Home The Bridge

Fix Platonian Chekov

You nerfed Chekov right before his sale by removing his costumed trait and removing him from a difficult to complete collection. If you will not give him back costumed trait you should give him another trait to replace it. Give him inspiring, survivalist or veteran and add him to that collection. Or at the very least give him another trait without collection like tactician. He is the best Chekov in that three pack you are selling today. You took away some of his value right before a sale where multiple players could acquire him. So restore his value.
Let’s fly!
«1

Comments

  • ShanShan ✭✭✭✭✭
    What happened with Platonian Chekov was unfortunate.
    The "costumed" trait was replaced with "resourceful".

    That trait was added by error, and it is something we need to pay better attention to before releasing a crew, which we intend on doing as we understand the impact this can have especially where collections are involved.







  • robownagerobownage ✭✭✭✭✭
    In the interest of being true to the episode “Plato’s Stepchildren”, I submit that Platonian Kirk, Spock, and Chekov should have the costumed trait, plus Uhura and Chapel if those cards are ever created.

    It’s not just native dress but the fact that Kirk, Spock, Uhura, and Chapel were forced to change into those garments and held against their will for the amusement of the Platonians. It is similar to the TNG episode QPid where Q held the TNG crew against their will and made them perform in period costumes.

    Or did you just make an argument for them removing Costumed from all of the QPid cards? :s
  • Captain IdolCaptain Idol ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2021
    Shan wrote: »
    What happened with Platonian Chekov was unfortunate.
    The "costumed" trait was replaced with "resourceful".

    That trait was added by error, and it is something we need to pay better attention to before releasing a crew, which we intend on doing as we understand the impact this can have especially where collections are involved.

    Edit: Retracting my previous comment, turns out was added post-launch of Platonian, but has been a part of my sheets for sometime...
  • ShanShan ✭✭✭✭✭
    Shan wrote: »
    What happened with Platonian Chekov was unfortunate.
    The "costumed" trait was replaced with "resourceful".

    That trait was added by error, and it is something we need to pay better attention to before releasing a crew, which we intend on doing as we understand the impact this can have especially where collections are involved.

    Small amendment, Resourceful has always been a part of his trait set from the beginning. At least I only removed costumed from my sheets when the change happened and resourceful was always there...

    From the data I have at my disposal the original traits were:
    Human, Starfleet, Federation, Costumed, Telekinetic

    And are now:
    Human, Starfleet, Federation, Resourceful, Telekinetic
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    Will there be a resourceful collection coming any time in the near future?
    Let’s fly!
  • ShanShan ✭✭✭✭✭
    Will there be a resourceful collection coming any time in the near future?

    Not to my knowledge.
    I will however suggest it as a potential future collection.
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2021
    Indeed. He was one of the crew I wanted and why I spent 50,000 dilithium buying elusive treasures packs. Got him from an ET pack on July 27th. I immortalized him on Aug. 13th and Costumed was removed Sept. 1. I didn’t even get a month of use before costumed was removed. I appreciate that WRG added another trait back but after this experience I will not be buying any more elusive treasure packs in the future.

    Besides the utility issue of messing with Platonian Chekov, for me it also removed the fun of Platonian Spock. I was going to get Spock and make a really cool toga bridge. No longer and that’s a shame. A game should be fun.
    Let’s fly!
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    Shan wrote: »
    What happened with Platonian Chekov was unfortunate.
    The "costumed" trait was replaced with "resourceful".

    That trait was added by error, and it is something we need to pay better attention to before releasing a crew, which we intend on doing as we understand the impact this can have especially where collections are involved.







    Can you please explain that a little better? How was a Costumed Crew having the Costumed Trait an "error"?

    What if I told you not every single nit needs to be picked literally to death?
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    Shan wrote: »
    What happened with Platonian Chekov was unfortunate.
    The "costumed" trait was replaced with "resourceful".

    That trait was added by error, and it is something we need to pay better attention to before releasing a crew, which we intend on doing as we understand the impact this can have especially where collections are involved.







    Can you please explain that a little better? How was a Costumed Crew having the Costumed Trait an "error"?

    All the Platonian crew are clearly costumed. I think the error came in that WRG only wants a certain number of crew in each collection to make them difficult to complete to sell packs and dilithium and if they kept Platonian Chekov costumed they might have then had to add in Kirk and Spock which would have expanded the crew pool for the costumed collection making it easier to complete.
    Let’s fly!
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    Agreed, especially after WRG intentionally added more weight to traits by using them for events, bonus in voyages, and crew retrieval. The more they add power to traits the more effects it has when they mess with them. I hate that almost every time when there is trait inconsistency between cards their solution is to remove traits rather than add them.
    Let’s fly!
  • It seems reasonable to issue refunds upon request when they made those expenditures prior to the changes. I'd say it's reasonable to expect that some people made those expenditures based on the expected collection bonuses.
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2021
    It seems like Platonian Chekov lost 25% of his value by the change and anyone who got him before should be given a 25% refund if they want to still keep him and 100% if they don’t.
    Let’s fly!
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    Jurist wrote: »
    Shan wrote: »
    What happened with Platonian Chekov was unfortunate.
    The "costumed" trait was replaced with "resourceful".

    That trait was added by error, and it is something we need to pay better attention to before releasing a crew, which we intend on doing as we understand the impact this can have especially where collections are involved.

    That is the kind of mistake that once made, it is best to live with it. The bigger and more unfortunate error was removing the costumed trait after selling the card.

    The biggest impact of losing the costumed trait is not losing the collection value. There are 76 other golds that can replace him, or 17 if you only want to count the currently unnecessary golds.

    Costumed is a peculiar voyage trait. It is one of the top voyage traits with a 31.38% chance of showing up on at least one seat. It is also one for which not many crew exist that can fill them, relative to the rest of the top voyage traits. This means that good costumed voyagers are in demand.

    What a brilliant post. I am signing onto this dissenting opinion.

    @Shan The frustrating part about post-release changes to elite cards, especially weeks or months later, is that players have made irrevocable and unrecoverable resource investments based on the initial information. This entire game is based on collecting character variants and carefully investing resources, resources that are effectively players' real money and time. When a high-end variant is altered like Platonian Chekov was, those extremely costly investments are essentially stolen from players. Players make decisions relying on the product being what it says it is, then the product is changed later with no opportunity to recoup the invested resources.

    The cost of acquiring and immortalizing even an average 5-star with citations can be in the $100 range (far more for Tuesday pack cards like Platonian Chekov depending on one's luck pulling the first copy), but regardless of the actual price, there is monetary value to these investments. If changes like this are to be made to "fix" a problem, then part of the process must be to refund players' investments into the altered card, remove the card from players' rosters, and provide the purchase/investment opportunity again with the updated information. If doing this is too onerous, then the change should not be implemented regardless of any other consideration, full stop. Otherwise, it feels pretty much like a bait and switch to players, i.e. fraud. In fact, I would say that it *is* tantamount to fraud or theft of services from the players' perspective.

    =j=Jurist
    Space Junkies

    I imagine at some point changing something people paid real cashy folding money to get after that money has changed hands rises to the level of not just civil charges.......

    What if I told you not every single nit needs to be picked literally to death?
  • AviTrekAviTrek ✭✭✭✭✭
    Jurist wrote: »
    Shan wrote: »
    What happened with Platonian Chekov was unfortunate.
    The "costumed" trait was replaced with "resourceful".

    That trait was added by error, and it is something we need to pay better attention to before releasing a crew, which we intend on doing as we understand the impact this can have especially where collections are involved.

    That is the kind of mistake that once made, it is best to live with it. The bigger and more unfortunate error was removing the costumed trait after selling the card.

    The biggest impact of losing the costumed trait is not losing the collection value. There are 76 other golds that can replace him, or 17 if you only want to count the currently unnecessary golds.

    Costumed is a peculiar voyage trait. It is one of the top voyage traits with a 31.38% chance of showing up on at least one seat. It is also one for which not many crew exist that can fill them, relative to the rest of the top voyage traits. This means that good costumed voyagers are in demand.

    What a brilliant post. I am signing onto this dissenting opinion.

    @Shan The frustrating part about post-release changes to elite cards, especially weeks or months later, is that players have made irrevocable and unrecoverable resource investments based on the initial information. This entire game is based on collecting character variants and carefully investing resources, resources that are effectively players' real money and time. When a high-end variant is altered like Platonian Chekov was, those extremely costly investments are essentially stolen from players. Players make decisions relying on the product being what it says it is, then the product is changed later with no opportunity to recoup the invested resources.

    The cost of acquiring and immortalizing even an average 5-star with citations can be in the $100 range (far more for Tuesday pack cards like Platonian Chekov depending on one's luck pulling the first copy), but regardless of the actual price, there is monetary value to these investments. If changes like this are to be made to "fix" a problem, then part of the process must be to refund players' investments into the altered card, remove the card from players' rosters, and provide the purchase/investment opportunity again with the updated information. If doing this is too onerous, then the change should not be implemented regardless of any other consideration, full stop. Otherwise, it feels pretty much like a bait and switch to players, i.e. fraud. In fact, I would say that it *is* tantamount to fraud or theft of services from the players' perspective.

    =j=Jurist
    Space Junkies

    I imagine at some point changing something people paid real cashy folding money to get after that money has changed hands rises to the level of not just civil charges.......

    These are digital assets. WRG is 100% in their rights to change anything about any character whenever they choose. Every player agreed to that in the TOS for playing the game.

    Was it a bad decision, yes. Should it be corrected, yes. But please don't escalate the issue by making false claims that there was anything illegal about what they did.
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Jurist wrote: »
    Shan wrote: »
    What happened with Platonian Chekov was unfortunate.
    The "costumed" trait was replaced with "resourceful".

    That trait was added by error, and it is something we need to pay better attention to before releasing a crew, which we intend on doing as we understand the impact this can have especially where collections are involved.

    That is the kind of mistake that once made, it is best to live with it. The bigger and more unfortunate error was removing the costumed trait after selling the card.

    The biggest impact of losing the costumed trait is not losing the collection value. There are 76 other golds that can replace him, or 17 if you only want to count the currently unnecessary golds.

    Costumed is a peculiar voyage trait. It is one of the top voyage traits with a 31.38% chance of showing up on at least one seat. It is also one for which not many crew exist that can fill them, relative to the rest of the top voyage traits. This means that good costumed voyagers are in demand.

    What a brilliant post. I am signing onto this dissenting opinion.

    @Shan The frustrating part about post-release changes to elite cards, especially weeks or months later, is that players have made irrevocable and unrecoverable resource investments based on the initial information. This entire game is based on collecting character variants and carefully investing resources, resources that are effectively players' real money and time. When a high-end variant is altered like Platonian Chekov was, those extremely costly investments are essentially stolen from players. Players make decisions relying on the product being what it says it is, then the product is changed later with no opportunity to recoup the invested resources.

    The cost of acquiring and immortalizing even an average 5-star with citations can be in the $100 range (far more for Tuesday pack cards like Platonian Chekov depending on one's luck pulling the first copy), but regardless of the actual price, there is monetary value to these investments. If changes like this are to be made to "fix" a problem, then part of the process must be to refund players' investments into the altered card, remove the card from players' rosters, and provide the purchase/investment opportunity again with the updated information. If doing this is too onerous, then the change should not be implemented regardless of any other consideration, full stop. Otherwise, it feels pretty much like a bait and switch to players, i.e. fraud. In fact, I would say that it *is* tantamount to fraud or theft of services from the players' perspective.

    =j=Jurist
    Space Junkies

    I imagine at some point changing something people paid real cashy folding money to get after that money has changed hands rises to the level of not just civil charges.......

    These are digital assets. WRG is 100% in their rights to change anything about any character whenever they choose. Every player agreed to that in the TOS for playing the game.

    Was it a bad decision, yes. Should it be corrected, yes. But please don't escalate the issue by making false claims that there was anything illegal about what they did.

    I'm not making any claims.


    But, you do you.

    What if I told you not every single nit needs to be picked literally to death?
  • PeetsPeets ✭✭✭✭
    Jurist wrote: »

    @Shan The frustrating part about post-release changes to elite cards, especially weeks or months later, is that players have made irrevocable and unrecoverable resource investments based on the initial information. This entire game is based on collecting character variants and carefully investing resources, resources that are effectively players' real money and time. When a high-end variant is altered like Platonian Chekov was, those extremely costly investments are essentially stolen from players. Players make decisions relying on the product being what it says it is, then the product is changed later with no opportunity to recoup the invested resources.

    The cost of acquiring and immortalizing even an average 5-star with citations can be in the $100 range (far more for Tuesday pack cards like Platonian Chekov depending on one's luck pulling the first copy), but regardless of the actual price, there is monetary value to these investments. If changes like this are to be made to "fix" a problem, then part of the process must be to refund players' investments into the altered card, remove the card from players' rosters, and provide the purchase/investment opportunity again with the updated information. If doing this is too onerous, then the change should not be implemented regardless of any other consideration, full stop. Otherwise, it feels pretty much like a bait and switch to players, i.e. fraud. In fact, I would say that it *is* tantamount to fraud or theft of services from the players' perspective.

    =j=Jurist
    Space Junkies

    You clearly did not read the disclaimer.
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    Peets wrote: »
    Jurist wrote: »

    @Shan The frustrating part about post-release changes to elite cards, especially weeks or months later, is that players have made irrevocable and unrecoverable resource investments based on the initial information. This entire game is based on collecting character variants and carefully investing resources, resources that are effectively players' real money and time. When a high-end variant is altered like Platonian Chekov was, those extremely costly investments are essentially stolen from players. Players make decisions relying on the product being what it says it is, then the product is changed later with no opportunity to recoup the invested resources.

    The cost of acquiring and immortalizing even an average 5-star with citations can be in the $100 range (far more for Tuesday pack cards like Platonian Chekov depending on one's luck pulling the first copy), but regardless of the actual price, there is monetary value to these investments. If changes like this are to be made to "fix" a problem, then part of the process must be to refund players' investments into the altered card, remove the card from players' rosters, and provide the purchase/investment opportunity again with the updated information. If doing this is too onerous, then the change should not be implemented regardless of any other consideration, full stop. Otherwise, it feels pretty much like a bait and switch to players, i.e. fraud. In fact, I would say that it *is* tantamount to fraud or theft of services from the players' perspective.

    =j=Jurist
    Space Junkies

    You clearly did not read the disclaimer.

    The Disclaimer is the Disclaimer. But, this is turning into an ongoing thing. It's by far not the first time Crew was changed after luring people into spending actual cash folding money either directly to purchase the Crew, get chances to draw for the Crew, or do better in an Event to try and win the Crew. Wasn't at least one Crew changed during the Event it was a Reward in, with literally very little time left in the Event?

    To say giving someone who is clearly costumed the Costumed Trait was an "error", when it was obviously removed for other reasons, is pretty clearly not an "error". It was done for contrived game reasons. After money had changed hands. That is going to be one of those things that leaves a very bad taste in people's mouths. Especially well it is well past the first time.

    STANDARD DISCLAIMER: IT IS NOT SHAN'S FAULT! SHE CAN ONLY PASS ON WHAT SHE IS TOLD TO PASS ON BY THE COMPANY. THEY JUST KEEP THROWING HER UNDER THE BUS AND DOING LAPS!

    What if I told you not every single nit needs to be picked literally to death?
  • PeetsPeets ✭✭✭✭

    The Disclaimer is the Disclaimer. But, this is turning into an ongoing thing. It's by far not the first time Crew was changed after luring people into spending actual cash folding money either directly to purchase the Crew, get chances to draw for the Crew, or do better in an Event to try and win the Crew. Wasn't at least one Crew changed during the Event it was a Reward in, with literally very little time left in the Event?

    To say giving someone who is clearly costumed the Costumed Trait was an "error", when it was obviously removed for other reasons, is pretty clearly not an "error". It was done for contrived game reasons. After money had changed hands. That is going to be one of those things that leaves a very bad taste in people's mouths. Especially well it is well past the first time.

    STANDARD DISCLAIMER: IT IS NOT SHAN'S FAULT! SHE CAN ONLY PASS ON WHAT SHE IS TOLD TO PASS ON BY THE COMPANY. THEY JUST KEEP THROWING HER UNDER THE BUS AND DOING LAPS!

    Oh, I'm quite sure this was a mistake. But intentionally, I doubt that.
    Humans make mistakes each day, even at their daily job. Which will always cost someone money.
    If you knew how much money is lost each day because someone makes an error... it's insane.
    This happens because the majority of humans don't care as long it isn't their money.
    Sadly it happened to some STT players and I hope they get some compensation.

    That's why there are disclaimers.

  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yep as a Timelines Original it could have whatever traits they wanted without affecting the others.
    Let’s fly!
  • The bait and switch has been used for the five years I've been playing this game. I and many others simply stopped spending - "There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, 'Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me—you can't get fooled again.'"

    It's not a way to run a business or instill consumer confidence and I'm not surprised they're struggling.
Sign In or Register to comment.