2.5/5 so far for DB on serious issues - That is progress

[SSR] GTMET

Over the last few months there have been what I would call 5 major issues upsetting/angering people.

1. AND shuttle issue
2. Polywater Yar
3. Skirmish event bonus structure
4. Anti -macro support
5. CS and quality issues

In the last week, we have seen DB resolve 2 of these in a very positive way (Polywater and Skirmish), make no clear progress on 2 (AND shuttle investigation and Anti-macros) and some early signs of progress on the last (CS/Quality issues).

I would like to say thank you, that I appreciate the progress made on these issues, it is personally going a good way to addressing some of my concerns and frustration. Please keep up the good work and address Macro and AND shuttle issues and demonstrate some real changes on quality issues. As they say, its a good start, but this is one case where follow through on ALL these top issues are what is needed to really restore faith.

JeanLucKirk

Personally the shuttle AND issue you bring up very often was no issue for me - playingwise. After having learned what is needed in a shuttle event and after having build up a strong enough crew for events like these when I wanted to make Top 1000 I never failed in making it. Before and after a possible stealth fix to the way shuttles work in events.

From another angle this is a problem though for sure. Cause when STT came to life Jon Radoff said DB is supposed to be different from other mobile game companies, transparency is one of the top priorities. And well, DB is not really transparent in this issue.

The bonus structure in Skirmishes I see different. The way they were meant to be is not the way they are now, but indeed even with bonus crew needing to match traits as well to get the full bonus. Since the interface for selecting crew **tsk tsk** for that taking back their original plans is a good choice for the moment. But when a new UI is ready one day I would definitely prefer their original plans. Cause it would not equalize the playing field, but give certain advantages to players with a deep crew.

Anti macro measures agree completely, concerning events the best human effort shall win, not the best macros.

With the other points I would suggest to lower your expectations - sadly. When CS is outsourced and not always perfectly briefed problems will occur. Also when a small team has to deliver a wagonload of work more problems and mistakes will come up. These things could only change when the revenue flow will become better and more staff can be recruited.

Maybe you know that DB has some open office space. Would this game be a monster hit the solution would be simple: Make support, translations etc. internal. But for that more income is needed...

[TFA] Commodore Wizzlestix

The problem with Jon Radoff saying DB would be different, open, transparent, etc, etc, is that that is what all owners/CEOs/politicians say. They're easy words to say, easy high-sounding buzz words to kick around and they mean absolutely nothing.

Sometimes DB seems to make a few small steps forward and then it's straight back to same old same old. If I was a solo player I'd have left long ago. I stay because I'm proud of my fleet even though we don't push as hard as we used to. Camaraderie is what keeps me here.

Female Klingon Q

While I am hardly the biggest DB booster on this fora, I would hasten to point out another thing that DB has done well lately.

There were proactive in realizing that people were likely to get VERY upset about voyage exclusive crew dropping more than once, and were proactive in rectifying the situation for people that invested honor in crew that they thought were never going to drop again (like me).

[TFA] Commodore Wizzlestix

Ah yes, I believe the term is "damage control".

Dirk Gunderson

Female Klingon Q wrote: »

While I am hardly the biggest DB booster on this fora, I would hasten to point out another thing that DB has done well lately.

There were proactive in realizing that people were likely to get VERY upset about voyage exclusive crew dropping more than once, and were proactive in rectifying the situation for people that invested honor in crew that they thought were never going to drop again (like me).

I wouldn’t call making a change after roughly a year “proactive”...they were thoughtful, however, and that is something to remember if only to appreciate the rarity of such an occurrence.

Pallidyne

Dirk Gunderson wrote: »

Female Klingon Q wrote: »

While I am hardly the biggest DB booster on this fora, I would hasten to point out another thing that DB has done well lately.

There were proactive in realizing that people were likely to get VERY upset about voyage exclusive crew dropping more than once, and were proactive in rectifying the situation for people that invested honor in crew that they thought were never going to drop again (like me).

I wouldn’t call making a change after roughly a year “proactive”...they were thoughtful, however, and that is something to remember if only to appreciate the rarity of such an occurrence.

They were referring to the honor given to folks as compensation when the change was made, not the change itself.

That was done fairly proactively, anticipating some rage and defusing most if not all of it.

[SSR] GTMET

Pallidyne wrote: »

Dirk Gunderson wrote: »

Female Klingon Q wrote: »

While I am hardly the biggest DB booster on this fora, I would hasten to point out another thing that DB has done well lately.

There were proactive in realizing that people were likely to get VERY upset about voyage exclusive crew dropping more than once, and were proactive in rectifying the situation for people that invested honor in crew that they thought were never going to drop again (like me).

I wouldn’t call making a change after roughly a year “proactive”...they were thoughtful, however, and that is something to remember if only to appreciate the rarity of such an occurrence.

They were referring to the honor given to folks as compensation when the change was made, not the change itself.

That was done fairly proactively, anticipating some rage and defusing most if not all of it.

Agreed that this was a nice pro-active improvement, and a step in the right direction