1. Raise captain level.
2. Search avatars by name feature
3. Fleet rewards
4. Admiral tools (lock rooms - promote demote squad leaders)
5. Regular portal updates
6. Voyage recall tokens (time reducers)
7. New event type (not just a short skirmish)
8. Expand map
9. New missions
10. Expand collections
11. Raise immortal total rewards
12. Revise squad rewards
13. Fix chat censor
14. Create a shipyard
15. Extra Voyages
16. Revise gauntlet
17. 1 click builds in galaxy events
We did get a couple new collections. Many other items on this list have been issues (wants, desires) for several years now. Hopefully 2021 brings some of these. (I really want a shipyard to improve ship stats, might break things up a bit in arena).
Thank you for your input @DScottHewitt
I agree with your sentiment, the disappointment is palpable. Hopefully we'll see 120 tiers again soon!
I also agree with other inputs in this thread. That's what makes this community so welcoming. I think we can all agree that the common enemy here is growing game apathy.
And in honor of @DScottHewitt 's common send-off signature:
I really love the holiday campaign, and the double citations was the sole reason I picked it up. I'd be thrilled if this became the norm.
But if WRG considers this as the new standard, they can't just weigh sentiment. This is a killer deal, and one that undercuts and devalues not only several weekly offers, but even special occasion offers. It's true there is value in consistency, so getting more folks to regularly upgrade to the premium campaign track may be worth an overall decrease in profits. But there are limits to this.
Additionally, this presented as something special for the holidays. If it becomes the norm, now they need to top it for future special occasions. And if they do, will we just complain that isn't the norm?
It's worth letting the devs know when we're disappointed. But game development involves a lot of long term planning, and juggling lots of different factors. When devs don't immediately respond to something, that doesn't mean they aren't listening, or even doing the thing we want. And let's also remember, the developers are people too, and should be enjoying their own holidays right now.
Six degrees in Inter-species Veterinary Medicine. Treating all manner of critters, from Tribbles to Humans.
Once again some one tries to give feedback about what they would like to see and they are dumped on and have their motivations questioned rather than constructive critique of the feedback.
Either you agree with wanting 120 tiers to be normal or you have a reason it shouldn't. Whether it's was intended or not is not point. TP doesn't need an army of defence trolls leveling nitpicks based on presumption of their methods and goals, they can and should be speaking for themselves. No one said it was a "problem" to stay with 100 tiers. They said they want the 120 tiers to become normalized and said they observed a better than average feedback for this.
Either agree or disagree with the substance.
Who’s disagreeing that 120 tiers isn’t a good idea going forward? I just re-read this thread and didn’t see anyone saying anything along the lines of “you know, I don’t like getting the most possible value for either the free or premium campaign tracks.” As long as reaching all 120 tiers is a reachable goal - because there were early concerns that some players might not reach all 20 added tiers - we can all agree that this is a good thing.
The issue here is one of managing expectations. There’s clearly some kind of personnel crunch going on at WRG, because we’re way past due on the next Cataclysm, the portal update took far too long to complete, and Carlos Data is still missing from the Big Goodbye collection (someone please help if I am forgetting something). Tiers 101-120 are an experiment - can people reach them by way of event threshold accolades, do the rewards make people want to reach those tiers in the first place, and how much extra value does TP want to offer in order to boost sales. Customarily, you run an experiment, take time to analyze the data, and then make adjustments as necessary. This takes time in the best of conditions, and whether it’s the ‘rona or something else, that does not describe what’s happening at WRG right now.
There has been a strong undercurrent of “I WANT MORE STUFF NOW” complaining going on here recently, a total Veruca Salt vibe. (Not saying this is what Scott’s up to, as he’s one of my favorite people here and I agree that it’s a bummer we’re not getting 120 tiers for the next campaign.) It’s getting old, as is the concern-trolling that comes up when people say that the entitlement syndrome is tiresome.
How many people have left the forum or the game entirely because this forum is turning into a toxic swamp? Is it a number that approaches, equals, or exceeds the number of people who have left because the game no longer holds their interest? It’s hard to tell, because they’re no longer here to comment.
Indeed. 🤔
"In the short run, the game defines the players. But in the long run, it's us players who define the game." — Nicky Case, The Evolution of Trust
I thought it was really smart when TP made a longer campaign and tied it to the events. Get people more motivated to play events, more likely to spend money, and to do all their daily missions. I am surprised TP would not continue with this because it was genius. It feels like TP is being timid and unwilling to commit to the ideas they put forth as trial experiments that then we don’t hear anything about after or see them again.
Once again some one tries to give feedback about what they would like to see and they are dumped on and have their motivations questioned rather than constructive critique of the feedback.
Either you agree with wanting 120 tiers to be normal or you have a reason it shouldn't. Whether it's was intended or not is not point. TP doesn't need an army of defence trolls leveling nitpicks based on presumption of their methods and goals, they can and should be speaking for themselves. No one said it was a "problem" to stay with 100 tiers. They said they want the 120 tiers to become normalized and said they observed a better than average feedback for this.
Either agree or disagree with the substance.
Who’s disagreeing that 120 tiers isn’t a good idea going forward? I just re-read this thread and didn’t see anyone saying anything along the lines of “you know, I don’t like getting the most possible value for either the free or premium campaign tracks.” As long as reaching all 120 tiers is a reachable goal - because there were early concerns that some players might not reach all 20 added tiers - we can all agree that this is a good thing.
The issue here is one of managing expectations. There’s clearly some kind of personnel crunch going on at WRG, because we’re way past due on the next Cataclysm, the portal update took far too long to complete, and Carlos Data is still missing from the Big Goodbye collection (someone please help if I am forgetting something). Tiers 101-120 are an experiment - can people reach them by way of event threshold accolades, do the rewards make people want to reach those tiers in the first place, and how much extra value does TP want to offer in order to boost sales. Customarily, you run an experiment, take time to analyze the data, and then make adjustments as necessary. This takes time in the best of conditions, and whether it’s the ‘rona or something else, that does not describe what’s happening at WRG right now.
There has been a strong undercurrent of “I WANT MORE STUFF NOW” complaining going on here recently, a total Veruca Salt vibe. (Not saying this is what Scott’s up to, as he’s one of my favorite people here and I agree that it’s a bummer we’re not getting 120 tiers for the next campaign.) It’s getting old, as is the concern-trolling that comes up when people say that the entitlement syndrome is tiresome.
How many people have left the forum or the game entirely because this forum is turning into a toxic swamp? Is it a number that approaches, equals, or exceeds the number of people who have left because the game no longer holds their interest? It’s hard to tell, because they’re no longer here to comment.
Indeed. 🤔
Agreed. Many of us have been guilty of snark, myself included. An eye for eye leads to a blind world and the hot mess express, right? And there are those that take it to next level creepy through doxing, harassment, and other actions. Given some of what I have read on here at times (or in-game chat, Line, or Discord), it is easy to understand why some have chosen to avoid the Forums (or left this game) all together.
“A committee is a cul-de-sac, down which good ideas are lured and quietly strangled.” —Mark TwainMEMBER: [BoB] Barrel of Bloodwine... We are recruiting and putting the “curv” in scurvy! Best Event Finish: #3 Honor Debt: Inconceivable...Honor Bank Account: Slowly building...
There has been a strong undercurrent of “I WANT MORE STUFF NOW” complaining going on here recently, a total Veruca Salt vibe. (Not saying this is what Scott’s up to, as he’s one of my favorite people here and I agree that it’s a bummer we’re not getting 120 tiers for the next campaign.) It’s getting old, as is the concern-trolling that comes up when people say that the entitlement syndrome is tiresome. How many people have left the forum or the game entirely because this forum is turning into a toxic swamp? Is it a number that approaches, equals, or exceeds the number of people who have left because the game no longer holds their interest? It’s hard to tell, because they’re no longer here to comment.
THIS! Yes, people have invested a lot of time, energy, and in some cases, money, into this game.
But that doesn't entitle anyone to make demands, or throw temper tantrums if you don't get what you want.
Frankly, the constant stream of negativity lately is toxic and one of my biggest reasons for not enjoying the game as much. People seem to have forgotten a game is meant to be fun. If you aren't enjoying yourself, why keep playing?
There has been a strong undercurrent of “I WANT MORE STUFF NOW” complaining going on here recently, a total Veruca Salt vibe. (Not saying this is what Scott’s up to, as he’s one of my favorite people here and I agree that it’s a bummer we’re not getting 120 tiers for the next campaign.) It’s getting old, as is the concern-trolling that comes up when people say that the entitlement syndrome is tiresome. How many people have left the forum or the game entirely because this forum is turning into a toxic swamp? Is it a number that approaches, equals, or exceeds the number of people who have left because the game no longer holds their interest? It’s hard to tell, because they’re no longer here to comment.
THIS! Yes, people have invested a lot of time, energy, and in some cases, money, into this game.
But that doesn't entitle anyone to make demands, or throw temper tantrums if you don't get what you want.
Frankly, the constant stream of negativity lately is toxic and one of my biggest reasons for not enjoying the game as much. People seem to have forgotten a game is meant to be fun. If you aren't enjoying yourself, why keep playing?
THIS! People saying they are disappointed and being immediately accused of being greedy, entitled, toxic and throwing temper tantrums. How does accusing other players make the forum less toxic?
Players buy things from TP. TP needs to know what the players want to buy. If players cannot freely communicate to TP their needs and wants and instead stop buying and stop playing the game that hurts TP far more than complaints on a forum that may not always be worded perfectly.
I’d rather read players feedback, positive or not, than see all negative points banned from discussion.
Part of the reason I don’t frequent the forums as much as I used to was because there was an air of toxic positivity, where members were piled upon when they had concerns, complaints or wanted to debate opposing views.
Help me understand the issue here, the December campaign extended tiers was announced ahead of time as a one-time event, why is it a problem that campaigns are going back to 100 tiers?
Well, I guess since it was positively received, they might have considered player feedback. Would be a nice permanent change. Just saying......
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
Help me understand the issue here, the December campaign extended tiers was announced ahead of time as a one-time event, why is it a problem that campaigns are going back to 100 tiers?
Agreed. It was announced as an experiment. They don't even have the full months data yet. You can't expect TP to suddenly announce it's permanent. This feels like Scott deciding that because he liked something TP will make a change. And once he convinced himself that the change was happening he's now disappointed that it's not happening.
Nope. Scott is saying he liked the change. And would like to see it continue. Feedback.
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
I would have bought Talas campaign if it was 120 tiers with 2 legendary citations even though I do not care about Talas. I will likely not buy it if it is 100 tiers and 1 legendary citation.
Those extra Tiers { for the same pricepoint} would likely encourage a lot of people to buy into the Premium Track, even if the Legendary is not the best. Especially the extra Citations.
It was an experiment, hopefully. Correlating data that shows it is popular, might make it become a permanent thing.
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
I really love the holiday campaign, and the double citations was the sole reason I picked it up. I'd be thrilled if this became the norm.
But if WRG considers this as the new standard, they can't just weigh sentiment. This is a killer deal, and one that undercuts and devalues not only several weekly offers, but even special occasion offers. It's true there is value in consistency, so getting more folks to regularly upgrade to the premium campaign track may be worth an overall decrease in profits. But there are limits to this.
Additionally, this presented as something special for the holidays. If it becomes the norm, now they need to top it for future special occasions. And if they do, will we just complain that isn't the norm?
It's worth letting the devs know when we're disappointed. But game development involves a lot of long term planning, and juggling lots of different factors. When devs don't immediately respond to something, that doesn't mean they aren't listening, or even doing the thing we want. And let's also remember, the developers are people too, and should be enjoying their own holidays right now.
I fully understand that it is probably not likely a 120 Campaign would give the extra Citations every time. Finding the right mix of stuff to add, that will encourage players, without devaluing any of the "cash cows", might take time.
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
There has been a strong undercurrent of “I WANT MORE STUFF NOW” complaining going on here recently, a total Veruca Salt vibe. (Not saying this is what Scott’s up to, as he’s one of my favorite people here and I agree that it’s a bummer we’re not getting 120 tiers for the next campaign.) It’s getting old, as is the concern-trolling that comes up when people say that the entitlement syndrome is tiresome. How many people have left the forum or the game entirely because this forum is turning into a toxic swamp? Is it a number that approaches, equals, or exceeds the number of people who have left because the game no longer holds their interest? It’s hard to tell, because they’re no longer here to comment.
THIS! Yes, people have invested a lot of time, energy, and in some cases, money, into this game.
But that doesn't entitle anyone to make demands, or throw temper tantrums if you don't get what you want.
Frankly, the constant stream of negativity lately is toxic and one of my biggest reasons for not enjoying the game as much. People seem to have forgotten a game is meant to be fun. If you aren't enjoying yourself, why keep playing?
Comment removed. ~Shan
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
We have to consider that some events and campaigns are designed months in advance, probably up to three. This new campaign will start on Christmas Eve, so it was prepared way ahead.
They tried something different, are getting feedback, and will look at the numbers. We get a normal campaign while they crunch numbers and see how they compare to a normal one.
Until the extended campaign is completely over, they have no idea how many folks will actually buy. I buy the day it starts. Some take time to decide. Some buy at the end.
I buy regardless. My roster is not deep enough that a 4/5* is something that doesn't make a big difference. Only a few of the free 4* crew have been entirely honor. Tourist Tucker and Rura Penthe Kirk were both 1/5* in my quarters when announced. Kirk was FE.
I have stalked those four copies like a mad woman. There was celebrating in this house. I finally had an immortalized gold Kirk to go with two gold Spocks and a McCoy. I am down to missing immortal golds of just two series mains- Archer and Burnham- and will have my Burnham next Thursday. Thanks, Timelines, for my double Christmas present!
Every campaign gold I have done is a top ten crew in one skill or another. They may not stay there permanently, but I use them while they are. I have several, like Covert Ops Leland and Commander Troi out on shuttles now. Campaigns benefit the middle of the pack player. I'm not old enough to already have them and not so new I can't make good use of them yet. They are good enough to be of use even if they aren't all top tier. There are better out there, but I don't have them. I'm getting some, but my campaign crew at 4/5* will do me more good than the 1/5*, except for Gauntlet, events, and a few odd with really good skills, traits, etc.
If you don't want or need it, don't buy it. It isn't mandatory. Wait one out and see if you wait it at the end.
W.W. CarlislePlayed since January 20, 2019Captain Level- 99 (May 9, 2022)VIP 14Crew Quarters: 485/485Most recent/Lowest- Anbo-jyutsu Kyle Riker (1/5* Lvl 30) 5/29/23Immortalized x-866 5* x184, 4* x 490, 3* x91, 2* x62, and 1* x27Most recent Immortal - Tearful Janeway 4* 5/25/23Current non-event project- Improving my Science base skill. Retrieval Project- Mestral 1/5*
I would have bought Talas campaign if it was 120 tiers with 2 legendary citations even though I do not care about Talas. I will likely not buy it if it is 100 tiers and 1 legendary citation.
Those extra Tiers { for the same pricepoint} would likely encourage a lot of people to buy into the Premium Track, even if the Legendary is not the best. Especially the extra Citations.
It was an experiment, hopefully. Correlating data that shows it is popular, might make it become a permanent thing.
Yep. Except you can't look at your data before the experiment is completed. There are 4 days left. People still buy the campaign towards the end. So how do you expect them to make something permanent before they even have the data? And the data is not just, "how many people buy the campaign." It's how many new purchases are made because of the campaign. If someone buys the campaign instead of buying another deal it's a wash for TP. If someone buys the campaign when they normally would not have spent money, that's new revenue for TP. So they need to look at overall purchases not just campaign sales. They also want to see how the campaign change effected event participation. Did the extra accolades get more people to play the events?
We'd all like the campaign change to be permanent. More free stuff (or more stuff included in a purchase you're already making) is great for the players. That's not in question. But being disappointed that an experiment was not made permanent before the experiment was even completed is the objection. You need to adjust your expectations to what can reasonably be expected. Otherwise you might as well say I'm disappointed there was no 5* citation in the threshold rewards for the event.
We have to consider that some events and campaigns are designed months in advance, probably up to three. This new campaign will start on Christmas Eve, so it was prepared way ahead.
This makes a lot of sense, same as the fact that the campaign hasn't technically ended yet.
But I wonder how useful the data from this campaign will actually be, if they're collecting it to decide on the 120 format.
- The campaign takes place in December, a month when a lot of people might be willing to spend a little more in general. Or they might be waiting longer than usual to spend on the campaign to see what kind of special offers will show up.
- The featured legendary is a two-skiller, which seems to be unpopular with a lot of players (at least here on the forums).
- The featured legendary is a good two-skiller (if compared to the last ones) with a lot of event potential.
- And it's a version of Kirk, who is probably one of the most popular Trek characters they could have chosen.
There seem to be a lot of variables at play besides the new format.
My guess at the moment is that this is a format that they will use again during mega events, with or without the second citation (that might actually be an interesting experiment to see if people still care about the 20 extra tiers if the most valuable item is removed - I certainly wouldn't).
I really liked having the extra 20 tiers and I hope TP will bring them back and make them a regular thing.
What annoys me is that if you're a daily player you finish the campaign 4 days in advance so for those 4 days you're just collecting accolades for nothing. I think it would be great if those extra accolades were converted into something else once the campaign is over. Maybe honor or merits at a ration of 10:1 or something like that.
I really liked having the extra 20 tiers and I hope TP will bring them back and make them a regular thing.
What annoys me is that if you're a daily player you finish the campaign 4 days in advance so for those 4 days you're just collecting accolades for nothing. I think it would be great if those extra accolades were converted into something else once the campaign is over. Maybe honor or merits at a ration of 10:1 or something like that.
That would be cool. I do like that there is some cushion on campaigns. Remember too that not everyone is finishing with 4 days to spare. The higher level of VIP the more extra points a player gets.
That would be cool. I do like that there is some cushion on campaigns. Remember too that not everyone is finishing with 4 days to spare. The higher level of VIP the more extra points a player gets.
True. That's why it shouldn't be anything big but just a little something extra. I really like the cushion, too. Some days life just happens and you don't get around to playing.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't have got it without the extra, and I have no current plans to buy the next.
But yes, if this were the norm, it would undermine the value of a lot of other deals.
IMHO the campaign already undermines a lot of other deals. That’s why I don’t buy LTO’s or DYC’s. Let’s take the two offer’s I currently have in game right now. Niner’s Ezri plus 1,250 Chrono’s and 200,000 Creds. The second one is 2,250 Chrono’s and 3,000 Honor. Now both of those are the same price, which is also the same price as the campaign. I can see how people can be attracted to the first one (crew they may want etc.)- the second one isn’t as good IMO 3,000 honor isn’t that much really when it comes to looking at things to buy in the honor hall. I’ve had a few of the crew that I really wanted in the LTO’s but still passed them up. When I can get one 5* crew plus chrono’s and cred’s or I can get a 4/5 crew plus citation, and all the other goodies the choice is very clear. But that’s just me, always looking for the best deal I guess
“What's a knockout like you doing in a computer-generated gin joint like this?”
Proud member of Patterns of Force
Captain Level 99
Played since January 2017
I really enjoyed the extra Tiers to 120 and hope they made some extra money from an increase in purchases.
Dedicated players are nicely rewarded for playing every week, & if RL gets in the way a players would still be able to obtain the normal Rewards to T100 with only about 3 weeks(ish) of play.
I'm all for the argument of, if the extended campaign was an experiment, and the campaign isn't over yet, it makes sense that they need time to compare sales before deciding if its worth implementing.
Except the last time that happened, the mini event experiment, has yet to produce results since that was attempted.
I'm all for the argument of, if the extended campaign was an experiment, and the campaign isn't over yet, it makes sense that they need time to compare sales before deciding if its worth implementing.
Except the last time that happened, the mini event experiment, has yet to produce results since that was attempted.
That's exactly what I was thinking.
Hopefully they process this data a little faster and let us know what the plans are moving forward. I dont want to hope for more tiers month after month if they have decided against it moving forward.
I would have bought Talas campaign if it was 120 tiers with 2 legendary citations even though I do not care about Talas. I will likely not buy it if it is 100 tiers and 1 legendary citation.
Those extra Tiers { for the same pricepoint} would likely encourage a lot of people to buy into the Premium Track, even if the Legendary is not the best. Especially the extra Citations.
It was an experiment, hopefully. Correlating data that shows it is popular, might make it become a permanent thing.
Yep. Except you can't look at your data before the experiment is completed. There are 4 days left. People still buy the campaign towards the end. So how do you expect them to make something permanent before they even have the data? And the data is not just, "how many people buy the campaign." It's how many new purchases are made because of the campaign. If someone buys the campaign instead of buying another deal it's a wash for TP. If someone buys the campaign when they normally would not have spent money, that's new revenue for TP. So they need to look at overall purchases not just campaign sales. They also want to see how the campaign change effected event participation. Did the extra accolades get more people to play the events?
We'd all like the campaign change to be permanent. More free stuff (or more stuff included in a purchase you're already making) is great for the players. That's not in question. But being disappointed that an experiment was not made permanent before the experiment was even completed is the objection. You need to adjust your expectations to what can reasonably be expected. Otherwise you might as well say I'm disappointed there was no 5* citation in the threshold rewards for the event.
No response. Clearly some people carry personal bias into any thread I am in.
Might not wanna include that last paragraph I posted, since it clearly refers to after the data and feedback are correlated....
Also, {CLICK}
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
I would have bought Talas campaign if it was 120 tiers with 2 legendary citations even though I do not care about Talas. I will likely not buy it if it is 100 tiers and 1 legendary citation.
Those extra Tiers { for the same pricepoint} would likely encourage a lot of people to buy into the Premium Track, even if the Legendary is not the best. Especially the extra Citations.
It was an experiment, hopefully. Correlating data that shows it is popular, might make it become a permanent thing.
Yep. Except you can't look at your data before the experiment is completed. There are 4 days left. People still buy the campaign towards the end. So how do you expect them to make something permanent before they even have the data? And the data is not just, "how many people buy the campaign." It's how many new purchases are made because of the campaign. If someone buys the campaign instead of buying another deal it's a wash for TP. If someone buys the campaign when they normally would not have spent money, that's new revenue for TP. So they need to look at overall purchases not just campaign sales. They also want to see how the campaign change effected event participation. Did the extra accolades get more people to play the events?
We'd all like the campaign change to be permanent. More free stuff (or more stuff included in a purchase you're already making) is great for the players. That's not in question. But being disappointed that an experiment was not made permanent before the experiment was even completed is the objection. You need to adjust your expectations to what can reasonably be expected. Otherwise you might as well say I'm disappointed there was no 5* citation in the threshold rewards for the event.
No response. Clearly some people carry personal bias into any thread I am in.
Might not wanna include that last paragraph I posted, since it clearly refers to after the data and feedback are correlated....
Also, {CLICK}
Yep, I don’t get the pushback. You were disappointed TP didn’t continue with the 120 tier system. I was too. Many others probably were as well. Then because we were disappointed we were greedy and toxic? I loved that the campaign was tied into the events. It made the events even more fun and gave us something different. Heck, TP could have continued the 120 tier system even without the second citation and it would have been fun. I hope they do in the future.
I would have bought Talas campaign if it was 120 tiers with 2 legendary citations even though I do not care about Talas. I will likely not buy it if it is 100 tiers and 1 legendary citation.
Those extra Tiers { for the same pricepoint} would likely encourage a lot of people to buy into the Premium Track, even if the Legendary is not the best. Especially the extra Citations.
It was an experiment, hopefully. Correlating data that shows it is popular, might make it become a permanent thing.
Yep. Except you can't look at your data before the experiment is completed. There are 4 days left. People still buy the campaign towards the end. So how do you expect them to make something permanent before they even have the data? And the data is not just, "how many people buy the campaign." It's how many new purchases are made because of the campaign. If someone buys the campaign instead of buying another deal it's a wash for TP. If someone buys the campaign when they normally would not have spent money, that's new revenue for TP. So they need to look at overall purchases not just campaign sales. They also want to see how the campaign change effected event participation. Did the extra accolades get more people to play the events?
We'd all like the campaign change to be permanent. More free stuff (or more stuff included in a purchase you're already making) is great for the players. That's not in question. But being disappointed that an experiment was not made permanent before the experiment was even completed is the objection. You need to adjust your expectations to what can reasonably be expected. Otherwise you might as well say I'm disappointed there was no 5* citation in the threshold rewards for the event.
No response. Clearly some people carry personal bias into any thread I am in.
Might not wanna include that last paragraph I posted, since it clearly refers to after the data and feedback are correlated....
Also, {CLICK}
Yep, I don’t get the pushback. You were disappointed TP didn’t continue with the 120 tier system. I was too. Many others probably were as well. Then because we were disappointed we were greedy and toxic? I loved that the campaign was tied into the events. It made the events even more fun and gave us something different. Heck, TP could have continued the 120 tier system even without the second citation and it would have been fun. I hope they do in the future.
I was just giving feedback that I hoped it became a permanent thing. Feedback, like the company asked for. I really did not expect it to mean I felt privileged or entitled. I support the game and would like for it to last. I am sorry so many people thought I was demanding the Moon "RIGHT NOW, DADDY!"
Thank you for understanding where I was coming from, even when my words were unclear!!!!!!
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
I’d rather read players feedback, positive or not, than see all negative points banned from discussion.
Part of the reason I don’t frequent the forums as much as I used to was because there was an air of toxic positivity, where members were piled upon when they had concerns, complaints or wanted to debate opposing views.
I think there's been a marked decline in "toxic positivity" since the offer wall thread. I hope you've found the forum much more to your liking since then.
Comments
Good stuff to work on!
I agree with your sentiment, the disappointment is palpable. Hopefully we'll see 120 tiers again soon!
I also agree with other inputs in this thread. That's what makes this community so welcoming. I think we can all agree that the common enemy here is growing game apathy.
And in honor of @DScottHewitt 's common send-off signature:
🖖🏼🖖🖖🏻🖖🏽🖖🏾🖖🏿
But if WRG considers this as the new standard, they can't just weigh sentiment. This is a killer deal, and one that undercuts and devalues not only several weekly offers, but even special occasion offers. It's true there is value in consistency, so getting more folks to regularly upgrade to the premium campaign track may be worth an overall decrease in profits. But there are limits to this.
Additionally, this presented as something special for the holidays. If it becomes the norm, now they need to top it for future special occasions. And if they do, will we just complain that isn't the norm?
It's worth letting the devs know when we're disappointed. But game development involves a lot of long term planning, and juggling lots of different factors. When devs don't immediately respond to something, that doesn't mean they aren't listening, or even doing the thing we want. And let's also remember, the developers are people too, and should be enjoying their own holidays right now.
Starport
Indeed. 🤔
Agreed. Many of us have been guilty of snark, myself included. An eye for eye leads to a blind world and the hot mess express, right?
THIS! Yes, people have invested a lot of time, energy, and in some cases, money, into this game.
But that doesn't entitle anyone to make demands, or throw temper tantrums if you don't get what you want.
Frankly, the constant stream of negativity lately is toxic and one of my biggest reasons for not enjoying the game as much. People seem to have forgotten a game is meant to be fun. If you aren't enjoying yourself, why keep playing?
THIS! People saying they are disappointed and being immediately accused of being greedy, entitled, toxic and throwing temper tantrums. How does accusing other players make the forum less toxic?
Players buy things from TP. TP needs to know what the players want to buy. If players cannot freely communicate to TP their needs and wants and instead stop buying and stop playing the game that hurts TP far more than complaints on a forum that may not always be worded perfectly.
Part of the reason I don’t frequent the forums as much as I used to was because there was an air of toxic positivity, where members were piled upon when they had concerns, complaints or wanted to debate opposing views.
Well, I guess since it was positively received, they might have considered player feedback. Would be a nice permanent change. Just saying......
Nope. Scott is saying he liked the change. And would like to see it continue. Feedback.
Those extra Tiers { for the same pricepoint} would likely encourage a lot of people to buy into the Premium Track, even if the Legendary is not the best. Especially the extra Citations.
It was an experiment, hopefully. Correlating data that shows it is popular, might make it become a permanent thing.
I fully understand that it is probably not likely a 120 Campaign would give the extra Citations every time. Finding the right mix of stuff to add, that will encourage players, without devaluing any of the "cash cows", might take time.
Comment removed. ~Shan
They tried something different, are getting feedback, and will look at the numbers. We get a normal campaign while they crunch numbers and see how they compare to a normal one.
Until the extended campaign is completely over, they have no idea how many folks will actually buy. I buy the day it starts. Some take time to decide. Some buy at the end.
I buy regardless. My roster is not deep enough that a 4/5* is something that doesn't make a big difference. Only a few of the free 4* crew have been entirely honor. Tourist Tucker and Rura Penthe Kirk were both 1/5* in my quarters when announced. Kirk was FE.
I have stalked those four copies like a mad woman. There was celebrating in this house. I finally had an immortalized gold Kirk to go with two gold Spocks and a McCoy. I am down to missing immortal golds of just two series mains- Archer and Burnham- and will have my Burnham next Thursday. Thanks, Timelines, for my double Christmas present!
Every campaign gold I have done is a top ten crew in one skill or another. They may not stay there permanently, but I use them while they are. I have several, like Covert Ops Leland and Commander Troi out on shuttles now. Campaigns benefit the middle of the pack player. I'm not old enough to already have them and not so new I can't make good use of them yet. They are good enough to be of use even if they aren't all top tier. There are better out there, but I don't have them. I'm getting some, but my campaign crew at 4/5* will do me more good than the 1/5*, except for Gauntlet, events, and a few odd with really good skills, traits, etc.
If you don't want or need it, don't buy it. It isn't mandatory. Wait one out and see if you wait it at the end.
Yep. Except you can't look at your data before the experiment is completed. There are 4 days left. People still buy the campaign towards the end. So how do you expect them to make something permanent before they even have the data? And the data is not just, "how many people buy the campaign." It's how many new purchases are made because of the campaign. If someone buys the campaign instead of buying another deal it's a wash for TP. If someone buys the campaign when they normally would not have spent money, that's new revenue for TP. So they need to look at overall purchases not just campaign sales. They also want to see how the campaign change effected event participation. Did the extra accolades get more people to play the events?
We'd all like the campaign change to be permanent. More free stuff (or more stuff included in a purchase you're already making) is great for the players. That's not in question. But being disappointed that an experiment was not made permanent before the experiment was even completed is the objection. You need to adjust your expectations to what can reasonably be expected. Otherwise you might as well say I'm disappointed there was no 5* citation in the threshold rewards for the event.
This makes a lot of sense, same as the fact that the campaign hasn't technically ended yet.
But I wonder how useful the data from this campaign will actually be, if they're collecting it to decide on the 120 format.
- The campaign takes place in December, a month when a lot of people might be willing to spend a little more in general. Or they might be waiting longer than usual to spend on the campaign to see what kind of special offers will show up.
- The featured legendary is a two-skiller, which seems to be unpopular with a lot of players (at least here on the forums).
- The featured legendary is a good two-skiller (if compared to the last ones) with a lot of event potential.
- And it's a version of Kirk, who is probably one of the most popular Trek characters they could have chosen.
There seem to be a lot of variables at play besides the new format.
My guess at the moment is that this is a format that they will use again during mega events, with or without the second citation (that might actually be an interesting experiment to see if people still care about the 20 extra tiers if the most valuable item is removed - I certainly wouldn't).
What annoys me is that if you're a daily player you finish the campaign 4 days in advance so for those 4 days you're just collecting accolades for nothing. I think it would be great if those extra accolades were converted into something else once the campaign is over. Maybe honor or merits at a ration of 10:1 or something like that.
That would be cool. I do like that there is some cushion on campaigns. Remember too that not everyone is finishing with 4 days to spare. The higher level of VIP the more extra points a player gets.
True. That's why it shouldn't be anything big but just a little something extra. I really like the cushion, too. Some days life just happens and you don't get around to playing.
But yes, if this were the norm, it would undermine the value of a lot of other deals.
IMHO the campaign already undermines a lot of other deals. That’s why I don’t buy LTO’s or DYC’s. Let’s take the two offer’s I currently have in game right now. Niner’s Ezri plus 1,250 Chrono’s and 200,000 Creds. The second one is 2,250 Chrono’s and 3,000 Honor. Now both of those are the same price, which is also the same price as the campaign. I can see how people can be attracted to the first one (crew they may want etc.)- the second one isn’t as good IMO 3,000 honor isn’t that much really when it comes to looking at things to buy in the honor hall. I’ve had a few of the crew that I really wanted in the LTO’s but still passed them up. When I can get one 5* crew plus chrono’s and cred’s or I can get a 4/5 crew plus citation, and all the other goodies the choice is very clear. But that’s just me, always looking for the best deal I guess
Proud member of Patterns of Force
Captain Level 99
Played since January 2017
TP: Do better!!!
Dedicated players are nicely rewarded for playing every week, & if RL gets in the way a players would still be able to obtain the normal Rewards to T100 with only about 3 weeks(ish) of play.
Great change/test, please make 120 permanent!
Except the last time that happened, the mini event experiment, has yet to produce results since that was attempted.
That's exactly what I was thinking.
Hopefully they process this data a little faster and let us know what the plans are moving forward. I dont want to hope for more tiers month after month if they have decided against it moving forward.
No response. Clearly some people carry personal bias into any thread I am in.
Might not wanna include that last paragraph I posted, since it clearly refers to after the data and feedback are correlated....
Also, {CLICK}
Yep, I don’t get the pushback. You were disappointed TP didn’t continue with the 120 tier system. I was too. Many others probably were as well. Then because we were disappointed we were greedy and toxic? I loved that the campaign was tied into the events. It made the events even more fun and gave us something different. Heck, TP could have continued the 120 tier system even without the second citation and it would have been fun. I hope they do in the future.
I was just giving feedback that I hoped it became a permanent thing. Feedback, like the company asked for. I really did not expect it to mean I felt privileged or entitled. I support the game and would like for it to last. I am sorry so many people thought I was demanding the Moon "RIGHT NOW, DADDY!"
Thank you for understanding where I was coming from, even when my words were unclear!!!!!!
I think there's been a marked decline in "toxic positivity" since the offer wall thread. I hope you've found the forum much more to your liking since then.