Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 1 Dear Dev Team
05-10-2010, 02:54 AM
Like most others, I have a number of things that I'm not satisfied with and will revisit later in this post.

I first want to applaud your efforts however. Previous game release experience aside, I'm sure that we can all relate to the relative pickle that you were put into by larger corporate interests. With release moved forward the closed beta testers, the one who could objectively pick apart the game, didn't have time to do so. Open beta was pretty much a "look at me" circus by people who really just wanted to play the game prior to day -2. You've had and still have a HUGE mess on your dry-erase board I'm sure. You're doing what you can as you can and objectively and with personal gripes aside, it shows. Thank you.

Now..... on to my personal gripes.

Tempered with the knowlege of Cryptic needing the biggest game impact for their buck, I'm going to try to be objective in what I suggest.

Suggestion 1: Bridge Officer Training
As youngsters in Starfleet Academy or in the Klingon similar, we are trained in many facets of starship systems performance, tactics, ground tactics, and overall "stuff". Later, as we develop in our chosen fields of study, we still have options to "multiclass" so to speak. Multiclass options like an Engineer for an Escort Captain or even a Tactical Officer for a Science Ship and any number of mixes in between. With that said, it's apparent that we're putting training into those areas, specialized, time intensive training. Why can't we train Bridge Officers outside of our class? My engineer is a subject matter expert on starship tactics. Why can I not train Tac Officers Attack Pattern Beta III? The chart says I can, but alas, they're not engineers.

I'm sure the larger corporate interests might look down on this thinking. "They will play longer to train new characters to explore different facets of the game." Well no, we'll get bored, play our original toons until we can't stomach it anymore and then just quit or only log in to do our dailies. Certainly that's not a good demographic to show perspective advertisers. On a business angle, perhaps tie in a class change with our stats change. $6.20 U.S. or whatever the cash value of that is to allow us, as part of our restatting, to permanantly train Bridge Officers with a new class of skills. A: It adds to the desire to do it. B: even if included in the 20,000 energy credits to buy one with EC, it gives us a reason to drum on. A much better stat for showing advertisers.

As a customer, I'd much rather to "just" be able to train what the chart says I can. As an objective gamer, I can see Cryptic's need to point out that they can "turn a buck" on it to larger interests.

Suggestion 2 (and 2.5): Science Consoles in PvP vs. PvE.
As a quick fix, Cryptic had to adjust Science consoles in order to reign in some overbalanced science abilities. Now, even after the initial recoding of these problem abilities, (bravo for the effort by the way) science consoles remain at only +15 for mk X's.

There are abilities, like Science Team, that really weren't overbalanced in the first place. Yet, EVERYONE suffers from the changing of consoles. You've begun changes to the root abilities, give us back our consoles....please? They were really only a problem in PvP anyway.

Speaking of PvP...... How about letting us schedule less than 5v5's? Maybe not acceptable for missions and no, I don't expect to get 25 marks for a 1v1. However, something appropriate is do-able, I'm sure.

I have more "gripes" than just these, but I haven't sat and thought about them as in-detail as these. I'm going to bookmark my own thread so, when I have time to think later, I can just use this thread as a reference. Thanks for your time in reading.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
05-10-2010, 03:45 AM
Well it's good to see a thread with constructive criticism for a change.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
05-10-2010, 03:52 AM
Originally Posted by Streakfury View Post
Well it's good to see a thread with constructive criticism for a change.
Ya... thoose are rare on this forum... I agree and aproove of both above statements
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
05-11-2010, 07:21 AM
I happen to agree. I also want to see more abilities to tank and so forth, properly.

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 06:00 AM.