Home› The Bridge

Faction Event Change

SMMSMM ✭✭✭
in The Bridge
Regarding the announcement of the change, it was combined with an event announcement. This means that effectively two different discussions are combined into one thread. This increases the time that interested parties have to take to follow their thread of interest.

The announcement was poor as answers to obvious questions were not tackled or handled in the original brief (OP). Again this increases the time taken to assimilate information.

Failure to provide information in a concise, ordered and logical fashion is replicated in the game. DB needs management that who will accept that this situation is not tenable.

Comments

  • SMMSMM ✭✭✭
    Shan wrote: »
    Keep in mind that this is part of a multi-stage approach to performance improvements.
    We will monitor things on your end but your feedback will be very important as well for our assessments.

    Why not try and solicit feedback before making changes?
  • Banjo1012Banjo1012 ✭✭✭✭✭
    SMM wrote: »
    Shan wrote: »
    Keep in mind that this is part of a multi-stage approach to performance improvements.
    We will monitor things on your end but your feedback will be very important as well for our assessments.

    Why not try and solicit feedback before making changes?

    Because the affect of those changes won’t be known until we actually experience them
  • FutureImperfectaFutureImperfecta ✭✭✭✭✭
    SMM wrote: »
    Shan wrote: »
    Keep in mind that this is part of a multi-stage approach to performance improvements.
    We will monitor things on your end but your feedback will be very important as well for our assessments.

    Why not try and solicit feedback before making changes?

    Lol well, everyone knows that it's much easier to break something and apologize then discuss it and do it anyways.

    I'm honestly surprised there was any warning at all.

    Lol could have blamed an accident, "oh, some of the missions were lost but we're gonna run the event anyways and monitor performance"

    (It's Kinda like when they tinkered with the rules in expeditions so you couldn't do a red shirt tactic to save a bad run, or locking Galaxy builds to one build per formula appearance.)
    -

    I find it very funny though this was done having never really been mentioned by DB before.. but that reevaluation and rebalancing of event prizes they mentioned in.. October ? Is still nowhere to be seen.
  • JhamelJhamel ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2018
    A multi-stage approach? Meowch ... that means there's gunna be more changes coming ... hopefully Galaxy next time (e. g. a limitation of Super-Rare turn-ins at the last 30 minutes), leave our shuttles alone. :(
    "Everything about the Jem'Hadar is lethal!" - Eris (ST-DS9 Episode 2x26 "The Jem'Hadar")
  • S14 Bri S14 Bri ✭✭✭
    Faction events are the only events I enjoy.... I hope this doesn’t make it worse. I can only imagine opening countless 4-5 crew shuttles and not having enough missions available to choose 3 crew missions. That’ll be frustrating, debilitating and tantamount to another nerf
  • Secret JourneySecret Journey ✭✭✭✭
    Bri wrote: »
    Faction events are the only events I enjoy.... I hope this doesn’t make it worse.

    I got a bad feeling about this...
    DB = Climbing up an endless wall...
  • Commander MorakCommander Morak ✭✭✭
    Bri wrote: »
    Faction events are the only events I enjoy.... I hope this doesn’t make it worse. I can only imagine opening countless 4-5 crew shuttles and not having enough missions available to choose 3 crew missions. That’ll be frustrating, debilitating and tantamount to another nerf

    Why does requiring more crew give you lower odds of success, anyway? One would think requiring more crew would be a penalty on its own.
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    Commander Morak wrote: »
    Bri wrote: »
    Faction events are the only events I enjoy.... I hope this doesn’t make it worse. I can only imagine opening countless 4-5 crew shuttles and not having enough missions available to choose 3 crew missions. That’ll be frustrating, debilitating and tantamount to another nerf

    Why does requiring more crew give you lower odds of success, anyway? One would think requiring more crew would be a penalty on its own.

    Exactly. Using more Crew should make it easier to hit 99%, not HARDER

    {Waiting patiently for the "That is not how they implemented it, you idiot" guy........}


    Scott


    "The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
  • DavideBooksDavideBooks ✭✭✭✭✭
    The kick-start was an unintended loop-hole that DB ignored until too many people (myself included) exploited it and it became a drain on infrastructure. They have now decided to scale the loop-hole down which is displeasing, but they did not remove it. This seems to me to be an unfortunate development, but understandable and shows DB is not trying to be mean or greedy. If they wanted mean and greedy, they would have closed the loop-hole.

    The issue of missions being harder with more crew needed is a different issue that is annoying.

    The issue of apparently too-high failure rates is another issue that angers players and seems wrong.

    If they were more open about why those last two issues seem to be there, I think most of us would be satisfied.
  • Commander MorakCommander Morak ✭✭✭
    DavideBooks wrote: »
    The issue of missions being harder with more crew needed is a different issue that is annoying.

    The highest stat over all crew gives the biggest boost to the success of a mission. Everything else is diminishing returns, so a logarithmic curve in improvement.

    Difficulty, however, seems to increase in a linear fashion as more crew are added. They should really revisit this aspect.
  • Commander SinclairCommander Sinclair ✭✭✭✭✭
    SMM wrote: »
    Shan wrote: »
    Keep in mind that this is part of a multi-stage approach to performance improvements.
    We will monitor things on your end but your feedback will be very important as well for our assessments.

    Why not try and solicit feedback before making changes?

    Isn't that what these forums are for? Just sayin'...
    I want to become a Dilionaire...
  • FutureImperfectaFutureImperfecta ✭✭✭✭✭
    The way i figure it, reach slot has a number value needed to reach 99%

    Let's say 1600 is 99% as a good guess

    So a one man shuttle during the mirror mega with 4/5 Picard at say 920 command then skill boost would hit 99%

    But, you put a second seat in and that character has 720 engineering but that slot need 1600 to reach 99% also
    So youd get roughly a 75%
    A 3rd seat, this time science and 800points
    Would bring you to about 65%

    A 4th and 5th seat, same scenario


    Numbers are just pulled out my butt, not an exact science it figures and just the way iequate things.
Sign In or Register to comment.