Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,180
# 61
04-01-2013, 06:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kadieras View Post
The thing I'd like to know most about those who are upset and happy are how many of those upset are planning on being Romulan mains, and how many of those happy are FED/KDF simply planning on making a ROM alt?
Why does that matter?
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 140
# 62
04-01-2013, 06:26 PM
Someone who's simply making an alt would most likely love the Alliance system because they could care less about the Romulans they just want something new and shiny. Those however, who plan on playing Romulans exclusively would probably have a much different reaction and it's THOSE people who are more likely to make or break the longevity of a functional Romulan faction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tpalelena View Post
Why does that matter?
Like the Romulan Alliance System? Of course you do, it sounds fine to you because you aren't Romulans, you're FED or KDF who are going to make a Romulan alt, it makes a HUGE difference in perspective.
Ensign
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 15
# 63
04-01-2013, 06:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpalelena View Post
Why does that matter?
It matters becaus if you don't want to start a romulan...the way cryptic will design them is irrelevant for you

stupid analogy:

The government want to raise the tax for dogs. But if you have no dogs....you don't care or will fight against the rise because it doesn't concern you. In the common attitude you don't care if it rise or not. It means neutral. But in reality you were not really thinking about it because you have no dogs.

i hope you understood my analogy
Captain
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,223
# 64
04-01-2013, 06:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by linyive View Post
If I were in Cryptic's position, I would try to work on player unity. I would not post anything in which would keep the division growing. Legacy of Romulus has great potential. Even though it may have started out on rocky information, the road ahead can only lead to good things.
[/i]
If I were in Cryptic's position, I'd nuke the entire forum other than official Cryptic releases, the bug report section, and patch notes. It might actually be somewhat useful then.

The last couple weeks have been a total embarrassment. Way too many people here clearly need adult supervision in order to be allowed access to the internet, and I feel for Brandon and the community moderators having to wade through the immense amount of gibberish this place has been responsible for lately.
--------------------------------------

"We are smart." - Grebnedlog

Member of Alliance Central Command/boq botlhra'ghom
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,045
# 65
04-01-2013, 06:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pakimpar View Post
It matters becaus if you don't want to start a romulan...the way cryptic will design them is irrelevant for you

stupid analogy:

The government want to raise the tax for dogs. But if you have no dogs....you don't care or will fight against the rise because it doesn't concern you. In the common attitude you don't care if it rise or not. It means neutral. But in reality you were not really thinking about it because you have no dogs.

i hope you understood my analogy
Yes, that is a good analogy.

I guess I can see how Romulan purists (for lack of a better term) might not like the alliance system. But if they want to play as the scheming, manipulative Romulans from TNG, the only Romulan group in STO who still acts like that is the Tal Shiar. And since they've aligned themselves with the Iconians, I don't think they would work as a playable faction.

I think the proposed system (as I understand it so far) is a good one, at least as a start. But I'll reserve further judgement until we get more dev blogs addressing individual concerns and topics.
Say NO to mandatory Arc!
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,180
# 66
04-01-2013, 06:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pakimpar View Post
It matters becaus if you don't want to start a romulan...the way cryptic will design them is irrelevant for you

stupid analogy:

The government want to raise the tax for dogs. But if you have no dogs....you don't care or will fight against the rise because it doesn't concern you. In the common attitude you don't care if it rise or not. It means neutral. But in reality you were not really thinking about it because you have no dogs.

i hope you understood my analogy

Would that not be a player who does not play them at all?

Making an alt is more like getting a dog, while you already have a cat.

And the Federation-allied romulans really work well the role-play my fleet has.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 424
# 67
04-01-2013, 07:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoleviathan99 View Post
I'm saying I think she was probably pretty quick to make that assumption about posts that were actually on topic. And if you're going to throw those posts out, throw them out of the percentage ranking. Which means that people's posts are, by volume, 14% positive about the expansion, 41% neutral, and 45% negative.

Now, even allowing that negative posters post 85% more often than positive posters... We don't know how often neutral posters reply in response to the other two groups. But lets adjust for posting frequency on the positive side.

Here's the basic methodology:

Start off assuming 14 positive, 45 negative, and 41 neutral posts in a 100 post sample.

Adjust up the number of positive by 85% to allow for lower posting frequency.

You now have 26 positive, 45 negative, 41 neutral.

That brings the numbers around to:

40% negative. 23% positive. 37% neutral.

Now, yes, that means either way that negative posters are the minority. But the minority (especially a 40% one) is not strategically insignificant. It's not "break out the cake and to heck with the haters." It's serious sleeve rolling, coffee brewing, and pacing around the whiteboard time. And I'm sure they're already doing that but probably need to look at doing it more if 40% of your target for a free product is turned off by it.

I LIKE Cryptic's plan for the expansion overall. I like the ideas I'm seeing. I think it all stems from a good place, a place of creativity applied to dealing with challenges in game design. But I think that if they don't consider a few major changes, this is going to be a disappointment for them. The hole in the bucket is bigger than previously thought and it's time to get some really creative, adaptive brainstorming in, to let the criticism in and take it honestly and use it constructively. I don't expect Cryptic can just bend over backwards for every critic but I think these kinds of numbers really, really suggest the need for feedback and critical re-examination... and if they listen to Terilynn's dismissively calm take on this, they're going to wind up with a bruised lip and black eye in three months, taking a lot of this back to the drawing board.

If they treat it like an emergency now, it will save them money. You don't say:

- "Good news! My wife is only 40% sure she's going to divorce me!"
- "The doctor only gives me a 40% chance it's cancer!"
- "Revenue is down by a negligible 40% this quarter!"

You grit your teeth. You say, "We've got 60% we can work with." And you set out to understand, conquer, and convert as much of that remaining 40% that you can, while trying to electrify that 37% that's saying, "Meh. It's okay." (Because that's not great either.)
Positive 107/407 ~= 26.3%
Negative 183/407 ~= 45%
Neutral 117/407 ~= 28.7%

So slightly under double for all the categories, or what's to be expected when you remove a little under 50% of the data [with the largest of the remaining category gaining the leftover share]. However, when the topic at hand is determining a rage thread. I do believe the off-topic numbers are relevant. Of course it is worth noting that most threads contain content that is vastly off-topic, so it's important to realize that when you start considering "wow that thread got busy fast", without appreciating that the largest segment of that content is banal and largely driven by a very small number of people actually posting in the thread.

As for adjusting with posting frequency ,that's really not how you should do it, as you're not normalizing the entire set. You're simply apply the difference between Positive and Negative occurences to the positive population, while leaving neutral unadjusted (we shouldn't assume neutral is 1:1). Also, you're really running risks of introducing rounding errors when doing adjustments like that, would really be better off working with the raw numbers up until the point you're trying to present the total.

For academic purposes, even of we removed the neutral population from the equation, you're left with a (107/289) 37% Positive / (183/289) 64% negative on posts. However, if we just consider by accounts. You are left with (75/146) 51% Positive / (71/146) 49% Negative. However, I would maintain this as purely academic, as removing the neutral population is a disservice.

All that said, I'm just going to repeat what I wrote here earlier in that I feel that off-topic is still important and relevant to the goal of showing what the thread actually contained. And perhaps an interesting reflection on how large threads become larger threads.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 113
# 68
04-01-2013, 07:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by linyive View Post
Terilynn Shull is just attacking the players in which carry a difference in opinion.




*shrugs*

If I were in Cryptic's position, I would try to work on player unity. I would not post anything in which would keep the division growing. Legacy of Romulus has great potential. Even though it may have started out on rocky information, the road ahead can only lead to good things.

This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Perfect World Entertainment Community Rules and Policies . ~BranFlakes
Anyone else see the irony here?
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 312
# 69
04-01-2013, 07:27 PM
You know I can understand why Branflakes may be bummed in regards to the reaction, maybe not everyone can handle themselves in a mature manner when giving feedback. I still feel there is some truth to the negative feedback and I feel that is primarily that we were given this image of something we are not getting at launch.

Ok so Stahl says it might be later, but that's not the impression I got. I know some people say it makes sense for the Romulans not being able to stand on their own and while I agree with that, I don't think it justifies the lack of reliable information in regards to the expansion. I was excited about having a Romulan fleet and starbase; I personally would have made it so that the alliance still happens but on a fleet scale. So you get your Romulan fleet started and choose your side in the alliance and then you share a fleet interface with either a KDF or FED fleet where you can contribute to their projects and they can help you by contributing to yours to get your first Romulan Base / HQ / Starbase w/e built.

This would have made more sense to me personally, maybe they'll allow the Romulan characters in your fleet to do that later on. Aside from that I'm really excited to play a Romulan and try out the warbirds. I hope in time it does move to more factions that are completely separate.


"We're doing it wrong, but it's working...."
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,031
# 70
04-01-2013, 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pakimpar View Post
The discussion about whether the majority is positive or negative is not helpful.
Both sides are big enough to be considered.
We should put our energy into possible solutions instead playing civil war.

my possible solutions

1.) if klingons are not profitable for the devs ...why not try kickstarter..this is the best plattform to solve this problem

2.) Do the "Choose your side"-Thing, but not let Romulans fly alliance ships and vice versa only as a temporary solution until you made enough content for the romulans and then break the bonds to the alliance and make them a full 100 % independent fraction....like development help from the industrialized countries until they are fit enough to stand alone.

3.) Make a real thrird fraction with less content like the klings at launch and deliver content through patches

It is easy to complain or defend the policy of cryptic....it is better to mediate and contribute solutions
Frankly, I think you could have a much fuller Romulan faction with a few changes. The main things are to give Romulans Featured episode text which gives them enough missions for 1-50 and more ship builds.

From there, the issues are PvP and starbases. PvP needs a full overhaul anyway and I personally think starbases are too difficult for Klingons or any smaller faction and what would be ideal there is to let people form out of character fleet clusters of Romulan, Klingon, and Federation that share overall starbase XP and tier but not any of the subcategories.

The remaining issue is DOff assignments.

In this case, Cryptic is so close to a full faction that I can see where they may eventually face pressure to finish the job... Although I suspect if they go that route, it wouldy probably mean no more factions, ever.
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 02:53 AM.