Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 101
04-19-2011, 10:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heezdedjim
You can't actually be this dense. What I want; and what people on the K side want even more, is something to do while leveling up a new toon besides playing the same three explore templates another 1,200 times, or repeating the same featured episodes for the eleventeenth time through.

Many people hoped Foundry would provide that. A single daily of 189 points does next to nothing for someone trying to level up a new toon without taking a year to do it, especially if it takes an hour to get the same reward they can get in five minutes by doing one of the regular dailies. So if they want to progress, they're right back to grinding those explores rather than playing through new, interesting missions for SP rewards proportional to their time invested.

If Cryptic can figure out a way to attach the standard, level proportionate SP rewards to each Foundry mission, where the mission involves the same play time and effort as one of the normal patrol or explore length templates, THEN they would really have something. The daily isn't that; and it isn't even close to that. So we're right back to the Foundry, because the missions carry basically no SP rewards, being irrelevant to the problem of filling the yawning content gap that is the first 50 levels of this game.

Comprende?
They have indicated an interest, next time they do a Foundry spotlight, in adding specific "wrapper" missions that say, basically, "Play this/these SPECIFIC Foundry missions for a reward." But that has to be approved on a very case by case basis.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 102
04-19-2011, 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathan99
They have indicated an interest, next time they do a Foundry spotlight, in adding specific "wrapper" missions that say, basically, "Play this/these SPECIFIC Foundry missions for a reward." But that has to be approved on a very case by case basis.
It's true, it's not an easy thing to do; because like you say, it comes down to having an actual person sign off on "approved" missions and then basically freezing them so they can't be gutted or reworked. If there's any way they could make that happen with a reasonable turnaround for the productive authors, and at a sustainable, steady rate, then Foundry could become a huge, really significant source of excellent, ongoing new content for the game. It might actually be the one big thing that would keep lots of people playing long-term. Whatever effort it would take for them to make this happen, it's obviously going to be much, much less over the long term than hand rolling new content themselves will continue to take, so it would be a great payoff in terms of the ratio of resources invested to content deployed.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 103
04-19-2011, 10:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by WishStone
We want the Foundry to be used for users to create missions. Set a scenario, create the world anew for yourself. The tool was not created to allow players to level up easier, to have a quicker way to gather Accolades, or similar. If your mission sets this as a goal in any form, we may take action. Please do not create missions that are geared towards boosting of any kind..
Here's the problem, any mob we create in-game apart from animal mobs w/ physical attacks are ones that have kills and damage tied to them from the accolade system, so by your own rules we can't use them.

So we go the other way and do something that is non-combat focused, lets say an rp setting, or a racetrack, or some sort of world building map scenario that is useful, but is something that hasn't been put in yet--like facilities in the rest of the sol system.

I create missions to test starship builds or to try combat tactics, so you don't have to fly across space to try out your new ship, or BO loadouts, and it can get flagged on two levels. If I have many fighting mobs, than I'm making an accolade farming mission. If I make the combat optional than I'm creating a click-and-win.

According to another team member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salami_Inferno
If you guys report those "click the console to win" missions, we'll happily address them.
Okay so with terms of the unspoken eula, no RP missions than either.

So at this point, I'm afraid to make content as it might get me banned. I'm afraid to run foundry content for fear of being called an exploiter and thus banned. And I'm afraid to talk about my concerns about content as any talking to you folks directly will get me forum points--and thus again banned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WishStone
Community Tickets are always welcome.
At this point, given my fears, I honestly feel like I should make sure to run any foundry mission ideas and plans through the community office first just to be safe.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 104
04-19-2011, 10:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The.Grand.Nagus View Post
Those rules are called the Terms of Service, and those rules say you cannot use the game in a way that was not intended to gain an advantage over other players. So if someone agreed to those rules, and then directly went against them by creating a mission that was not how the Foundry was intended to be used, then they are responsible for their actions.
This system was in testing for MONTHS. Just about all of us that tested it mentioned this, said this would be a problem.

We told them not to make accolades achievable within Foundry missions.

We told them not to give XP. In fact I believe it was specifically said they would give Xp, only based on a variety of metrics calculated while the mission was publishing, after completion of the mission.

I know that several people reported and demonstrated JUST the same missions people are now complaining about in this thread and talking about reporting.

I think a good case could be made for these being intended uses of the foundry by the sheer fact that their existence and the capability of creating them was NOT removed back then. Saying this isn't an intended use of the Foundry after all the aforementioned call outs is like saying you didn't mean for someone to die after you gave a monkey a loaded gun...you KNOW there's a good chance of something happening if you give that monkey a loaded gun but you did it anyway.

You could have at least taken the bullets out or put in blanks.

Ok, so if I put a large amount of mobs on my mission? If I have a large-scale ground assault? Space assult? Someone comes in, aborts after seeing a large space battle and suddenly I'm getting a mission taken down before anyone even plays through the new mission?

I'm also worried this new scheme is just going to have people hate-reporting or even just turning the Foundry into a witch hunt.

If the devs don't have time or resources to police the Foundry missions on their own why would they have the time to CHECK these missions we report to make sure someone didn't report a grind mission based off of some random large scale battle?

I'm all for reporting missions that violate the...um, whatever.

Anyway, do we have a guarantee that no missions or mission authors will be blocked before their reported mission(s) are reviewed, fully, by a developer? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see some stuff taken care of but really I don't wanna hear people complain that their mission got taken down for nothing.

I've been following Cryptic for 10 years now on forums and through games and development of games. This isn't an insult or an attack, it's a fact: Cryptic tends to swing from one extreme to the other in cases like this and I don't want to see any heads rolling because of a far too extreme swing.

Unless you're pulling people not required for the game development (Wishstone, etc) to go check these missions I'm fine moving past them and letting them exist until the Foundry team gets some free time to tweak the XP rewards and put in blocks for preventing these things.

But if you're going to punish or pull things down you need to state, now and in plain english:

The Foundry toolset is designed for a creative outlet for the playerbase of Star Trek online. Missions created with the sole purpose of speeding along the leveling process, accolade collection or otherwise circumventing the intended methods of character advancement in an extreme way, will result in removal of these missions and punishment of the author where required.

That's all you need to say. It should be a popup whenever you log into the Foundry. It should be specifically stated, it's still vague enough to allow you room to hammer people down when you feel they're straying out of the lines but clear enough to understand.

The key thing is: This isn't stated anywhere that I can find and that's been the main problem (aside from allowing these missions to be possible in the first place)

Oh, and a side note related to the Foundry vaguely: If you do anymore Spotlights don't spotlight ones already crazy popular. Find the ones with 100 or fewer play throughs that you find entertaining and enjoyable. Seems silly to publicize already popular missions when so many other diamonds are buried on the bottom of the list because people don't have entire fleets grinding their missions to boost them up to the top of the lists...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 105
04-19-2011, 11:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powerhelm View Post
This system was in testing for MONTHS. Just about all of us that tested it mentioned this, said this would be a problem.

We told them not to make accolades achievable within Foundry missions.

We told them not to give XP. In fact I believe it was specifically said they would give Xp, only based on a variety of metrics calculated while the mission was publishing, after completion of the mission.

I know that several people reported and demonstrated JUST the same missions people are now complaining about in this thread and talking about reporting.

I think a good case could be made for these being intended uses of the foundry by the sheer fact that their existence and the capability of creating them was NOT removed back then. Saying this isn't an intended use of the Foundry after all the aforementioned call outs is like saying you didn't mean for someone to die after you gave a monkey a loaded gun...you KNOW there's a good chance of something happening if you give that monkey a loaded gun but you did it anyway.
I agree wholeheartedly. The simple fix for this would be to deny any XP being earned after death. Now, I say simple, but I realize that to do that it probably would entail a complete rework of the combat engine and testing and whatnot.

It's sad and frustrating to see publishers become the bad guy in all this. What exactly is the incentive to publish a mission? To have your account threatened with banning just because someone flagged your mission?

No thanks. It's not worth it.

If they weren't addressed in Beta it set the precedent that these missions were allowed simply because they exist.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 106
04-19-2011, 11:41 PM
Like several other posters in this thread, I implore Cryptic to well, not be so cryptic with what is or is not allowed. These need to be expressly written out in the terms of use, EULA, and whatever else.

Obviously killing tons of fighters is wrong and I'm glad that's being taken care of via the game mechanics (Thursday's patch). But killing over 100 of one species in a long mission with storyline should not be frowned upon -- in fact there are multiple missions that Cryptic produced that are just like that (Researcher Rescue, Hunting the Hunters, etc.).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 107
04-20-2011, 12:38 AM
My feeling is that the real reason, or a large part of the reason is the fact that such missions are an easy credit farm.

I would not mind the grind missions, seeing how I have leveled 6 toons via regular missions. Accolades and drops should be absent in grind missions. Those missions would simply offer an alternative way to level toons
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 108
04-20-2011, 12:47 AM
*meh* *del just in case*
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 109
04-20-2011, 12:56 AM
Oh boy. Again in the thread amassing violations.

Please, I ask of you: Check your postings and remove anything that violated the forum rules.
Especially, please get rid of all private communication / talks you may have had with CS or via PMs as well as flaming, trolling or insults.

Just jump back and edit that stuff out, please. You cannot be heard if you gather up infraction points.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 110
04-20-2011, 01:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The.Grand.Nagus View Post
Let me see if I can put this simply: if all you care about is rushing to end game so you have nothing to do but complain about how bored you are, then the Foundry isnt for you. But if you actually want to enjoy the game as you level and arent in some mad rush, then you'll probably really enjoy the Foundry. Comprende?
What about people that want to get their character to endgame to do their VA PvP quickly? No matter how good the Foundry missions get - they want give me PvP, and the lower tiers are almost dead in terms of PvP.

I suppose a better-rewarded Foundry Daily will help. I like story missions. But I have a particular goal in mind - VA PvP. That is currently more important to me then story missions. I would prefer if story missions where the best way to get there. The Daily alone - even with better rewards - can't do that. it's just a Daily.
Closed Thread

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 06:18 PM.