Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 633
# 41
10-18-2012, 03:30 PM
Quote:
This. Exchanges aren't a concern, they are useless. There are better ways to get better purple doffs.
then explain it to us becuase i know of zero that are able to provide high quality doffs when all you have are whites at a reliable and quick rate.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,691
# 42
10-18-2012, 03:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diogene0 View Post
Come on, we know that the problem comes from the incredibly cheap starbase doff vendor. Add dilithium costs to that, I see no issue if you kill this feature, since it gives the best doff rewards to those who don't doff. Nerf this instead of the academy stuff if you don't sell enough packs.
Actually... what Cryptic may be trying to do is channel more players to starbases. Think about it for a moment. We're seeing lots of starbase exhaustion and a lot of fleets are simply stopping or going at a VERY reduced speed, not to mention a lot of players simply not caring about starbases. Starbases are one of the key long term monetization components of STO, they WANT to get everyone attached to one. These added Dil costs make it so everyone would prefer to grow their base and get doffs through fleet credits, of course you CAN get them without being in a fleet.... you would just prefer not to.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 891
# 43
10-18-2012, 03:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diogene0 View Post
Come on, we know that the problem comes from the incredibly cheap starbase doff vendor.
Once again, you spout the crazy talk. The SB Doff vendor already has a cost associated with it - Fleet marks. And while your time spent earning marks might be "cheap" my time isn't. Everytime you propose a "solution" it always involves screwing other people without impacting your own preferred playstyle.

The solution isn't to eff over one group of players (sb doff vendor users) over another group of players (recruitment officer/c-store pack buyers). The solution is to not raise a dilithium surchange by a factor of 50 in one fell swoop.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,691
# 44
10-18-2012, 03:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerobang View Post
not to mention that the Klingon side of things pretty much got shafted...

FEDs can do Supports to get lots of Refugees and do Asylums to get their Purple DOffs

KDF only get useless prisoners from Supports and their Asylum counterparts lack proper supply for the inputs.
Ahh, but the KDF gets contraband like crazy. Cryptic would also prefer it if you had to grind both sides, one for Dil, the other for everything else that needs Dil. Which is what a lot of people do now, except these changes would make it less profitable.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 688
# 45
10-18-2012, 03:37 PM
"Wheeeeeeeee! Come on guys! Last one down the slippery slope has to script smartphone apps!"
Well, this was sort of to be expected. First they pointlessly gut Doff discharge values, after their free Doff degrinder turned out to be (who would've guessed?) poorly thought through, now once more they take something we already had and change the rules, so we have to pay more to keep using the same service, and next, within a week or so, when the reputation system makes its way onto Tribble, it will reveal itself to be yet another dilithium sync, cause you know Romulans love dilithium. It crackles and disappears so beautifully when you chuck it into a quantum singularity powered drive core. And of course, there won't be any change to the daily refining cap. Oh no, not that.

I'm more and more starting to get the feeling that PWE's just too polite to show us the door, and are trying to make us so uncomfortable around here that we leave of our own volition.
Reave

Last edited by hrisvalar; 10-18-2012 at 03:40 PM.
Ensign
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 2
# 46
10-18-2012, 03:38 PM
I literally do not see the point to this. This will drive players away, ultimately hurting PWE's long-term monetization!

Have none of these people taken marketing classes?!
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 731
# 47
10-18-2012, 03:41 PM
These changes may be acceptable *IF* they cut the doff requirements by an *order of magnitude*.
Fleet holding costs | Accolade Points: 18020 (Fed Engineer), 16400 (KDF Tactical)
Subscribe to Accolade thread | Join channel Accolades | Idea: Mail Revamp
New on STOwiki: Spire projects | STO Timeline | Fed-KDF Disparity | upcoming content
Fed Fleet: Section 31 (level 20) | KDF Fleet: Klingon Intelligence (level 20)
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 73
# 48
10-18-2012, 03:42 PM
I used to play a card game at a local game store. The owner decided that he wanted to make some extra money. So his plan was to sell the same product as Wal-Mart...only at a higher price. $4 for a $3 pack of cards. $1 for a can of soda.

Can you guess why I don't play cards there anymore. Or why nobody plays cards there anymore.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 891
# 49
10-18-2012, 03:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by phyrexianhero View Post
These changes may be acceptable *IF* they cut the doff requirements by an *order of magnitude*.
they raised the upgrind/downgrinder from 10 to 500 on commons. They'd have to lower the doff requirements on projects by the same factor for me to find this acceptable.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 633
# 50
10-18-2012, 03:46 PM
Even if they did the lost future econemy wide dilithium income from people having lower level doffs on average would be harsh, and it's also going to trade into lost FM income, and maybe even other future curruncies.

If anything this sees to be aimed soley at stopping people generating large amoutns of dilithium via doffing. With all the LTS's getting extra character slots now there's a real probability of serious dilithum income spike in the near future.
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 06:17 AM.