Home The Bridge
Options

Key information about the event: Fast as Light (flashback) - 10/31

1235

Comments

  • Options
    PenguinJimPenguinJim ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2019
    Antasil wrote: »
    I have to add my 2 cents here and voice my extreme disappointment on the Archer card, in particular the art. He looks horrible! What is his right hand doing upside down?

    Ummm... I don't think you're looking right. That's his left hand coming out of the right sleeve of his jacket, hence the thumb being at the bottom of the hand. His left foot is clearly coming out of the left jacket sleeve. His right foot is in his left boot, and his right hand is in his right boot. Just like in the episode, remember?

    Doing all that and then getting his head up there is obviously why he has the Resourceful trait. :p

    Edit: pic!
    omv0189ta5jr.png
  • Options
    PenguinJim wrote: »
    Antasil wrote: »
    I have to add my 2 cents here and voice my extreme disappointment on the Archer card, in particular the art. He looks horrible! What is his right hand doing upside down?

    Ummm... I don't think you're looking right. That's his left hand coming out of the right sleeve of his jacket, hence the thumb being at the bottom of the hand. His left foot is clearly coming out of the left jacket sleeve. His right foot is in his left boot, and his right hand is in his right boot. Just like in the episode, remember?

    Doing all that and then getting his head up there is obviously why he has the Resourceful trait. :p

    Edit: pic!
    omv0189ta5jr.png

    It is really bad. His cap is perched on his head like a schoolboy. His face looks like he’s having intestinal distress.
  • Options
    DavideBooksDavideBooks ✭✭✭✭✭
    Rank 5000 is what I will aim for to finish Duchamps.

    I'll see Friday who the next person is and event type, but I'll probably stop at 350K, even though I like Archer. This one just won't benefit my crew.
  • Options
    AviTrekAviTrek ✭✭✭✭✭
    Shan, I totally get the issue of 4* crew. What I don't get is why it's an issue to still stick an existing 5* at the end of the thresholds.

    As for Desert Archer, I just want to say that I appreciate that his legs look natural. We've seen a lot of artwork that has someone's legs placed in wholly unnatural directions. That bothers me far more than the infamous orange and teal lighting. (Seriously, try to pose like Mirror Phlox sometime.)

    Sticking an existing 5* would be easy, but you're now adding a second existing 5* to the event. And you would probably need to change the pack too. Honey Bare is the 5* for this event. She is included as a reward(just last week because of that shift). It doesn't make sense for her to be a rank and threshold reward. So any 5* threshold would be a new crew added to the event. In a replay when a new 5* is created and added as rank, then the existing crew gets to be in threshold as a means for players to get the card that was in the original event. But with Honey Bare already available a threshold reward would be new.
  • Options
    [RotP]Ran Airen[RotP]Ran Airen ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2019
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Shan, I totally get the issue of 4* crew. What I don't get is why it's an issue to still stick an existing 5* at the end of the thresholds.

    As for Desert Archer, I just want to say that I appreciate that his legs look natural. We've seen a lot of artwork that has someone's legs placed in wholly unnatural directions. That bothers me far more than the infamous orange and teal lighting. (Seriously, try to pose like Mirror Phlox sometime.)

    Sticking an existing 5* would be easy, but you're now adding a second existing 5* to the event. And you would probably need to change the pack too. Honey Bare is the 5* for this event. She is included as a reward(just last week because of that shift). It doesn't make sense for her to be a rank and threshold reward. So any 5* threshold would be a new crew added to the event. In a replay when a new 5* is created and added as rank, then the existing crew gets to be in threshold as a means for players to get the card that was in the original event. But with Honey Bare already available a threshold reward would be new.

    DB can do whatever they want and call it a "Flashback". They completely changed the Solo Rewards (adding in the now standard post 130k thesholds) and the Rank (Top 1500 gold and other goodies). They could have thrown in whatever else they wanted to. They could have done that, not changed the pack and kept it just as Flashback-y as what they have delivered.

    I think the ultimate argument is a general dissatisfaction that we are getting less (or at least less opportunity) than a "Re-run" when a Flashback doesn't seem to actually save them developer time.
    Member of Rise of the Phoenix.
  • Options
    marschallinmarschallin ✭✭✭✭
    Ren~ wrote: »
    I'm sorry but "change is inevitable" is con artist speak. Change happens sure, it can be good or bad and I'm sure most people here will agree that here you're serving us the bad version. You don't have to create new crew for the leaderboards in reruns and you can also an older card to the 400k threshold. You chose not to. You're making bad changes and if you want to call it nefarious that's up to you.

    You could also use that opportunity to make improvements and come up with something that doesn't require us to be on our toes to know exactly what's going to happen in the coming week with half a dozen rewards structures that get changed on a whim.

    Sorry to be harsh, you're just the PR person and that's your job, but that kind of PR speak is rather upsetting.

    This is what entitlement culture looks like

    I find it amusing when people whine about customer service and entitlement culture of the current generation.

    Customer service has gone down the toilet in the last 40-50 years. When I was young, I could walk into a department store, be greeted by a clerk who asked me what I needed, and the clerk would show me all the options, speak knowledgeably about them, ring me up, and thank me for my purchase. And if the thing I purchased wasn’t as advertised, or broke prematurely, all I had to do was take it back to the store, where they’d apologize profusely and give me my money back.

    Now, you walk into a store, if there is a clerk (a big if) they ignore you until you ask for help, which is usually useless anyway, as they don’t know anything about the merchandise they’re selling. I have to schlep my purchases to a centrally located register, where I am never thanked for giving the store my business. And if it breaks, I’m on my own if it’s after 2 weeks. The company isn’t responsible for producing a piece of garbage. Joke’s on me, I guess, since they already have my money.

    But sure, *this* generation is the entitlement culture. Seems like all this generation is doing is calling a spade a spade.

    I like the game, but DB’s responsiveness to their customers could certainly stand to be better. Talking about how you’d like things to be improved isn’t entitlement, unless you’re a corporate shill.

    This happened due to consumer choice. People used to be willing to pay mid-range prices for a better service and quality product (mid-range department stores). In the never ending price war, consumers stopped shopping at mid-range stores and they're gradually dying off. This requires less and less staff and lower quality products to compete with Wal-mart and amazon having cheaper options. Now all we've got are extreme high end products and dirt cheap garbage, with very little in between.

    If great customer service and good value products for a mid-range price were a successful business model it would still exist (at least in department stores and for non-specialty products). Some people pay lip service saying they want this experience and product, but not enough of them showed up with their wallets to keep it alive and it's gone.

    That may be true (I’m not knowledgeable enough to say) but I still don’t think it’s entitlement to express dissatisfaction with something you don’t like, which is what I was saying.
  • Options
    This happened due to consumer choice. People used to be willing to pay mid-range prices for a better service and quality product (mid-range department stores). In the never ending price war, consumers stopped shopping at mid-range stores and they're gradually dying off. This requires less and less staff and lower quality products to compete with Wal-mart and amazon having cheaper options. Now all we've got are extreme high end products and dirt cheap garbage, with very little in between.

    If great customer service and good value products for a mid-range price were a successful business model it would still exist (at least in department stores and for non-specialty products). Some people pay lip service saying they want this experience and product, but not enough of them showed up with their wallets to keep it alive and it's gone.

    It's not that people aren't willing to pay more for better quality/service, it's that they're not willing to pay enough more. The fact is, most people go for the lowest price, while the cost of noticeably better service is more than most people are willing to pay.

    There's also the economic argument, which is that a large segment of the population has less disposable wealth than in the past, Which is partly due to the increased cost of modern living (phone, cable tv, internet, etc.)
  • Options
    How about an Expedition Event?
    Maybe for the December Mega?
    What do you say @Shan ?
  • Options
    12345678 of 12345678912345678 of 123456789 ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2019
    Ren~ wrote: »
    I'm sorry but "change is inevitable" is con artist speak. Change happens sure, it can be good or bad and I'm sure most people here will agree that here you're serving us the bad version. You don't have to create new crew for the leaderboards in reruns and you can also an older card to the 400k threshold. You chose not to. You're making bad changes and if you want to call it nefarious that's up to you.

    You could also use that opportunity to make improvements and come up with something that doesn't require us to be on our toes to know exactly what's going to happen in the coming week with half a dozen rewards structures that get changed on a whim.

    Sorry to be harsh, you're just the PR person and that's your job, but that kind of PR speak is rather upsetting.

    This is what entitlement culture looks like

    This is what unnecessary culture war looks like. 🙄

    Ren may've been harsh in comparing old event format v1 to old event format v2, but that's hardly grounds for invoking further controversial political/corporate buzzwords. So disingenuous and sad to see from a leading fleet admiral.

    The 400k threshold is hardly a gimmie and not much of an incentive when less than 5-10% of players hit that total in an event. If DB is going to update the rank and threshold reward structure regardless, why wouldn't it include the 400k threshold update as well?

    Personally I'd like that last star for Honey Bare, but I probably wasn't going to waste my time grinding for it in a buildathon where I don't care about the next week's gold. I wouldn't have bought packs/offers for that star either, so DB lost nothing aside from my engagement with the event and related use of adwarps. And since I tend to appreciate DB not incentivizing my engagement more often than not, I'm fine with no reward at 400k.

    Enjoy the run for top 1500 to all interested. 🖖

    (Side note: Archer is in no way a telepath)
  • Options
    AviTrekAviTrek ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hasedoki wrote: »
    And for the fifth or sixth time I run to complete a character in an upcoming event . . . and forget to leave the level 90 uniform blank even though I know it will be dropping.

    One day I'll hopefully learn.

    On the bright side, to immortalize my last blue all I need is a single single hockey Kim.

    I never bother to wait for that item. I'd rather have the big final stats boost for most of the event than lose 1-2 days before I get it. It's just one replication and I have more replications than I need anyway.
  • Options
    Banjo1012Banjo1012 ✭✭✭✭✭
    AviTrek wrote: »
    Hasedoki wrote: »
    And for the fifth or sixth time I run to complete a character in an upcoming event . . . and forget to leave the level 90 uniform blank even though I know it will be dropping.

    One day I'll hopefully learn.

    On the bright side, to immortalize my last blue all I need is a single single hockey Kim.

    I never bother to wait for that item. I'd rather have the big final stats boost for most of the event than lose 1-2 days before I get it. It's just one replication and I have more replications than I need anyway.

    I do the same thing and dump it in the replicator when i claim it

  • Options
    marschallinmarschallin ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2019
    Paladin 27 wrote: »
    Ren~ wrote: »

    I'm sorry but "change is inevitable" is con artist speak. Change happens sure, it can be good or bad and I'm sure most people here will agree that here you're serving us the bad version. You don't have to create new crew for the leaderboards in reruns and you can also an older card to the 400k threshold. You chose not to. You're making bad changes and if you want to call it nefarious that's up to you.

    You could also use that opportunity to make improvements and come up with something that doesn't require us to be on our toes to know exactly what's going to happen in the coming week with half a dozen rewards structures that get changed on a whim.

    Sorry to be harsh, you're just the PR person and that's your job, but that kind of PR speak is rather upsetting.

    IMHO there is such a thing as an entitled customer, but OP is not one.

    In comparing flashbacks and reruns:

    Positives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • Get an additional star on an existing gold the prior week for top 1500
    • No new crew in a pack with two golds and odds half as good as normal packs
    Negatives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • No additional star on an existing gold for 400k



    I’m too tired to go back through al the thread, but initially there was a polite argument that adding in a 400K threshold was not hard in terms of programming, and if DB was already doing some extra programming for the event (that it, this was not an exact copy of the previous event) why not do that as well?

    Then accusations of being entitled and demanding began to be floated around, and people started to respond to being called entitled, and things got a bit more heated etc, etc, but the initial suggestion was not entitled, but rather reasonable IMHO.
  • Options
    ~peregrine~~peregrine~ ✭✭✭✭✭
    🍿
    "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
  • Options
    Ren~Ren~ ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2019
    Paladin 27 wrote: »
    Ren~ wrote: »

    I'm sorry but "change is inevitable" is con artist speak. Change happens sure, it can be good or bad and I'm sure most people here will agree that here you're serving us the bad version. You don't have to create new crew for the leaderboards in reruns and you can also an older card to the 400k threshold. You chose not to. You're making bad changes and if you want to call it nefarious that's up to you.

    You could also use that opportunity to make improvements and come up with something that doesn't require us to be on our toes to know exactly what's going to happen in the coming week with half a dozen rewards structures that get changed on a whim.

    Sorry to be harsh, you're just the PR person and that's your job, but that kind of PR speak is rather upsetting.

    IMHO there is such a thing as an entitled customer, but OP is not one.

    In comparing flashbacks and reruns:

    Positives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • Get an additional star on an existing gold the prior week for top 1500
    • No new crew in a pack with two golds and odds half as good as normal packs
    Negatives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • No additional star on an existing gold for 400k

    I think the issue with the OP here, is that they basically inferred that DB was acting like a con artist in not giving flashbacks a threshold existing gold at 400k.

    For those of us considering both the positives and negatives of flashbacks not just the one negative, things are basically a wash and we find the con artist description unfair and inaccurate.

    As a reminder, this was a specific answer to the typical PR BS Shan served us. It's her job and I'm aware of that, but I'm calling a spade a spade. Trying to convince us that change for the worst is acceptable because change is "inevitable" is a con. If you think otherwise, I'm welcoming any argument proving me that there are forces of nature akin to the law of physics at work in game design. If you also think that paying customers should accept getting less according to these laws then I'm also waiting for evidence. In case we can agree that game design is what the designers want, Shan should at least have the decency to acknowledge that they're taking something away from us and give us a solid explanation on why this is happening and not the "we're too busy" excuse, this is deplorable and not good enough to justify no 400k gold crew.
  • Options
    Travis S McClainTravis S McClain ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ren~ wrote: »
    Paladin 27 wrote: »
    Ren~ wrote: »

    I'm sorry but "change is inevitable" is con artist speak. Change happens sure, it can be good or bad and I'm sure most people here will agree that here you're serving us the bad version. You don't have to create new crew for the leaderboards in reruns and you can also an older card to the 400k threshold. You chose not to. You're making bad changes and if you want to call it nefarious that's up to you.

    You could also use that opportunity to make improvements and come up with something that doesn't require us to be on our toes to know exactly what's going to happen in the coming week with half a dozen rewards structures that get changed on a whim.

    Sorry to be harsh, you're just the PR person and that's your job, but that kind of PR speak is rather upsetting.

    IMHO there is such a thing as an entitled customer, but OP is not one.

    In comparing flashbacks and reruns:

    Positives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • Get an additional star on an existing gold the prior week for top 1500
    • No new crew in a pack with two golds and odds half as good as normal packs
    Negatives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • No additional star on an existing gold for 400k

    I think the issue with the OP here, is that they basically inferred that DB was acting like a con artist in not giving flashbacks a threshold existing gold at 400k.

    For those of us considering both the positives and negatives of flashbacks not just the one negative, things are basically a wash and we find the con artist description unfair and inaccurate.

    As a reminder, this was a specific answer to the typical PR BS Shan served us. It's her job and I'm aware of that, but I'm calling a spade a spade. Trying to convince us that change for the worst is acceptable because change is "inevitable" is a con. If you think otherwise, I'm welcoming any argument proving me that there are forces of nature akin to the law of physics at work in game design. If you also think that paying customers should accept getting less according to these laws then I'm also waiting for evidence. In case we can agree that game design is what the designers want, Shan should at least have the decency to acknowledge that they're taking something away from us and give us a solid explanation on why this is happening and not the "we're too busy" excuse, this is deplorable and not good enough to justify no 400k gold crew.

    That's pretty harsh, @Ren~, and in my estimation out of bounds. Nothing has been taken away from anyone and no one is getting less for what they're paying. I'm disappointed by the absence of an existing 5* in a Flashback threshold table, but I'm not being cheated by it. There's nothing indecent about Shan's statements. And if you find this "deplorable", I have some things to tell you about the world outside this game.
  • Options
    Ren~Ren~ ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2019
    Ren~ wrote: »
    Paladin 27 wrote: »
    Ren~ wrote: »

    I'm sorry but "change is inevitable" is con artist speak. Change happens sure, it can be good or bad and I'm sure most people here will agree that here you're serving us the bad version. You don't have to create new crew for the leaderboards in reruns and you can also an older card to the 400k threshold. You chose not to. You're making bad changes and if you want to call it nefarious that's up to you.

    You could also use that opportunity to make improvements and come up with something that doesn't require us to be on our toes to know exactly what's going to happen in the coming week with half a dozen rewards structures that get changed on a whim.

    Sorry to be harsh, you're just the PR person and that's your job, but that kind of PR speak is rather upsetting.

    IMHO there is such a thing as an entitled customer, but OP is not one.

    In comparing flashbacks and reruns:

    Positives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • Get an additional star on an existing gold the prior week for top 1500
    • No new crew in a pack with two golds and odds half as good as normal packs
    Negatives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • No additional star on an existing gold for 400k

    I think the issue with the OP here, is that they basically inferred that DB was acting like a con artist in not giving flashbacks a threshold existing gold at 400k.

    For those of us considering both the positives and negatives of flashbacks not just the one negative, things are basically a wash and we find the con artist description unfair and inaccurate.

    As a reminder, this was a specific answer to the typical PR BS Shan served us. It's her job and I'm aware of that, but I'm calling a spade a spade. Trying to convince us that change for the worst is acceptable because change is "inevitable" is a con. If you think otherwise, I'm welcoming any argument proving me that there are forces of nature akin to the law of physics at work in game design. If you also think that paying customers should accept getting less according to these laws then I'm also waiting for evidence. In case we can agree that game design is what the designers want, Shan should at least have the decency to acknowledge that they're taking something away from us and give us a solid explanation on why this is happening and not the "we're too busy" excuse, this is deplorable and not good enough to justify no 400k gold crew.

    That's pretty harsh, @Ren~, and in my estimation out of bounds. Nothing has been taken away from anyone and no one is getting less for what they're paying. I'm disappointed by the absence of an existing 5* in a Flashback threshold table, but I'm not being cheated by it. There's nothing indecent about Shan's statements. And if you find this "deplorable", I have some things to tell you about the world outside this game.

    They rebranded reruns as "flashbacks" and the only meaningful difference is that there is no 400k reward. Emphasis on meaningful. Paladin's packs story is only a concern for the two dozen of people who buy event packs lol. If you think pointing this out in spite of all the corporate shilling telling me it's OK to have less gold crew in thresholds because "we're too busy to add them" is out of bounds then I don't know what to tell you.
  • Options
    Paladin 27Paladin 27 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ren~ wrote: »

    They rebranded reruns as "flashbacks" and the only meaningful difference is that there is no 400k reward. Emphasis on meaningful. Paladin's packs story is only a concern for the two dozen of people who buy event packs lol. If you think pointing this out in spite of all the corporate shilling telling me it's OK to have less gold crew in thresholds because "we're too busy to add them" is out of bounds then I don't know what to tell you.

    Could you direct me to the post where you were told they are too busy to add the threshold reward?

    I saw one where it was stated that "Making a new crew takes a significant amount of time", not that adding the threshold reward takes a significant amount of time.

    And just as reruns in the past typically have had the 400k threshold existing gold, they have never also let you get the existing gold card from finishing top 1500. While I get that some players may not like this trade-off, others are neutral to it, and some may prefer it since there are no two gold packs. It's hardly an across the board negative change.
  • Options
    Travis S McClainTravis S McClain ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ren~ wrote: »
    Ren~ wrote: »
    Paladin 27 wrote: »
    Ren~ wrote: »

    I'm sorry but "change is inevitable" is con artist speak. Change happens sure, it can be good or bad and I'm sure most people here will agree that here you're serving us the bad version. You don't have to create new crew for the leaderboards in reruns and you can also an older card to the 400k threshold. You chose not to. You're making bad changes and if you want to call it nefarious that's up to you.

    You could also use that opportunity to make improvements and come up with something that doesn't require us to be on our toes to know exactly what's going to happen in the coming week with half a dozen rewards structures that get changed on a whim.

    Sorry to be harsh, you're just the PR person and that's your job, but that kind of PR speak is rather upsetting.

    IMHO there is such a thing as an entitled customer, but OP is not one.

    In comparing flashbacks and reruns:

    Positives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • Get an additional star on an existing gold the prior week for top 1500
    • No new crew in a pack with two golds and odds half as good as normal packs
    Negatives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • No additional star on an existing gold for 400k

    I think the issue with the OP here, is that they basically inferred that DB was acting like a con artist in not giving flashbacks a threshold existing gold at 400k.

    For those of us considering both the positives and negatives of flashbacks not just the one negative, things are basically a wash and we find the con artist description unfair and inaccurate.

    As a reminder, this was a specific answer to the typical PR BS Shan served us. It's her job and I'm aware of that, but I'm calling a spade a spade. Trying to convince us that change for the worst is acceptable because change is "inevitable" is a con. If you think otherwise, I'm welcoming any argument proving me that there are forces of nature akin to the law of physics at work in game design. If you also think that paying customers should accept getting less according to these laws then I'm also waiting for evidence. In case we can agree that game design is what the designers want, Shan should at least have the decency to acknowledge that they're taking something away from us and give us a solid explanation on why this is happening and not the "we're too busy" excuse, this is deplorable and not good enough to justify no 400k gold crew.

    That's pretty harsh, @Ren~, and in my estimation out of bounds. Nothing has been taken away from anyone and no one is getting less for what they're paying. I'm disappointed by the absence of an existing 5* in a Flashback threshold table, but I'm not being cheated by it. There's nothing indecent about Shan's statements. And if you find this "deplorable", I have some things to tell you about the world outside this game.

    They rebranded reruns as "flashbacks" and the only meaningful difference is that there is no 400k reward. Emphasis on meaningful. Paladin's packs story is only a concern for the two dozen of people who buy event packs lol. If you think pointing this out in spite of all the corporate shilling telling me it's OK to have less gold crew in thresholds because "we're too busy to add them" is out of bounds then I don't know what to tell you.

    I get the complaining about flashbacks not having the 5* in the thresholds that replays have. I've done some complaining about that myself, including in this very thread. What I found out of bounds was your contemptuous, accusatory attitude. DB hasn't done anything wrong here. Disappointing, yes, but not wrong. And it's not that we're getting less gold crew in a flashback; it's that we do get more gold crew in a replay. Though they might sound interchangeable, they're not.
  • Options
    MiT SanoaMiT Sanoa ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2019
    Paladin 27 wrote: »
    In comparing flashbacks and reruns:

    Positives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • Get an additional star on an existing gold the prior week for top 1500
    • No new crew in a pack with two golds and odds half as good as normal packs
    Negatives of flashbacks compared to re-runs
    • No additional star on an existing gold for 400k

    I think both pros for Flashbacks are merely academic for the majority of players.

    1. You need to rank to add a star which takes more effort than 400k VP. Quite some fleet mates tried last week and failed.
    2. Many people do not buy event packs at all (myself included) because of FF duplicates. And as long as you are not hunting for a specific legendary of the two in a rerun pack but instead are fine with any of them, there is zero advantage. As newer crew tends to have better stats getting a "new" star might even be considered more valuable.

    For me personally there is really NO advantage of Flashbacks over Reruns other than the promised QoL improvements. There is no way to sugarcoat that.

    I think that DB did not want to create a precedent by providing a 400k reward as players would expect one in every subsequent Flashback. And if DB used a newer event with modern reward structure players would still expect one which actually added effort. With lots of confusion on the differences between the two event types having a 400k reward in Flashbacks occasionally but in general none would be basically impossible to explain to players via ingame mail...

    I hope that Flashbacks will go away altogether when their big overhaul is done.
    Wir, die Mirror Tribbles [MiT] haben freie Plätze zu vergeben. Kein Zwang und kein Stress, dafür aber Spaß, Discord und eine nette, hilfsbereite Gemeinschaft, incl. voll ausgebauter Starbase und täglich 700 ISM.
  • Options
    IvlainIvlain ✭✭✭✭
    I had both SRs at 3/4 FE. Nice to FF both day 1 and take the weekend off. 😁
  • Options
    MiT SanoaMiT Sanoa ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ivlain wrote: »
    I had both SRs at 3/4 FE. Nice to FF both day 1 and take the weekend off. 😁

    Duchamps was 2/4 before Community and Kim was 3/4. I so wished it was the other way around...
    Wir, die Mirror Tribbles [MiT] haben freie Plätze zu vergeben. Kein Zwang und kein Stress, dafür aber Spaß, Discord und eine nette, hilfsbereite Gemeinschaft, incl. voll ausgebauter Starbase und täglich 700 ISM.
  • Options
    marschallinmarschallin ✭✭✭✭
    I think it’s just kind of concerning that people on this board have identified “the army of 1/5s” as one of the things most turning them off the game. And DB, in its flashbacks and reruns have a way to help solve the problem, that they have done before, in providing an old legend at 400K.

    And doing this would seeming only require a bit of extra programming, in a week where extra programming already had to be done to update award tables, and it was (purposely?) not done.

    It doesn’t even have to specifically be Honey Bare. Honey Bare would be great, sure, but it can be any old legend. Arachnia. Admiral Kirk. Whatever.

    So the way I see it, DB had a chance to help correct a problem that many in the player base have, with very little effort on their part, and they declined.

    The obvious conclusion is that they either don’t know or don’t care. If they don’t know, that’s concerning. A post with that title has been on the first page the last two months, with numerous people posting in that topic and agreeing with it. If they don’t care—why? Does customer satisfaction mean that little to them?

    And if, for some reason, programming in the reward at 400K is so onerous, (which common sense says it would not be, but anything’s possible, I suppose) than just say so.

    I mean, I’m not angry, just disappointed. I’ll still play. For now. Just seems a missed opportunity.
Sign In or Register to comment.