I think it's more of a safeguard in case an author decides to change their mission into something, hrm... inappropriate? I doubt that would happen, but, you know

Cheers,

Brandon =/\=

Wouldn't it be better if the creator could edit an inactive copy of the mission and submit it for review by you? If the edit truly are improvements, such as dialogue or maps or adding new Foundry features, you could decide if it is enough to validate an update of the active featured mission copy.

Sounds like a good idea. Maybe limit the "updates" to one every month or two (number up to Cryptic) if they are worried they'll be constantly bombarded with review requests.

That would be a great solution.

That's just too paranoid.

I'm definitely staying out of spotlights.

Thank you for the heads up

Well, I edited my mission with a dialogue box apologizing for the crappy BOff pathing AI and saying it was Cryptic's fault and not mine. So if you don't mind that being permanently frozen there, then go ahead. Otherwise, you might want to fix the pathing on the map first.

I've only been asking for 1 and a half years :p

We can hope, although they did add some new functions to the Foundry - which could throw a monkey wrench in the mission auto re-publish process.

I'm still pretty unclear as to what we (as foundry authors) need to do with our missions to make them count in the daily. Does it have to last a certain amount of time, kill a certain number of enemies, use a certain number of interactions, speak with a certain number of people? There is no clear layout of what it needs to have to count, which is pretty crap for those of us making missions, only to find out that no one will ever play them because they don't count to the daily.

It's probably EULA changes in order to let Cryptic archive spotlighted missions so they stay exactly how they are once they're featured on the "Hail Starfleet" page.