Shoot, I didn't check the treats. Yes, it's Romantic, because it was used as a main treat and then it got greyed out on the buttom when it didn't have to be greyed out. Empurror is correct.
"Everything about the Jem'Hadar is lethal!" - Eris (ST-DS9 Episode 2x26 "The Jem'Hadar")
We have spent the last several days trying to coordinate things in our fleet so that we can start a boss battle at a specific time. This is to give us the best possible chance of beating nightmare mode. But every time, somebody in the fleet starts the battle early.
This is not somebody starting an easier battle so that they have a chance to grab some easier rewards. That happens too, but that's not what I'm complaining about (I can actually understand why that happens, even if it is annoying that people are "wasting" their valor instead of helping the fleet). What's happening is somebody is either not seeing any of the multiple communications we're sending out (in-game chat, message of the day and fleet discord), or they're not understanding them, or they're just ignoring them and doing their own thing. Or alternatively, they're starting the battle without realising that they've done it, as it's incredibly easy to hit the button by mistake.
I understand what Ben said about not wanting to lock battles to give lower level players options. But he is 100% wrong on this, and it's yet more evidence that WRG do not understand how people play their game.
We need the ability to lock battles as soon as possible. Anything else is ruining this feature for everybody.
I would like to see brutal reduced in health. It is too difficult to hit for most mid power fleets and we are getting stuck at bridge 7 and feeling pretty discouraged.
And even if you can kill Brutal, you will be stuck at Level 9 anyway as you will need Bilitrium II there. Nightmare - in my opinion - is easier (in relation) than Brutal, because you can use 5* ships and 5* crew on Nightmare which (over)compensates for the boss HP increase.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
"Everything about the Jem'Hadar is lethal!" - Eris (ST-DS9 Episode 2x26 "The Jem'Hadar")
And even if you can kill Brutal, you will be stuck at Level 9 anyway as you will need Bilitrium II there. Nightmare - in my opinion - is easier (in relation) than Brutal, because you can use 5* ships and 5* crew on Nightmare which (over)compensates for the boss HP increase.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
Nightmare is definitely easier than brutal. It takes roughly 3.5x as much damage to kill nightmare, but you can easily do 3-4x as much damage with 5* ships so that pretty much events out. You can do considerably more than that if you have the right ships maxed out (I don't, yet).
But nightmare allows you to remove 50% of the total with combo chains, brutal is limited to 40%. So that's what makes the difference.
And even if you can kill Brutal, you will be stuck at Level 9 anyway as you will need Bilitrium II there. Nightmare - in my opinion - is easier (in relation) than Brutal, because you can use 5* ships and 5* crew on Nightmare which (over)compensates for the boss HP increase.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
Nightmare is definitely easier than brutal. It takes roughly 3.5x as much damage to kill nightmare, but you can easily do 3-4x as much damage with 5* ships so that pretty much events out. You can do considerably more than that if you have the right ships maxed out (I don't, yet).
But nightmare allows you to remove 50% of the total with combo chains, brutal is limited to 40%. So that's what makes the difference.
If you have ideal ships, you can do 3.5x as much damage. Most people don’t have 10/10 Artifacts. Or 10/10 Blimps. They do have 10/10 Kraytons. Maybe. And they’re going to be using some variation of Ardra/3xHammers. But that’s only going to be double a Brutal set up.
My fleet can pretty regularly clear Brutal but our one time in Nightmare land involved spending dilithium and some using the 10 free Valour. Nobody has a 10/10 artifact with an ideal repair build.
And even if you can kill Brutal, you will be stuck at Level 9 anyway as you will need Bilitrium II there. Nightmare - in my opinion - is easier (in relation) than Brutal, because you can use 5* ships and 5* crew on Nightmare which (over)compensates for the boss HP increase.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
Nightmare is definitely easier than brutal. It takes roughly 3.5x as much damage to kill nightmare, but you can easily do 3-4x as much damage with 5* ships so that pretty much events out. You can do considerably more than that if you have the right ships maxed out (I don't, yet).
But nightmare allows you to remove 50% of the total with combo chains, brutal is limited to 40%. So that's what makes the difference.
If you have ideal ships, you can do 3.5x as much damage. Most people don’t have 10/10 Artifacts. Or 10/10 Blimps. They do have 10/10 Kraytons. Maybe. And they’re going to be using some variation of Ardra/3xHammers. But that’s only going to be double a Brutal set up.
My fleet can pretty regularly clear Brutal but our one time in Nightmare land involved spending dilithium and some using the 10 free Valour. Nobody has a 10/10 artifact with an ideal repair build.
What setup are you using for krayton? I've been trying to find a more achievable nightmare setup.
And even if you can kill Brutal, you will be stuck at Level 9 anyway as you will need Bilitrium II there. Nightmare - in my opinion - is easier (in relation) than Brutal, because you can use 5* ships and 5* crew on Nightmare which (over)compensates for the boss HP increase.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
Nightmare is definitely easier than brutal. It takes roughly 3.5x as much damage to kill nightmare, but you can easily do 3-4x as much damage with 5* ships so that pretty much events out. You can do considerably more than that if you have the right ships maxed out (I don't, yet).
But nightmare allows you to remove 50% of the total with combo chains, brutal is limited to 40%. So that's what makes the difference.
If you have ideal ships, you can do 3.5x as much damage. Most people don’t have 10/10 Artifacts. Or 10/10 Blimps. They do have 10/10 Kraytons. Maybe. And they’re going to be using some variation of Ardra/3xHammers. But that’s only going to be double a Brutal set up.
My fleet can pretty regularly clear Brutal but our one time in Nightmare land involved spending dilithium and some using the 10 free Valour. Nobody has a 10/10 artifact with an ideal repair build.
What setup are you using for krayton? I've been trying to find a more achievable nightmare setup.
I don’t do Nightmare. If I did and used a Krayton (or Tong) it would be Killy/UOB/Garth/TKK. I use UOB because I figure a <5% chance at causing the boss to miss is better than nothing.
I do have a 10/10 Blimp. A lot of fleet mates don’t. I can reliably hit 4-4.5M damage in Brutal. I’m not likely to do better than double that Nightmare.
It occurs to me that I’ve passed on irretrievable First Officer Chekhov numerous times in game. He might now be one of the best FBB crew available.
Once you reach Bridge Level 12, First Officer Checkoff won't be needed anymore and can be replaced with Demo Man Scotty on the last ENG seat (Artifact tank setup Nightmare) as the resistence will be so high that two 25% hull healers and the big ship heal (one-time use 75%) will carry the player through the entire battle time. That leaves the extra spot open to Scotty ... or of course - no tests possible yet - Vindy Mariner.
"Everything about the Jem'Hadar is lethal!" - Eris (ST-DS9 Episode 2x26 "The Jem'Hadar")
As much as I am learning from the above comments, I think they should be posted in the Ready Room thread(s). This thread is about the game mechanism itself & not crew/ship setups, as I understand its intent. 🖖
"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
1. Fix the in-game communications system, so that, at a bare minimum, fleet members do not have to rely on "non sactioned" (sic) external means in order to coördinate our actions.
2. Reduce the minimum for Personal Damage Rewards to 1 (one), on every Boss level. This will ensure that every fleet member who contributes effort is rewarded. Period.
3. Eliminate the timer. It seems to be an arbitrary mechanism designed to increase spending, which is not something I associate with Star Trek in any of its incarnations. It makes me sad to think that the @WRG Team thought this was somehow appropriate for our game.
...
I do not use that term loosely, "our game". We players have helped shape the direction of Star Trek Timelines through our voices and our actions (or inactions) over the course of its lifespan. The developers monitor our interaction with the game, true, but they also listen to us when we respond clearly and succinctly. We may not agree with their decisions, but we know they listened, usually.
I hope they are still listening, as I am. 🖖
"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
And even if you can kill Brutal, you will be stuck at Level 9 anyway as you will need Bilitrium II there. Nightmare - in my opinion - is easier (in relation) than Brutal, because you can use 5* ships and 5* crew on Nightmare which (over)compensates for the boss HP increase.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
Nightmare is definitely easier than brutal. It takes roughly 3.5x as much damage to kill nightmare, but you can easily do 3-4x as much damage with 5* ships so that pretty much events out. You can do considerably more than that if you have the right ships maxed out (I don't, yet).
But nightmare allows you to remove 50% of the total with combo chains, brutal is limited to 40%. So that's what makes the difference.
If you have ideal ships, you can do 3.5x as much damage. Most people don’t have 10/10 Artifacts. Or 10/10 Blimps. They do have 10/10 Kraytons. Maybe. And they’re going to be using some variation of Ardra/3xHammers. But that’s only going to be double a Brutal set up.
My fleet can pretty regularly clear Brutal but our one time in Nightmare land involved spending dilithium and some using the 10 free Valour. Nobody has a 10/10 artifact with an ideal repair build.
FWIW, I don't have the Artifact either. That would be one of the "right ships" that I mentioned not having yet (next month's arena should do it). My estimate of 3-4x the damage was based on using the T'Ong.
And even if you can kill Brutal, you will be stuck at Level 9 anyway as you will need Bilitrium II there. Nightmare - in my opinion - is easier (in relation) than Brutal, because you can use 5* ships and 5* crew on Nightmare which (over)compensates for the boss HP increase.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
Nightmare is definitely easier than brutal. It takes roughly 3.5x as much damage to kill nightmare, but you can easily do 3-4x as much damage with 5* ships so that pretty much events out. You can do considerably more than that if you have the right ships maxed out (I don't, yet).
But nightmare allows you to remove 50% of the total with combo chains, brutal is limited to 40%. So that's what makes the difference.
If you have ideal ships, you can do 3.5x as much damage. Most people don’t have 10/10 Artifacts. Or 10/10 Blimps. They do have 10/10 Kraytons. Maybe. And they’re going to be using some variation of Ardra/3xHammers. But that’s only going to be double a Brutal set up.
My fleet can pretty regularly clear Brutal but our one time in Nightmare land involved spending dilithium and some using the 10 free Valour. Nobody has a 10/10 artifact with an ideal repair build.
FWIW, I don't have the Artifact either. That would be one of the "right ships" that I mentioned not having yet (next month's arena should do it). My estimate of 3-4x the damage was based on using the T'Ong.
My estimate of double damage was based on using decent ships with relatively easy to obtain crew. Which includes the T'Ong. The average player isn't going to score 10-12 million damage with a T'Ong.
And even if you can kill Brutal, you will be stuck at Level 9 anyway as you will need Bilitrium II there. Nightmare - in my opinion - is easier (in relation) than Brutal, because you can use 5* ships and 5* crew on Nightmare which (over)compensates for the boss HP increase.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
Nightmare is definitely easier than brutal. It takes roughly 3.5x as much damage to kill nightmare, but you can easily do 3-4x as much damage with 5* ships so that pretty much events out. You can do considerably more than that if you have the right ships maxed out (I don't, yet).
But nightmare allows you to remove 50% of the total with combo chains, brutal is limited to 40%. So that's what makes the difference.
If you have ideal ships, you can do 3.5x as much damage. Most people don’t have 10/10 Artifacts. Or 10/10 Blimps. They do have 10/10 Kraytons. Maybe. And they’re going to be using some variation of Ardra/3xHammers. But that’s only going to be double a Brutal set up.
My fleet can pretty regularly clear Brutal but our one time in Nightmare land involved spending dilithium and some using the 10 free Valour. Nobody has a 10/10 artifact with an ideal repair build.
FWIW, I don't have the Artifact either. That would be one of the "right ships" that I mentioned not having yet (next month's arena should do it). My estimate of 3-4x the damage was based on using the T'Ong.
My estimate of double damage was based on using decent ships with relatively easy to obtain crew. Which includes the T'Ong. The average player isn't going to score 10-12 million damage with a T'Ong.
I've been testing T'Ong with Maco at 1/5 and either 3 hull boost or 2 hull boost and an attack boost(either bashir for pure boost or EMA for boost with his own burst). They've all been around 5m in damage. FFing MACO would help a little but I have trouble seeing how that gets me to 10m.
Trying to run a normal boss for the players not getting rewards on hard but even at normal you need a minimum of 1 million points. That’s way too much. I am trying to unlock the nodes for them on the chains since as newer players they don’t have all the crew. But it’s too difficult because I am not allowed to unlock any more nodes in a chain once I have unlocked one or more in a single run. So these chains can’t be done and as such we can’t get to 50% dead for more rewards for the ones able to get the high 1 million point threshold. Very frustrating. We as a fleet can’t finish brutal unless we build up everyone in fleet but we can’t do that with these ludicrous minimum amounts of damage and node unlocking rules.
My last two runs with tong were 9.8 and 10.3, using maco 5/5, dereth (1/5 on first run and 5/5 on second), laborer kirk 1/5, and karate crusher 1/5. It's a far cry from the 20+ I'm seeing here with artifact but seems like good results to me.
We have the confirmation now that "admirals or officers only being able to start a battle" will be in a future build (9.2.0 most likely). That's already a big bonus.
"Everything about the Jem'Hadar is lethal!" - Eris (ST-DS9 Episode 2x26 "The Jem'Hadar")
There is one that I haven't seen mentioned a lot yet, similar to the one that leaves both copies of the same trait greyed out, after it's been used only once.
If a trait (say Crafty) is the known trait for a node and the hidden trait for another, then it will obviously appear only once in the trait list. If the node where Crafty is the known trait gets unlocked first, for some reason that trait will be greyed out in the list, as if it had been already used, but it hasn't, because known traits aren't in the list.
That happened to my fleet yesterday and it was confusing, because we were left with an impossible node, until we figured out that the trait that we needed had been greyed out by this bug even if it had not been used yet.
Sorry in the lateness in replying to this:
I have been including greyed out traits all through, so the node I came across which was seemingly impossible was accounting for greyed out nodes already.
However, it was very much an isolated incident and hasn't happened again so it may well be that I missed a combination.
I'm almost certain I didn't, but I can also be wrong!
Fleet Admiral of NCC UK Midlands."Leave any bigotry in your quarters. There's no room for it on the bridge." - J.T. Kirk, 2266
We have the confirmation now that "admirals or officers only being able to start a battle" will be in a future build (9.2.0 most likely). That's already a big bonus.
And while i greatly appreciate the acknowledgement of this issue by wrg, and the intention to fix the problem, i will not celebrate or congratulate them until the fix is actually implemented.
And, i will continue to request a detailed acknowledgment and prioritization of the many other issues that have been raised in this thread.
With regard to the “request” to be able to see who started boss fights , i really have to say that i think this is a request that is not serving the interests of the gaming community. We are dealing with significant communication issues that prevent people feom being able to coordinate. Why are we asking for a tool to punich players who are falling victim to a poorly designed communication platform? This request is a fools errand in my opinion, and wrf would be better served to publically acknowledfe how piss poor their comms are, and either make an official wrg channel on discord or something else, or they should announce that fixing the comms is a priority.
I really dont understand why our players want to punish players for trying to play a game feature thats supposed to be in beta and is crippled by poopy comms .
I do understand wrg’s motivation, as they can point the finger at players instead of themselves.
Regarding chat improvement: at this time we are still looking at what our options could be, and unfortunately there are complications.
Being able to see who started a battle is a request that has been submitted by players, and we can understand why. There can indeed be various innocent reasons for a player to start a battle, and I would think fleet would recognize that and lend a helping hand to whomever might be confused.
But we can also see that there might be bad actors and that fleets need a way to be able to identify them and act accordingly.
I'm a little shocked to see Bridge Level 13 already requires 20 Bilitrium III (even though neither I nor II). It would be - and that's the main point of the issue - much more doable if Ultra-Nightmare offered Bilitrium I on top of II and III, so you wouldn't have to fight Nightmare and Ultra-Nightmare at the same time. Ultra alone is hard enough to kill on a daily basis, even for the most advanced fleets, trust me.
"Everything about the Jem'Hadar is lethal!" - Eris (ST-DS9 Episode 2x26 "The Jem'Hadar")
Regarding chat improvement: at this time we are still looking at what our options could be, and unfortunately there are complications.
Being able to see who started a battle is a request that has been submitted by players, and we can understand why. There can indeed be various innocent reasons for a player to start a battle, and I would think fleet would recognize that and lend a helping hand to whomever might be confused.
But we can also see that there might be bad actors and that fleets need a way to be able to identify them and act accordingly.
@Shan , at the very least, could the date of the message be added in the current chat?
We usually use Discord but for those fleetmates who don't want it, we sometimes post in fleet chat, and all it shows are the times, so people are getting confused because older messages for all intents and purposes look like new ones even though they should no longer be acted upon.
Comments
This is not somebody starting an easier battle so that they have a chance to grab some easier rewards. That happens too, but that's not what I'm complaining about (I can actually understand why that happens, even if it is annoying that people are "wasting" their valor instead of helping the fleet). What's happening is somebody is either not seeing any of the multiple communications we're sending out (in-game chat, message of the day and fleet discord), or they're not understanding them, or they're just ignoring them and doing their own thing. Or alternatively, they're starting the battle without realising that they've done it, as it's incredibly easy to hit the button by mistake.
I understand what Ben said about not wanting to lock battles to give lower level players options. But he is 100% wrong on this, and it's yet more evidence that WRG do not understand how people play their game.
We need the ability to lock battles as soon as possible. Anything else is ruining this feature for everybody.
About locking battles, I think everything has been said and the support with "meowsomes" given also speaks a clear language. I hope the developurrs are going to act on the clear opinion of the seasoned part of the commewnity.
Nightmare is definitely easier than brutal. It takes roughly 3.5x as much damage to kill nightmare, but you can easily do 3-4x as much damage with 5* ships so that pretty much events out. You can do considerably more than that if you have the right ships maxed out (I don't, yet).
But nightmare allows you to remove 50% of the total with combo chains, brutal is limited to 40%. So that's what makes the difference.
If you have ideal ships, you can do 3.5x as much damage. Most people don’t have 10/10 Artifacts. Or 10/10 Blimps. They do have 10/10 Kraytons. Maybe. And they’re going to be using some variation of Ardra/3xHammers. But that’s only going to be double a Brutal set up.
My fleet can pretty regularly clear Brutal but our one time in Nightmare land involved spending dilithium and some using the 10 free Valour. Nobody has a 10/10 artifact with an ideal repair build.
What setup are you using for krayton? I've been trying to find a more achievable nightmare setup.
I don’t do Nightmare. If I did and used a Krayton (or Tong) it would be Killy/UOB/Garth/TKK. I use UOB because I figure a <5% chance at causing the boss to miss is better than nothing.
I do have a 10/10 Blimp. A lot of fleet mates don’t. I can reliably hit 4-4.5M damage in Brutal. I’m not likely to do better than double that Nightmare.
It occurs to me that I’ve passed on irretrievable First Officer Chekhov numerous times in game. He might now be one of the best FBB crew available.
Wouldn't Kal'Hyah Bashir have a higher attack and even shorter cycle time?
1. Fix the in-game communications system, so that, at a bare minimum, fleet members do not have to rely on "non sactioned" (sic) external means in order to coördinate our actions.
2. Reduce the minimum for Personal Damage Rewards to 1 (one), on every Boss level. This will ensure that every fleet member who contributes effort is rewarded. Period.
3. Eliminate the timer. It seems to be an arbitrary mechanism designed to increase spending, which is not something I associate with Star Trek in any of its incarnations. It makes me sad to think that the @WRG Team thought this was somehow appropriate for our game.
...
I do not use that term loosely, "our game". We players have helped shape the direction of Star Trek Timelines through our voices and our actions (or inactions) over the course of its lifespan. The developers monitor our interaction with the game, true, but they also listen to us when we respond clearly and succinctly. We may not agree with their decisions, but we know they listened, usually.
I hope they are still listening, as I am. 🖖
FWIW, I don't have the Artifact either. That would be one of the "right ships" that I mentioned not having yet (next month's arena should do it). My estimate of 3-4x the damage was based on using the T'Ong.
PERIOD.
Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
My estimate of double damage was based on using decent ships with relatively easy to obtain crew. Which includes the T'Ong. The average player isn't going to score 10-12 million damage with a T'Ong.
I've been testing T'Ong with Maco at 1/5 and either 3 hull boost or 2 hull boost and an attack boost(either bashir for pure boost or EMA for boost with his own burst). They've all been around 5m in damage. FFing MACO would help a little but I have trouble seeing how that gets me to 10m.
The horse is not just dead, its been beaten down into basic atoms.
We deserve a prioritized summary from wrg, with the highest priority items that were identified from our feedback and how they will be incorporated.
We can add another 29 pages, but why? Theres plenty for them to start with.
Sorry in the lateness in replying to this:
I have been including greyed out traits all through, so the node I came across which was seemingly impossible was accounting for greyed out nodes already.
However, it was very much an isolated incident and hasn't happened again so it may well be that I missed a combination.
I'm almost certain I didn't, but I can also be wrong!
And while i greatly appreciate the acknowledgement of this issue by wrg, and the intention to fix the problem, i will not celebrate or congratulate them until the fix is actually implemented.
And, i will continue to request a detailed acknowledgment and prioritization of the many other issues that have been raised in this thread.
With regard to the “request” to be able to see who started boss fights , i really have to say that i think this is a request that is not serving the interests of the gaming community. We are dealing with significant communication issues that prevent people feom being able to coordinate. Why are we asking for a tool to punich players who are falling victim to a poorly designed communication platform? This request is a fools errand in my opinion, and wrf would be better served to publically acknowledfe how piss poor their comms are, and either make an official wrg channel on discord or something else, or they should announce that fixing the comms is a priority.
I really dont understand why our players want to punish players for trying to play a game feature thats supposed to be in beta and is crippled by poopy comms .
I do understand wrg’s motivation, as they can point the finger at players instead of themselves.
Being able to see who started a battle is a request that has been submitted by players, and we can understand why. There can indeed be various innocent reasons for a player to start a battle, and I would think fleet would recognize that and lend a helping hand to whomever might be confused.
But we can also see that there might be bad actors and that fleets need a way to be able to identify them and act accordingly.
@Shan , at the very least, could the date of the message be added in the current chat?
We usually use Discord but for those fleetmates who don't want it, we sometimes post in fleet chat, and all it shows are the times, so people are getting confused because older messages for all intents and purposes look like new ones even though they should no longer be acted upon.