The anger comes from the culmination of quality control failures by TP and how much they nerfed Saru. That it was something exciting and new then it was pulled away. TP could have lowered his stats and still kept him number one voyager. Or tie him with Reunion Spock and Kirk or even put him at 2. A drop of over 250 points is significant so it is disingenuous to say well, hey, he is number 6, you are not allowed to be angry about it. Human Saru was already in circulation to some extent. Human Saru was released and immortalized by a player who got it in their Dabo before he was nerfed. I am sure that player is quite angry about the development. Automaton got more anger and blame than warranted but I and many others are tired of players that see something good and bring it to the attention of TP and then it gets nerfed. Automaton didn’t just comment on how good the stats were but asked Shan to check them. Feels like a kid at the end of the Friday afternoon class asking the teacher if they were sure they were not going to assign homework? Or was that grading curve right, so many people got A’s? Maybe that is unfair but that is sure how it felt for us that love Saru, Discovery, and were really excited about a great new Saru released then saw him massively nerfed.
The anger comes from the culmination of quality control failures by TP and how much they nerfed Saru. That it was something exciting and new then it was pulled away. TP could have lowered his stats and still kept him number one voyager. Or tie him with Reunion Spock and Kirk or even put him at 2. A drop of over 250 points is significant so it is disingenuous to say well, hey, he is number 6, you are not allowed to be angry about it. Human Saru was already in circulation to some extent. Human Saru was released and immortalized by a player who got it in their Dabo before he was nerfed. I am sure that player is quite angry about the development. Automaton got more anger and blame than warranted but I and many others are tired of players that see something good and bring it to the attention of TP and then it gets nerfed. Automaton didn’t just comment on how good the stats were but asked Shan to check them. Feels like a kid at the end of the Friday afternoon class asking the teacher if they were sure they were not going to assign homework? Or was that grading curve right, so many people got A’s? Maybe that is unfair but that is sure how it felt for us that love Saru, Discovery, and were really excited about a great new Saru released then saw him massively nerfed.
So, then be mad at TP. Not at the players who spoke up. That was my main point.
We all know that the truth is TP messed up, didn't realise something gave too high of a boost in his equipment build (maybe they forgot to carry the one somewhere 🤷🏻♂️), and never actually intended to release a new crew that powerful.
That is very important and probably the crux of this whole debate — intent.
Yeah, 250 points is significant, but it was obviously never meant to be that high in the first place. Anyone saying otherwise is being disingenuous.
Yeah, they could have made him #1, 2, 6, or 600. People would have still complained. And it seems fairly obvious he was never meant to be higher than he actually now is. Just because they made a mistake doesn't mean they should have kept him that high.
Be annoyed, be mad, be whatever. That isn't the issue. It's the level of disrespect shown towards other players that is inexcusable, no matter how upset people are. There was no need for that.
I think it also says a lot about where some people's heads are at when some immediately jumped to the most cynical and illogical conspiracy theories. Even when presented with evidence to the contrary.
Whether you or anyone else is upset about it getting nerfed, pouncing on @Automaton_2000 is not justified. Even now, you're trying to justify it in your last post, with your school analogy. That isn't right. There's no maybe that's unfair, it is unfair. Your excitement over the card doesn't justify it.
You also can't say you "and many others are tired of players that see something good and bring it to the attention of TP and then it gets nerfed." If it was a mistake, it doesn't matter how "good" it was. Would you be saying the same thing if it was a 2000 point mistake instead of a 200?
You've also basically admitted in your post you know it was a mistake, and hoped it slipped through. Which to me, says a lot about how pure your motives in this are. You're not just mad about a mistake. You're also upset it got fixed, because you would have massively benefitted from it.
I've always had a lot of respect for your contributions to the forum, @(HGH)Apollo, but I'm sorry to say, I've lost some after this. You clearly wanted to take advantage of what was an honest mistake, and that is not only unethical, it's not in the Star Trek spirit either. Just because we could have pulled a fast one, doesn't mean we should.
There is a quote from an episode of TNG that I think applies greatly to this entire incident. Anyone who realised the mistake and spoke up, did the right thing. And I know Picard would agree.
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth! It is the guiding principle on which Starfleet is based. And if you can't find it within yourself to stand up and tell the truth about what happened, you don't deserve to wear that uniform!"
Just to clarify mine, Auto's and Stars positions with the Devs. We ask them to do a Q&A, they come and do a Q&A. That's it. We don't have pull/sway and any kind of intention to alter the game based on our whims.
If we did, this would be the least of our concerns. Auto does what a player does, point out that wow, his stats are bonkers, was this intentional? Because we know that they have a history with stat changes and the occasional error.
So @Banjo1012@BarnBurner@Trollita@Thurthorad please check your facts before you spread misinformation around because it isn't clever, it isn't productive and it certainly doesn't help the tone of these forums.
Hey, I was defending you! What part of my post do you object to?
The anger comes from the culmination of quality control failures by TP and how much they nerfed Saru. That it was something exciting and new then it was pulled away. TP could have lowered his stats and still kept him number one voyager. Or tie him with Reunion Spock and Kirk or even put him at 2. A drop of over 250 points is significant so it is disingenuous to say well, hey, he is number 6, you are not allowed to be angry about it. Human Saru was already in circulation to some extent. Human Saru was released and immortalized by a player who got it in their Dabo before he was nerfed. I am sure that player is quite angry about the development. Automaton got more anger and blame than warranted but I and many others are tired of players that see something good and bring it to the attention of TP and then it gets nerfed. Automaton didn’t just comment on how good the stats were but asked Shan to check them. Feels like a kid at the end of the Friday afternoon class asking the teacher if they were sure they were not going to assign homework? Or was that grading curve right, so many people got A’s? Maybe that is unfair but that is sure how it felt for us that love Saru, Discovery, and were really excited about a great new Saru released then saw him massively nerfed.
I really don't think that they nerfed the card because of what Automaton wrote. There were so many comments on it, plus another thread titled "Human Saru?? Stats are for real?". This isn't Automaton's fault.
If no one had mentioned it, it might have slipped through. It's happened before in this game with many other things. But there's also a chance that they would have nerfed him two weeks from now, which would have been worse.
How about we move on?
This may sound like an odd question from a player 26 months in, but how do skills get calculated for shuttles? Voyage considers base and prof. Is shuttle purely base? I keep thinking some was talking about high bases making good shuttle crew.
Since there are two scheduled this Mega, I thought I would take a hard look at what I had on hand for them and decide who to work on that will give me the most use. Costumed will work in both events; crew variants just one. I don't have many Troi or Saru variants to worry about anyway.
I'm fairly certain I have enough costumed crew on hand that I won't need to thaw any, since I do keep my better purples on hand, ex. Victorian Pulaski is my tenth best for Dip base, so she's still out, (6 of my 30 immortal golds have the trait and a similar ratio of my remaining crew do to) unless they are the existing.
Shuttle points come purely from bases, so if you're looking to have some success during this Mega, you'll definitely want to focus on your Costumed crew with high bases.
You can check the "Events" tab on my Google Sheets doc if you want to see who the heaviest hitters are for this event. It's divided into three parts - overall best crew is what you'll see right away, but scrolling down will show you the best purples and scrolling right will show you the best crew by skillset (for the AND seats).
There is IMO a teachable moment here. IceCat, WTH? The fires were out. The embers were cooled. New growth was starting up. The creatures were returning to the forest to start over. A new day had dawned.
Why did you feel you needed to douse gasoline over everything and strike a match? PLEASE do not answer that, but think about what happened here, reflect on your impact, and internalize it. This thread had finally calmed down, what was gained by ripping out the stitches and opening the wound back up?
Spent about 5 minutes troubleshooting new Federation shuttles, which were drawing from the normal pool and not applying event bonuses.
Thankfully I figured out it was s hybrid event before posting my bug report in the engineering section.
Then you missed out on a few more.
1. Before phase two, open all the shuttles you can for the faction event.
2. Once next phase starts
If you can hold off clicking anything on event you will still get the bonus crew stats as well as shared crew for seating.
Otherwise, remember that the bonus specific crew base stats are tripled and the nonspecific bonus crew are doubled when seating the shuttles. You will not be able to use squadron leaders shared crew.
3. Send those open faction shuttles until you use them all up or they run out of time.
@W.W. Carlisle, here’s the Faction event shuttle math as I understand it. All base value, rolls don’t count.
When crew has skills that match seats:
Score = 100% of highest base skill + 25% of lower base skill.
Order does not matter (since the “and” stealth fix, which is another topic entirely that I won’t revisit here). If the crew only has 1 matching skill, then just the 100%.
Bonuses:
“Small” bonus crew are Score x2.
“Big” bonus crew (i.e., event crew) are Score x3.
Examples:
Seat is CMD and SEC.
Crew A Is CMD 1000, SEC 400.
Crew B is SEC 800, CMD 500.
Crew C is SEC 1200, MED 600.
Crew A is worth 1100 (no bonus), 2200 (small bonus), or 3300 (big bonus).
Crew B is worth 925 (no bonus), 1850 (small), or 2775 (big).
Crew C is worth 1200 (no bonus), 2400 (small), or 3600 (big).
There’s a separate question about how those numbers turn into the predicted success rates. Through trial and error, I worked out a formula that matches the on-screen prediction for 4000 vp shuttles. It uses the average of all scores on the shuttle (not the total of all scores), but I hesitate to share it since I don’t want to mislead anyone (or contradict the mathematicians in our midst). I don’t recall ever seeing the %success calculation spelled out by anyone. Suffice to say that a higher average score will produce higher %success, whether you send a 3-seater or a 5-seater. It’s just usually harder to get top percentages on a 5-seater because they are almost all single-skill seats (i.e., they lack the opportunity to get the second-skill 25% score boost).
So... apparently it’s been a while since I searched the wiki for faction mission info. Yep, that covers it. 🖖
It has been around for a while. I did not find easily, this time. I knew it was there took me a little while to find it though. Not sure it is the same location or not. Thought I remembered it pretty much taking up a whole page in the past
I love the idea of a Costumed mega event. Clearly a way to help people fill up the Costumed collection a bit.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
I love the idea of a Costumed mega event. Clearly a way to help people fill up the Costumed collection a bit.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
+1
“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 love the idea of a Costumed mega event. Clearly a way to help people fill up the Costumed collection a bit.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
+1
Since when does TP make sense?
Founding ADM - PoF family of fleets (POF, POF2 & POF3) - Dear TP: Non sequitur. Your facts are uncoordinated.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it. I mean, I'm sure you could find one of many dictionary definitions that would back up that very particular explanation, but there's something that seems inherently off about that. Costume has an implication of being either recreational or at least thematic. Without bothering to look at who actually has the traits at the moment, it makes sense to say that Victorian Pulaski is in a costume. She's dressed in a particular fashion to reflect the era she's engaging with recreationally. Undercover O'Brien is not in a costume. He's dressed as a regular person. There's no particular aesthetics to it, he's just dressed as no one in particular.
Mintaken Troi and Riker are the grey area to me. They aren't engaging in recreation and they are just trying to blend in, but they are dressed in a very particular fashion to do so. VIrtuoso Doctor is the other end of the grey area. He's certainly dressed to fit an aesthetic and for recreation, but there's no intent to take on a certain persona or evoke any particular group or time period. He's also certainly not attempting to hide who he is or pretend he's anyone else.
I think it really is fair to say there's room for debate and judgement on when someone is or is not "Costumed". That really stinks here since consistency would be appreciated and is further muddied by the fact that sometimes it could just be an Oversight™.
Fun fact: To give WRG an easy out on a real logjam in this debate, I realized while watching "A Simple Investigation" that it appears it could make sense to have Falcon O'Brien as the only one with the Costumed trait (besides Bashir, Julian Bashir and Garak, Elim Garak) given that he is the only person to appear in that role outside of the transporter accident in "Our Man Bashir." Falcon O'Brien could in fact be the Chief willingly (kind of) playing the role of Falcon here, not just a hologram with the Chief's image.
Of course, that would be dumb and clearly just a pedantic justification to something that is obviously an inconsistency that deserves correction.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
Agreed. I think the best two words to use are costume vs disguise. A costume is when people know who you are but you have different clothing on to pretend to be someone/something else. A disguise is when you don't want people to know who you are. Undercover Operatives by definition are in disguise. I would argue that the Niners should not have costume either. They are wearing a uniform or clothing for playing baseball, they are not in a costume. It's no different than Klingon Worf or Raquetball Bashir. Sisko showing up to the station Halloween party as Buck Bocai would be costumed.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
Agreed. I think the best two words to use are costume vs disguise. A costume is when people know who you are but you have different clothing on to pretend to be someone/something else. A disguise is when you don't want people to know who you are. Undercover Operatives by definition are in disguise. I would argue that the Niners should not have costume either. They are wearing a uniform or clothing for playing baseball, they are not in a costume. It's no different than Klingon Worf or Raquetball Bashir. Sisko showing up to the station Halloween party as Buck Bocai would be costumed.
Agreed. Good point on the Niners team NOT being costumed. They are wearing a uniform for their team, no different than when they are wearing their Starfleet uniforms. Kira wearing her Niners jersey is not the same as her being costumed to play the role of Guinevere.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
Agreed. I think the best two words to use are costume vs disguise. A costume is when people know who you are but you have different clothing on to pretend to be someone/something else. A disguise is when you don't want people to know who you are. Undercover Operatives by definition are in disguise. I would argue that the Niners should not have costume either. They are wearing a uniform or clothing for playing baseball, they are not in a costume. It's no different than Klingon Worf or Raquetball Bashir. Sisko showing up to the station Halloween party as Buck Bocai would be costumed.
"Public opinion seems to be running against you." -Garak
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
Agreed. I think the best two words to use are costume vs disguise. A costume is when people know who you are but you have different clothing on to pretend to be someone/something else. A disguise is when you don't want people to know who you are. Undercover Operatives by definition are in disguise. I would argue that the Niners should not have costume either. They are wearing a uniform or clothing for playing baseball, they are not in a costume. It's no different than Klingon Worf or Raquetball Bashir. Sisko showing up to the station Halloween party as Buck Bocai would be costumed.
Agreed. Good point on the Niners team NOT being costumed. They are wearing a uniform for their team, no different than when they are wearing their Starfleet uniforms. Kira wearing her Niners jersey is not the same as her being costumed to play the role of Guinevere.
Though I agree about this as well (sports uniforms are not costumes), I didn't want the pitchforks behind taking away traits.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits.
Whether he actually has them in game or not, Dixon Hill? He is Picard in a costume, but Dixon Hill is a PI, who certainly operates undercover? A bit of stretch, but as close as I came up with.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits.
Whether he actually has them in game or not, Dixon Hill? He is Picard in a costume, but Dixon Hill is a PI, who certainly operates undercover? A bit of stretch, but as close as I came up with.
Personally I'd assign 'costumed' to the Dixon Hill characters, rather than being undercover. For me it still comes down to somebody playing a role in a fictional recreation. If he called himself Dixon Hill and dressed the part to infiltrate some Orion syndicate in real life, than that would be an undercover operative. I think this is a whole exercise in futility though. lol
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
Agreed. I think the best two words to use are costume vs disguise. A costume is when people know who you are but you have different clothing on to pretend to be someone/something else. A disguise is when you don't want people to know who you are. Undercover Operatives by definition are in disguise. I would argue that the Niners should not have costume either. They are wearing a uniform or clothing for playing baseball, they are not in a costume. It's no different than Klingon Worf or Raquetball Bashir. Sisko showing up to the station Halloween party as Buck Bocai would be costumed.
"Public opinion seems to be running against you." -Garak
Public opinion on these discussion tends to only care about increasing the number of crew to fill the collection. If you want to advocate making a collection easier, by all means, be up front and advocate for making the collection easier. But don't claim you really care about what is/isn't costumed when your true desire is the collection.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
Agreed. I think the best two words to use are costume vs disguise. A costume is when people know who you are but you have different clothing on to pretend to be someone/something else. A disguise is when you don't want people to know who you are. Undercover Operatives by definition are in disguise. I would argue that the Niners should not have costume either. They are wearing a uniform or clothing for playing baseball, they are not in a costume. It's no different than Klingon Worf or Raquetball Bashir. Sisko showing up to the station Halloween party as Buck Bocai would be costumed.
"Public opinion seems to be running against you." -Garak
Public opinion on these discussion tends to only care about increasing the number of crew to fill the collection. If you want to advocate making a collection easier, by all means, be up front and advocate for making the collection easier. But don't claim you really care about what is/isn't costumed when your true desire is the collection.
I would question why players that want to have a discussion about taking away traits would do so in the game forum where their convo could actually make that happen instead of privately chatting elsewhere. #keepthecostumed
Comments
So, then be mad at TP. Not at the players who spoke up. That was my main point.
We all know that the truth is TP messed up, didn't realise something gave too high of a boost in his equipment build (maybe they forgot to carry the one somewhere 🤷🏻♂️), and never actually intended to release a new crew that powerful.
That is very important and probably the crux of this whole debate — intent.
Yeah, 250 points is significant, but it was obviously never meant to be that high in the first place. Anyone saying otherwise is being disingenuous.
Yeah, they could have made him #1, 2, 6, or 600. People would have still complained. And it seems fairly obvious he was never meant to be higher than he actually now is. Just because they made a mistake doesn't mean they should have kept him that high.
Be annoyed, be mad, be whatever. That isn't the issue. It's the level of disrespect shown towards other players that is inexcusable, no matter how upset people are. There was no need for that.
I think it also says a lot about where some people's heads are at when some immediately jumped to the most cynical and illogical conspiracy theories. Even when presented with evidence to the contrary.
Whether you or anyone else is upset about it getting nerfed, pouncing on @Automaton_2000 is not justified. Even now, you're trying to justify it in your last post, with your school analogy. That isn't right. There's no maybe that's unfair, it is unfair. Your excitement over the card doesn't justify it.
You also can't say you "and many others are tired of players that see something good and bring it to the attention of TP and then it gets nerfed." If it was a mistake, it doesn't matter how "good" it was. Would you be saying the same thing if it was a 2000 point mistake instead of a 200?
You've also basically admitted in your post you know it was a mistake, and hoped it slipped through. Which to me, says a lot about how pure your motives in this are. You're not just mad about a mistake. You're also upset it got fixed, because you would have massively benefitted from it.
I've always had a lot of respect for your contributions to the forum, @(HGH)Apollo, but I'm sorry to say, I've lost some after this. You clearly wanted to take advantage of what was an honest mistake, and that is not only unethical, it's not in the Star Trek spirit either. Just because we could have pulled a fast one, doesn't mean we should.
There is a quote from an episode of TNG that I think applies greatly to this entire incident. Anyone who realised the mistake and spoke up, did the right thing. And I know Picard would agree.
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth! It is the guiding principle on which Starfleet is based. And if you can't find it within yourself to stand up and tell the truth about what happened, you don't deserve to wear that uniform!"
Hey, I was defending you! What part of my post do you object to?
I really don't think that they nerfed the card because of what Automaton wrote. There were so many comments on it, plus another thread titled "Human Saru?? Stats are for real?". This isn't Automaton's fault.
If no one had mentioned it, it might have slipped through. It's happened before in this game with many other things. But there's also a chance that they would have nerfed him two weeks from now, which would have been worse.
Shuttle points come purely from bases, so if you're looking to have some success during this Mega, you'll definitely want to focus on your Costumed crew with high bases.
You can check the "Events" tab on my Google Sheets doc if you want to see who the heaviest hitters are for this event. It's divided into three parts - overall best crew is what you'll see right away, but scrolling down will show you the best purples and scrolling right will show you the best crew by skillset (for the AND seats).
Why did you feel you needed to douse gasoline over everything and strike a match? PLEASE do not answer that, but think about what happened here, reflect on your impact, and internalize it. This thread had finally calmed down, what was gained by ripping out the stitches and opening the wound back up?
Thankfully I figured out it was s hybrid event before posting my bug report in the engineering section.
Starport
Then you missed out on a few more.
1. Before phase two, open all the shuttles you can for the faction event.
2. Once next phase starts
If you can hold off clicking anything on event you will still get the bonus crew stats as well as shared crew for seating.
Otherwise, remember that the bonus specific crew base stats are tripled and the nonspecific bonus crew are doubled when seating the shuttles. You will not be able to use squadron leaders shared crew.
3. Send those open faction shuttles until you use them all up or they run out of time.
When crew has skills that match seats:
Score = 100% of highest base skill + 25% of lower base skill.
Order does not matter (since the “and” stealth fix, which is another topic entirely that I won’t revisit here). If the crew only has 1 matching skill, then just the 100%.
Bonuses:
“Small” bonus crew are Score x2.
“Big” bonus crew (i.e., event crew) are Score x3.
Examples:
Seat is CMD and SEC.
Crew A Is CMD 1000, SEC 400.
Crew B is SEC 800, CMD 500.
Crew C is SEC 1200, MED 600.
Crew A is worth 1100 (no bonus), 2200 (small bonus), or 3300 (big bonus).
Crew B is worth 925 (no bonus), 1850 (small), or 2775 (big).
Crew C is worth 1200 (no bonus), 2400 (small), or 3600 (big).
There’s a separate question about how those numbers turn into the predicted success rates. Through trial and error, I worked out a formula that matches the on-screen prediction for 4000 vp shuttles. It uses the average of all scores on the shuttle (not the total of all scores), but I hesitate to share it since I don’t want to mislead anyone (or contradict the mathematicians in our midst). I don’t recall ever seeing the %success calculation spelled out by anyone. Suffice to say that a higher average score will produce higher %success, whether you send a 3-seater or a 5-seater. It’s just usually harder to get top percentages on a 5-seater because they are almost all single-skill seats (i.e., they lack the opportunity to get the second-skill 25% score boost).
Hope that helps!
https://stt.wiki/wiki/Faction_Missions
It has been around for a while. I did not find easily, this time. I knew it was there took me a little while to find it though. Not sure it is the same location or not. Thought I remembered it pretty much taking up a whole page in the past
What I don’t get is why two of the new cards for the costumed mega event, Barry and Chakotay, don’t have the costumed trait despite both 100% being in costume? Doesn’t seem to make sense.
+1
Proud member of Patterns of Force
Captain Level 99
Played since January 2017
TP: Do better!!!
Keeps happening.
Since when does TP make sense?
Someone in disguise could be "costumed" or an "undercover operative". Disguised Tuvok is the former and and Disguised Kira is the latter, for instance. I'd say Barry is more akin to Kira.
Of course, Disguised Chakotay has both...
If you’re undercover in a disguise, you’re necessarily in costume
Even just reading that, there's clearly something not true about it. I mean, I'm sure you could find one of many dictionary definitions that would back up that very particular explanation, but there's something that seems inherently off about that. Costume has an implication of being either recreational or at least thematic. Without bothering to look at who actually has the traits at the moment, it makes sense to say that Victorian Pulaski is in a costume. She's dressed in a particular fashion to reflect the era she's engaging with recreationally. Undercover O'Brien is not in a costume. He's dressed as a regular person. There's no particular aesthetics to it, he's just dressed as no one in particular.
Mintaken Troi and Riker are the grey area to me. They aren't engaging in recreation and they are just trying to blend in, but they are dressed in a very particular fashion to do so. VIrtuoso Doctor is the other end of the grey area. He's certainly dressed to fit an aesthetic and for recreation, but there's no intent to take on a certain persona or evoke any particular group or time period. He's also certainly not attempting to hide who he is or pretend he's anyone else.
I think it really is fair to say there's room for debate and judgement on when someone is or is not "Costumed". That really stinks here since consistency would be appreciated and is further muddied by the fact that sometimes it could just be an Oversight™.
Fun fact: To give WRG an easy out on a real logjam in this debate, I realized while watching "A Simple Investigation" that it appears it could make sense to have Falcon O'Brien as the only one with the Costumed trait (besides Bashir, Julian Bashir and Garak, Elim Garak) given that he is the only person to appear in that role outside of the transporter accident in "Our Man Bashir." Falcon O'Brien could in fact be the Chief willingly (kind of) playing the role of Falcon here, not just a hologram with the Chief's image.
Of course, that would be dumb and clearly just a pedantic justification to something that is obviously an inconsistency that deserves correction.
And yet, it is true. If you’re in disguise undercover, you’re pretending to be someone you’re not. You’re dressed in an outfit to affect a new persona. It’s a costume.
I look at "costumed" to be more along the lines of playing make believe. Dressing like another character in a holodeck is what comes to mind most readily, when the outfit is essentially a prop. Another way to look at it is that costumed characters would be fine having their real name in the by-line: Data as Scrooge, Kira as Guinevere, Barclay as Cyrano, TNG crew as naval officers, etc... For me, RAF O'Brien is a costumed character.
I look at "undercover operative" as somebody posing as somebody else, assuming a new identity. They don't want to be recognized and would definitely not want their true identify acknowledged in a by-line: Galen, Romulan Data, etc... For me, Undercover O'Brien is an undercover operative.
I can't think of any trek characters that should have both traits. An example of a situation that would call for both traits is if Galen had to dress up like a chicken during a heist being pulled off by the mercenary crew he was serving with. That would be Picard undercover as Galen, with Galen (the undercover identity) being costumed.
There are definitely several inconsistencies of how these traits are handled in the game.
Agreed. I think the best two words to use are costume vs disguise. A costume is when people know who you are but you have different clothing on to pretend to be someone/something else. A disguise is when you don't want people to know who you are. Undercover Operatives by definition are in disguise. I would argue that the Niners should not have costume either. They are wearing a uniform or clothing for playing baseball, they are not in a costume. It's no different than Klingon Worf or Raquetball Bashir. Sisko showing up to the station Halloween party as Buck Bocai would be costumed.
Agreed. Good point on the Niners team NOT being costumed. They are wearing a uniform for their team, no different than when they are wearing their Starfleet uniforms. Kira wearing her Niners jersey is not the same as her being costumed to play the role of Guinevere.
"Public opinion seems to be running against you." -Garak
Though I agree about this as well (sports uniforms are not costumes), I didn't want the pitchforks behind taking away traits.
Whether he actually has them in game or not, Dixon Hill? He is Picard in a costume, but Dixon Hill is a PI, who certainly operates undercover? A bit of stretch, but as close as I came up with.
Personally I'd assign 'costumed' to the Dixon Hill characters, rather than being undercover. For me it still comes down to somebody playing a role in a fictional recreation. If he called himself Dixon Hill and dressed the part to infiltrate some Orion syndicate in real life, than that would be an undercover operative. I think this is a whole exercise in futility though. lol
Public opinion on these discussion tends to only care about increasing the number of crew to fill the collection. If you want to advocate making a collection easier, by all means, be up front and advocate for making the collection easier. But don't claim you really care about what is/isn't costumed when your true desire is the collection.
I would question why players that want to have a discussion about taking away traits would do so in the game forum where their convo could actually make that happen instead of privately chatting elsewhere. #keepthecostumed