT :: I mean, lets face it, STO will make a pretty awesome singleplayer/co-op game after it goes F2P.
Actually, it says "through the game, particularly at the earlier levels." Yes, I see the "earlier levels" part, but I also see the "through the game" part too. What I'm wondering is why are you ignoring that part?
When you change one particular part of a curve, it will naturally propagate to other parts of the curve. Therefore, it is implied that the rest of said curve will see some change and can be "ignored."
...max level with "one weekend and a pack of red bull".
I would argue that is out of context. The length of the total curve was the subject in the previous discussion. This is why you can max level fast.
The rate of change for the curve at a particular area is the subject of the current discussion. This would allow you to level up fast in the beginning. In effect, drawing out the higher levels.
You can argue all you want, but that wont make it true. If they are going to preach about how leveling is too fast, then to turn around and make one part of the leveling path faster is a contradiction.
I don't think custoerms are going to be stupid enough to buy all of the lower level C-store ships if they are leveling so quickly
Ah , but they might be stupid enough to buy SOME ships .
Example : No matter how fast I go through the first level -- I would have purchased the TOS Constitution ship .
Because I personally believe that this is my only chance to fly/play with such a ship for a looooooong time (if ever) .
(because the 60's Trek is just not "cool" enough to ever get it's own game -- and no , don't confuse cool with iconic .)
To me it would of made much more sense to slow down the level progression to try and milk the consumer for more C-store purchases
Actually what would have made sense is to add more content (missions) to the lower levels , AND THEN speed up the game (so the leveling would have gotten to be just a bit faster , not a whole lot faster) .
Instead they choose to go the easy way and "tweak" the existing content .
I'm sure that they imagine that once F2p goes live and once they put some effort into the Klingons / PVP (and/or FE's) that they will eventually go back and ad missions to the lower Tiers , but that's just the same thinking they had about the Klingons , when they decided to make them a "faction" .
We have to remember... they want this game to be entertaining for the casual player. Having missions that are "unbeatable" for casual gamers who have zero understanding of the more advanced mechanics and are honestly just here for a good time isn't exactly a great way to make sure those people stick around.
Dude , no offense intended , but I have played facebook games that were tougher than most of STO (STF's not included) .
I did not cry when I lost , I just tried harder .
STO has a basic game speed progression to all 3 careers :
Tac's progress faster but they take damage and die sometimes .
Sci's are the slowest progression (low power , low hull)
Eng's are the "middle road" .
I tend to think that most ppl try out the Tac. profession first and judge the game's "dificulty" based on that .
And that's not fair ... as you do get your *** handed to you more often when you play as a Tac for the first time and zoom in at full impulse into combat .
Not quite. Cryptic really borked the leveling progression as I remember nearly universal complaints about how fast Captain goes by during the early days of the games while the lowest tier was a worse grind.
The quote in the OP is saying that leveling in the lower ranges is speeding up. This doesn't mean the entire game is--just a rank. The net (to--level-cap) time might be longer still. These concepts are not incompatible.
The leveling experience after that is going to still slow down, particularly since appropriate tiered ships and gear are soft-locked behind higher costs via dilithium. thus both what D'Angelo said (speaking generally) and what the quote says (speaking specifically about the lowest tier) can be true at once. They're not mutually exclusive.
This actually seems like a good idea as the early game was always too slow (especially till LtCmdr--when content opened) but the rest of the game flew by too quickly.
I agree with your well thought-out assessment.
You clearly point out the two statements are of different context while explaining the benefit of the new system from your point of view.
However, what do you think would be the downside to this leveling approach?