But then to change the missions on a re-run with no prior notice about it
They change the crew, they change the thresholds, they change the max number of shuttles... why would you assume they wouldn't change the mission details too?
I don't bother reviewing the wiki (or my own notes) for details about the re-runs. For me, the "re-run" just means another chance at the crew list. If you just play the event as it lays, you won't be disappointed by deviations from past incarnations.
I wonder if you would be singing from the same hymn sheet if they changed the kickstart so that you can only open one mission and send out a time, thus eliminating kick start completely "due to lag." It's one thing to be expect changes pre-warning of these changes wouldn't go amiss. To constantly expect rug pulling changes makes for a rather unhappy playing experience. DB have history of change first, communicate later. Whilst I applaud consistency no one likes a sloppy goo consistency.
[was on Sabbatical/Hiatus] Currently a trialist at Galaxy SquadronSTAY SAFE and KBO
Interesting discussion, this. I was trying to get Troi, or at least the premium pull, not trying so hard that I set timers during the night but I often wake up a few times anyway, so I don't think that much time was wasted, crew is not great but not too bad, and my strategy not perfect, but seeing the various advice here I don't think it was too far off either.
Results: I didn't even get to the voyage revival token. I think it was a good idea to raise the threshold, but I agree with those who have said that Troi should have been 200k, or maybe 300k. It is discouraging to put in significant effort, not just during the event but also in preparing for it, and not reach the threshold goal. Not ranking top 1k or even top 3k is much easier to accept, in my opinion, because that only means that others put in even more effort or had better luck.
But then to change the missions on a re-run with no prior notice about it
They change the crew, they change the thresholds, they change the max number of shuttles... why would you assume they wouldn't change the mission details too?
I don't bother reviewing the wiki (or my own notes) for details about the re-runs. For me, the "re-run" just means another chance at the crew list. If you just play the event as it lays, you won't be disappointed by deviations from past incarnations.
I wonder if you would be singing from the same hymn sheet if they changed the kickstart so that you can only open one mission and send out a time, thus eliminating kick start completely "due to lag." It's one thing to be expect changes pre-warning of these changes wouldn't go amiss. To constantly expect rug pulling changes makes for a rather unhappy playing experience. DB have history of change first, communicate later. Whilst I applaud consistency no one likes a sloppy goo consistency.
As bad as that would be for the kickstart, I think the pitchforks would come out more for the inability to look at multiple missions and ensure that all four have the highest success rate rather than using crew for slots where they end up being less efficient (burning Klingon Janeway on a SEC-only slot, then having a SEC/SCI or SEC/COM slot come up in a subsequent mission, for example).
But then to change the missions on a re-run with no prior notice about it
They change the crew, they change the thresholds, they change the max number of shuttles... why would you assume they wouldn't change the mission details too?
I don't bother reviewing the wiki (or my own notes) for details about the re-runs. For me, the "re-run" just means another chance at the crew list. If you just play the event as it lays, you won't be disappointed by deviations from past incarnations.
I wonder if you would be singing from the same hymn sheet if they changed the kickstart so that you can only open one mission and send out a time, thus eliminating kick start completely "due to lag." It's one thing to be expect changes pre-warning of these changes wouldn't go amiss. To constantly expect rug pulling changes makes for a rather unhappy playing experience. DB have history of change first, communicate later. Whilst I applaud consistency no one likes a sloppy goo consistency.
As bad as that would be for the kickstart, I think the pitchforks would come out more for the inability to look at multiple missions and ensure that all four have the highest success rate rather than using crew for slots where they end up being less efficient (burning Klingon Janeway on a SEC-only slot, then having a SEC/SCI or SEC/COM slot come up in a subsequent mission, for example).
Darn there goes my random generated skills mission idea for shuttle events, I was about to make that thread in the make it so area.
[was on Sabbatical/Hiatus] Currently a trialist at Galaxy SquadronSTAY SAFE and KBO
But then to change the missions on a re-run with no prior notice about it
They change the crew, they change the thresholds, they change the max number of shuttles... why would you assume they wouldn't change the mission details too?
I don't bother reviewing the wiki (or my own notes) for details about the re-runs. For me, the "re-run" just means another chance at the crew list. If you just play the event as it lays, you won't be disappointed by deviations from past incarnations.
I wonder if you would be singing from the same hymn sheet if they changed the kickstart so that you can only open one mission and send out a time, thus eliminating kick start completely "due to lag." It's one thing to be expect changes pre-warning of these changes wouldn't go amiss. To constantly expect rug pulling changes makes for a rather unhappy playing experience. DB have history of change first, communicate later. Whilst I applaud consistency no one likes a sloppy goo consistency.
As bad as that would be for the kickstart, I think the pitchforks would come out more for the inability to look at multiple missions and ensure that all four have the highest success rate rather than using crew for slots where they end up being less efficient (burning Klingon Janeway on a SEC-only slot, then having a SEC/SCI or SEC/COM slot come up in a subsequent mission, for example).
Darn there goes my random generated skills mission idea for shuttle events, I was about to make that thread in the make it so area.
I think it could work as long as we can open at least four missions at once, again to ensure optimum crew allocation.
Results: I didn't even get to the voyage revival token. I think it was a good idea to raise the threshold, but I agree with those who have said that Troi should have been 200k, or maybe 300k. It is discouraging to put in significant effort, not just during the event but also in preparing for it, and not reach the threshold goal. Not ranking top 1k or even top 3k is much easier to accept, in my opinion, because that only means that others put in even more effort or had better luck.
I'm the opposite, it is easier to hit a stationary target than a moving one... You can plan for it and do some maths to get an idea what it would take and based on that decide wether to go for it or not. Going for rank means most often just 'all in' type of push and hoping for the best.
Captain Lvl 99; Vip0; 552 Unique Immortals; Fleet: Omega Molecules; Base Lvl 134 (MAX); Playing Since March 2016.
Comments
I wonder if you would be singing from the same hymn sheet if they changed the kickstart so that you can only open one mission and send out a time, thus eliminating kick start completely "due to lag." It's one thing to be expect changes pre-warning of these changes wouldn't go amiss. To constantly expect rug pulling changes makes for a rather unhappy playing experience. DB have history of change first, communicate later. Whilst I applaud consistency no one likes a sloppy goo consistency.
Results: I didn't even get to the voyage revival token. I think it was a good idea to raise the threshold, but I agree with those who have said that Troi should have been 200k, or maybe 300k. It is discouraging to put in significant effort, not just during the event but also in preparing for it, and not reach the threshold goal. Not ranking top 1k or even top 3k is much easier to accept, in my opinion, because that only means that others put in even more effort or had better luck.
As bad as that would be for the kickstart, I think the pitchforks would come out more for the inability to look at multiple missions and ensure that all four have the highest success rate rather than using crew for slots where they end up being less efficient (burning Klingon Janeway on a SEC-only slot, then having a SEC/SCI or SEC/COM slot come up in a subsequent mission, for example).
Darn there goes my random generated skills mission idea for shuttle events, I was about to make that thread in the make it so area.
I think it could work as long as we can open at least four missions at once, again to ensure optimum crew allocation.
Oh Dear GOD NO!!
That would be a bloody nightmare to optimize (and the amount of merits used for transmissions would blow thru the roof)
and the rngesus aint your friend, pal.
edit: I'm the opposite, it is easier to hit a stationary target than a moving one... You can plan for it and do some maths to get an idea what it would take and based on that decide wether to go for it or not. Going for rank means most often just 'all in' type of push and hoping for the best.