Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 517
# 21
01-31-2013, 11:07 AM
Congrats select Foundry authors for nerfing the grinders. That's 2 for 2. What will you guys want nerfed next?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,768
# 22
01-31-2013, 11:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by admgreer View Post
I noticed the same thing. Its dropping about 1/2 what it use too. Must be all the complaining the Foundry authors were doing to the Devs about how they made missions that took 80 hours to complete and a simple grinder that has no content is the Top run mission. So to make them happy they prob nerfed the dropps. I was making 600k EC in drops a day from 1 run, now its down to 300k in drops.
Yep - blame it on the Foundry Authors as Cryptic NEVER does any data-mining of their own. They never know how many players are logged in concurrently, how many items are sold from their C-Store; the rate at which players earn Dilithium and other in game rewards...

Yep, Cryptic absolutely clueless about what goes on, on their game servers until someone complains...oh, wait.

If anything, Cryptic probably did some data-mining, saw a trend they didn't care fore and made adjustments. Maybe those who farm 'Ginder' missions non-stop should look in the mirror before assigning any blame as to why loot drop rates may have been changed, eh?
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=91861979000&dateline=  1340755546
PWE Drone says, "Your STO community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 517
# 23
01-31-2013, 11:38 AM
And the massive poutrage, spamming devs via twitter and email, mass reporting foundry missions they don't like, the mysterious deletion of comments and closing of topics where those same authors work out how to "legally destroy" or "remove" missions they don't like had no effect at all. Really?
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 622
# 24
01-31-2013, 11:52 AM
Unless some file editing was done there was likely no exploitation ever involved, only legitimate game mechanics. The change to the Officer Reports disqualified the click this console three times on ESD type missions. Even if the mission required no combat or combat against enemies that do not reciprocate, one still must utilize the mouse and/or keyboard to generate the mission contact and complete a mission requiring a specified minimum length of time. Thus the literal physics definition of work is satisfied regardless of the end amount of work involved related to other foundry missions. Which is what this essentially boils down to: People are simply unhappy their foundry mission isn't getting as many playthroughs.
All cloaks should be canon.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,508
# 25
01-31-2013, 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloctoad View Post
Unless some file editing was done there was likely no exploitation ever involved, only legitimate game mechanics. The change to the Officer Reports disqualified the click this console three times on ESD type missions. Even if the mission required no combat or combat against enemies that do not reciprocate, one still must utilize the mouse and/or keyboard to generate the mission contact and complete a mission requiring a specified minimum length of time. Thus the literal physics definition of work is satisfied regardless of the end amount of work involved related to other foundry missions. Which is what this essentially boils down to: People are simply unhappy their foundry mission isn't getting as many playthroughs.
...

So you make fun of authors complaining about the system and then turn aroudn and say "hey I had to lift my finger to press a button on my keyboard, therefore it's not an exploit".

Check out my Foundry missions:
Standalone - The Great Escape - The Galaxy's Fair - Purity I: Of Denial - Return to Oblivion
The Defenders - Duritanium Man - The Improbable Bulk - [WIP] Commander Rihan
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 622
# 26
01-31-2013, 12:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zorbane View Post
...

So you make fun of authors complaining about the system and then turn aroudn and say "hey I had to lift my finger to press a button on my keyboard, therefore it's not an exploit".
I do not think it means what you think it means. Standing inside of a pillar so the boss cannot attack you is an exploit. Changing the hull and shields of ships to 1 point so they can all be one shot is an exploit. Increasing the concussive force radius of warp core breach is an exploit. Modifying basic weapons so they can be fired from more than 10 km, well outside normal firing range of all vessels is an exploit. Circumventing the starting timer to begin at objectives for Azure Nebula Rescue or Colony Invasion is an exploit.

Utilizing standard warp core breach after DPSing shields and hull to zero to further damage other enemy ships in an armada of mysteriously abandoned vessels is not an exploit. Racing through a quick Boarding Party mission to access the appropriate consoles is not an exploit. Even clicking on the panel outside the transporter room on ESD three times before the change was still not an exploit. It is acceptable use of standard game mechanics.
All cloaks should be canon.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 517
# 27
01-31-2013, 12:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloctoad View Post
I do not think it means what you think it means.
'Round these parts "exploit" means "missions I don't like." Who are you with your well defined terms, sir?
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 314
# 28
01-31-2013, 01:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloctoad View Post
I do not think it means what you think it means. Standing inside of a pillar so the boss cannot attack you is an exploit. Changing the hull and shields of ships to 1 point so they can all be one shot is an exploit. Increasing the concussive force radius of warp core breach is an exploit. Modifying basic weapons so they can be fired from more than 10 km, well outside normal firing range of all vessels is an exploit. Circumventing the starting timer to begin at objectives for Azure Nebula Rescue or Colony Invasion is an exploit.

Utilizing standard warp core breach after DPSing shields and hull to zero to further damage other enemy ships in an armada of mysteriously abandoned vessels is not an exploit. Racing through a quick Boarding Party mission to access the appropriate consoles is not an exploit. Even clicking on the panel outside the transporter room on ESD three times before the change was still not an exploit. It is acceptable use of standard game mechanics.
Just because a game mechanic allows something to happen does not mean it was designed for that purpose. I would never dilude myself into thinking that the devs intended for us to single-click our way to rich rewards, or fight unarmed, defenseless vessels for super-fast loot, thus racing through content intended to make us spend more time in game (i.e., dilithium/fleet mark sinks).

Using game mechanics in ways not intended by the developer is indeed an exploit. I've seen this same argument in too many games -- and the same responses from the developers in said games -- to see it any differently.

That said, it is up to the devs to respond and define things accordingly after a potential exploit is reported. If they don't address it, then they don't consider it an exploit.

If the Foundry authors are indeed as insignificant a group as you seem to think they are, the devs would not be swayed by them. They'd stick by what was making *them* the most profit. Apparently, turkey-shoot grinders do not meet that criteria.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 592
# 29
01-31-2013, 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadnax View Post
*snip*.
What he said basically. Look while it is true, it sucks alot when the top rated missions are not story driven ones at all but just battlefests. Granted, I would say if there wasnt a segment of the population that liked that sort of thing, they wouldnt be there in the first place, so I can live with that aspect. the problem comes in though, when you have a mechanic being used to 'game' the system and basically create a massive Zimbabwe style economic system where a currency that already has poor buying power gets worse, and worse still, floods the market with goods. THIS is most likely the aspect of the whole thing that cryptic listened to the most.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 622
# 30
01-31-2013, 02:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadnax View Post
Just because a game mechanic allows something to happen does not mean it was designed for that purpose. I would never dilude myself into thinking that the devs intended for us to single-click our way to rich rewards, or fight unarmed, defenseless vessels for super-fast loot, thus racing through content intended to make us spend more time in game (i.e., dilithium/fleet mark sinks).

Using game mechanics in ways not intended by the developer is indeed an exploit. I've seen this same argument in too many games -- and the same responses from the developers in said games -- to see it any differently.

That said, it is up to the devs to respond and define things accordingly after a potential exploit is reported. If they don't address it, then they don't consider it an exploit.

If the Foundry authors are indeed as insignificant a group as you seem to think they are, the devs would not be swayed by them. They'd stick by what was making *them* the most profit. Apparently, turkey-shoot grinders do not meet that criteria.
You still misunderstand the definition of exploit. Every mission met the criteria for which Cryptic set forth. Missions were designed by players using Cryptic's own mission design parameters. Missions must be completed in order to receive credit for Officer Reports. Missions were completed and nowhere in those missions were exploits used. See my previous post to review examples of actual exploits. As a result of much community angst, Cryptic changed the criteria then changed a specific aspect of their own mechanic much as Blizzard would retune an easier encounter to be more difficult.

Whether or not you like those missions or the overall difficulty of those missions has no bearing on their validity. There is an effective cap on useful dilithium per day so the dilithium argument fails. There is an effective benchmark for minimum foundry mission time and also a benchmark for minimum completion time for fleet projects so the fleet mark argument fails. Any market flooded with goods will see a decrease in price as supply outbalances demand so the energy credit argument also fails.

I do challenge you, however, to quote where I state foundry authors could be considered an insignificant group. I do not believe you will be successful in locating such a sentiment. On the contrary, Cryptic would be mightily swayed by the opinion of specific foundry authors as you are creating supplimental content to ease their development burden and are doing so for zero remuneration.
All cloaks should be canon.
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 03:08 AM.