Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 810
# 621
02-15-2013, 10:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr4v1t4r View Post
How is that unfair? Should the players in smaller fleets get less rewards for their work? Because currently they do, you keep ignoring the fact that members of small fleets have to do *more* for the same rewards. Ergo, the return on investment is far worse then in larger fleets, scaling down so the rewards on investment would *not* be unfair to you, it would be fair for those in smaller fleets...
It is not necessary to scale down fleet starbases for small fleets. However I think it IS necessary to create a fleet-like mechanic for small fleets. I posted this earlier. Call them Squadrons. Classify a squadron as an association of players ranging in size from five to twenty-five players. Give the Squadron Holdings that work like fleet holdings and take a long time to progress through but with fleet mark and dilithium costs that are in line with five to twenty-five players.

If a squadron achieves a full compliment of 25 members, and wishes to grow beyond that, the option to upgrade to Fleet status would be available. But at that point, Squadron holdings are not available. When an upgrade happens, all Fleet marks and Dilithium that were put into advancing a squadron holding gets moved to the a Fleet Holding escrow. It may be contributed to fleet holding projects. The newly commissioned FLEET can have its holdings advanced as far as these resources will allow. Commodities and DOff personnel that were contributed to a squadron holding do not transfer over. Just the contributed Dilithium and Fleet Marks. I would say that A Tier 5 Squadron Holding could translate to a Tier 1 and change Fleet holding.

Consideration should be given to players who, for whatever reason, do not wish to be a part of a large fleet, or wish to grow a full fleet on their own but are having a hard time. An option to get in on the advancement of holdings should be there, even if limited to small, single-purpose facilities.
I personally want a Star Trek game that is actually Star Trek. On a qualitative level that could be a lot of different things for a lot of different people. But on a quantitative level, if the developers were to watch star trek and make the game like what they see, then at least it will be a shot in the right direction, as far as I am concerned.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 186
# 622
02-15-2013, 10:31 AM
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet does more PER MEMBER than the larger fleet.
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet spends more time in game PER MEMBER than the large fleet
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet is more potential profit than the large fleet

Simple logic says, design to the small fleet, and Cap fleet size at a much smaller number

The exploit, is the large fleet. Stop the exploit.

no matter how you spin it the fact is a small fleet does more per active member, meaning more potential for profit. The problem isn't the small fleet, its the fleets exploiting size to trivialize the efforts needed to get to the next tier.

5400 marks, 348K Dil for a T3 upgrade *(leaving out the consumables)
10 man fleet =540 marks per man, 34.8K dil per man
100 man fleet =54 marks per man 3.48 dil per man

Clearly the smaller fleet does more per member meaning more potential for profit, it takes them longer, they must be in the game more than the 100 man fleet, they're much more valuable than the 100 man fleet,

9 Fleet actions and 5 days of max Dil refine Vs 1 Fleet action, and one day of doff grind

You are valuing the wrong group.

Stop the exploit, stop the large fleet.
Career Officer
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 622
# 623
02-15-2013, 10:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by marc8219 View Post
If I have a million Dilithium or a 1000 fm on hand(which sometimes I do have even more of at times) and its enough to finish a project on my own, I should be able to contribute it and finish that project regardless if I am in a large or small fleet. If I was able to take those same resources and be able to use it to finish a project in a small fleet but if I donated the same amount in my fleet and the project didn't get finished due to some silly scaling requirement I would be very angry and so would many of my other fleet mates.
*Puts on Devil's Advocate hat*

Sure, but according to you your fleet has 500 people to cntribute. Really shouldn't be a problem to advance. Even my fleet at 100+ wouldn't have too big an issue.

Now for the smaller fleets, it would be a problem (and that may depend on the definition of "small fleet."

Cryptic says it's system was designed around a fleet of 25 people. Your fleet can get things done faster since it has 500. Your fleet is at an advantage because more people than what the system was designed for can contribute. Should the 25 man fleets continue to suffer becasue they are playing within the system?


And no I'm not asking for a nerf. I don't want to suffer the same wrath the Foundry authors did yesterday
Most JJ Trek hate = IDIC fail.
Quote:
Most who don't like the new Star Trek either didn't like TOS, don't remember TOS, or didn't see TOS

Last edited by lordagamemnonb5; 02-15-2013 at 10:36 AM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 221
# 624
02-15-2013, 10:35 AM
As far as the small fleet vs large fleet debate goes pricing for a project shouldn't matter large or small.

If a group of people went in to buy a gallon of milk, should they get charged more than the single person that goes in? Or would they get charged the same.

The prices/resources are set. If your in a 5 person fleet, you have to know your going to have to grind 2x as much as a 10 person fleet to finish the same project.

A scale/sliding system won't work because there are those that would abuse it. All you have to do is keep your numbers low until the base is finished, rotating members in and out. Then when its done bring everyone into the fold.

They should have set a larger minimum limit on starting a base. Like 15 or 20 people.

One way to help is introducing some sort of allies system where smaller fleets can band together for the larger fleet events.(Even though they s**k so bad.)
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,449
# 625
02-15-2013, 10:40 AM
I've read through the thread.

First, I want to reiterate what I said yesterday when I said that iterative, production oriented, and technology driven is the wrong approach.

Second, in case it got buried in there...

Cryptic should STOP replacing bad or malfunctioning designs out whenever they come up with a better design. From a design perspective, again, the new design is better and would have been a coherent design IF IT HAD LAUNCHED FIRST. Does that mean you don't tweak anything or change anything ever? No. Of course not.

But get outside of the design mentality. Think about what makes sense as a progression from where you are.

It's not a challenge unique to game design. It's present in just about every business environment.

If you come up with a better business model mid-stream, switching to it is a bad approach for the customer relationship. You find ways of tweaking the existing situation or phasing in that new business model.

STOP REPLACING WHAT YOU HAVE WITH BETTER ON-PAPER DESIGNS.

Cryptic needs to focus on marketing (the product development side: customer satisfaction development, in-house marketing), engagement, and transition management.

Frankly, I think you need a marketing person whose job is to provide the consumer experience perspective with veto power at all meetings. It's not a task that should be a split focus for Al, Dan, Jack, Zero, etc. Absolutely, you need everyone thinking about it but I think you need someone whose primary job is to study, develop, and think about the customer experience...

And they need to have veto power when this stuff is on the whiteboard. "Good design isn't everything if we can't plan a good rollout for it. A design is only as good as its rollout method." And they need to be able to veto iterative adjustments. So that when somebody says, "I'm not sure about this direction anymore" you have somebody who says, "No. We're not dropping this."

Until Cryptic can provide that, it's going to be one or more of these blowups every quarter like clockwork.
Career Officer
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 622
# 626
02-15-2013, 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebumble View Post
As far as the small fleet vs large fleet debate goes pricing for a project shouldn't matter large or small.

If a group of people went in to buy a gallon of milk, should they get charged more than the single person that goes in? Or would they get charged the same.

The prices/resources are set. If your in a 5 person fleet, you have to know your going to have to grind 2x as much as a 10 person fleet to finish the same project.

A scale/sliding system won't work because there are those that would abuse it. All you have to do is keep your numbers low until the base is finished, rotating members in and out. Then when its done bring everyone into the fold.

They should have set a larger minimum limit on starting a base. Like 15 or 20 people.

One way to help is introducing some sort of allies system where smaller fleets can band together for the larger fleet events.(Even though they s**k so bad.)

A limit may have helped avert some of the backlash. If your system is designed for a 25 man fleet, make it so you can't begin a Starbase until that number is met. Keep the resource requirements as they are so you can't ditch members to grind smaller requirements.

Maybe even have some type of system where you have squadrons as part of larger fleets; if you want to only play with a certain group of people, form a squadron and affiliate with a fleet. Of course, you would need rules as to what you can buy and what you can contribute, but it's a start.
Most JJ Trek hate = IDIC fail.
Quote:
Most who don't like the new Star Trek either didn't like TOS, don't remember TOS, or didn't see TOS
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,205
# 627
02-15-2013, 10:42 AM
So, time to step up Devs.

Hundreds of posts later, almost universally panning the decision.

Its time to give us an answer.

Will you be sorting this sorry debacle out very quickly...or will you simply ignore us all.

Your cash flow will depend on your answer.....and silence will not help either.

Indeed, the longer you remain silent, the more people will assume that you simply dont care.
Republic Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 512
# 628
02-15-2013, 10:43 AM
is it too late for a hobbit joke?

http://memecreator.eu/media/created/wt1jqf.jpg

Anyway, I have to say as far as people in larger fleets not complaining. It could also be that many people in large fleets are not complaining because most of them rarely donate as it is. They may donate a little here and there just to reach the level where they are allowed to purchase items from the fleet base. Beyond that, they see no reason to donate. They figure with so many other people in the fleet that their lack of donating won't really matter. In a way, that's true. The reason why smaller fleets are up in arms about this is that with a smaller fleet, people are expected to contribute more. There is no getting lost in the shuffle of a big fleet there. If your fleet has just 10 members, each member is expected to pitch in and if they don't want to, maybe they do belong in a larger fleet where they can just sleep through most of the hard stuff, yet still reap the rewards. Some people have told me that they all have thresholds that people must reach before they are allowed to purchase fleet items. Some of them are as small as 50k in contributions. That is not very hard to reach. In fact, just from the fleet marks one of my characters has I can pass that number in just a few donations. Given that i can do that, what is my motivation to keep contributing? There is none because in all likelihood I would never ascend to a leadership role in a fleet with several hundred member. Heck, I have been in a fleet where I was top 5 in contributions, but I was never looked at for a leadership spot because I didn't know the right people.

If you really think about it, this sounds an awful lot like the corporate world. Most people that get the promotions and the better jobs often have an inside track. To me, that feels so wrong. It basically means that no matter how hard I work I will probably never get to the top because I am not friends with the right people. This is why many of us choose to remain small because it feels more like a family and less like Office Space.

By coming out and saying that they are purposely making it harder on smaller fleets is their way of telling us that Wal Mart is going to swallow your mom and pop business and there is nothing you can do about it. The saddest thing about all this is that we can do something about it, but "God" won't listen. They've made up their mind and they don't care who they anger. This is their way of saying "It's our way or the highway."
_______________________________
To answer your question, yes. - @Executive_Emily - I have a Website? Oh, yeah! I do.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,145
# 629
02-15-2013, 10:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyuui13 View Post
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet does more PER MEMBER than the larger fleet.
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet spends more time in game PER MEMBER than the large fleet
Simple math tells us the smaller fleet is more potential profit than the large fleet

Simple logic says, design to the small fleet, and Cap fleet size at a much smaller number

The exploit, is the large fleet. Stop the exploit.

no matter how you spin it the fact is a small fleet does more per active member, meaning more potential for profit. The problem isn't the small fleet, its the fleets exploiting size to trivialize the efforts needed to get to the next tier.

5400 marks, 348K Dil for a T3 upgrade *(leaving out the consumables)
10 man fleet =540 marks per man, 34.8K dil per man
100 man fleet =54 marks per man 3.48 dil per man

Clearly the smaller fleet does more per member meaning more potential for profit, it takes them longer, they must be in the game more than the 100 man fleet, they're much more valuable than the 100 man fleet,

9 Fleet actions and 5 days of max Dil refine Vs 1 Fleet action, and one day of doff grind

You are valuing the wrong group.

Stop the exploit, stop the large fleet.
where are your numbers for this simple math?

Do you even realize how many Fleet ships module sales my Fleet generates for cryptic compared to yours? Since we are able to advance our shipyard quickly, most people in my fleet own lots of fleet ships, and outsiders are sometimes able to make arrangements to join temporarily to get fleet ships. I myself own 9 fleet ships on my account, some people in my fleet own even more. You aren't likely to buy all the modules for that without unlocking high tier shipyard.

We don't need to use up all of our dil like you do either. So who do you think is grinding that dil out to sell to you on the dil exchange. Dil being put on exchange causes people to buy zen, that is also more sales for cryptic.


You fail to point out how just because each member of your small fleet has to indiviually work harder that is more profit for cryptic.

If anything your fleet is a drain on server resources compared to mine, the server has to use the same resources to generate an instance for your fleet holdings and mine, and has to use same resources to store that data. If everyone was in large fleets they might not even have to instance all our holdings and we could have persistent holdings like in other MMOs.

Maybe there should be a fleet maintenance fee to help discourage excessive fleet spam.

Last edited by marc8219; 02-15-2013 at 10:45 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,465
# 630
02-15-2013, 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by marc8219 View Post
where are your numbers for this simple math?

Do you even realize how many Fleet ships module sales my Fleet generates for cryptic compared to yours? Since we are able to advance our shipyard quickly, most people in my fleet own lots of fleet ships, and outsiders are sometimes able to make arrangements to join temporarily to get fleet ships. I myself own 9 fleet ships on my account, some people in my fleet own even more. You aren't likely to buy all the modules for that without unlocking high tier shipyard.

We don't need to use up all of our dil like you do either. So who do you think is grinding that dil out to sell to you on the dil exchange. Dil being put on exchange causes people to buy zen, that is also more sales for cryptic.


You fail to point out how just because each member of your small fleet has to indiviually work harder that is more profit for cryptic.

If anything your fleet is a drain on server resources compared to mine, the server has to use the same resources to generate an instance for your fleet holdings and mine, and has to use same resources to stare that data. If everyone was in large fleets they might not even have to instance all our holdings and we could have persistent holdings like in other MMOs.

Maybe there should be a fleet maintenance fee to help discourage excessive fleet spam.
..........

And here I thought I'd already seen the most arrogant, self-centered, elitist and delusional post of the day...
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 04:07 AM.