Proposed Starchart Changes [Megathread]

[DJ_Redwire]

Let's be absolutely clear. Something being "an idea" and "not set in stone" does not mean we shouldn't respond to it with our feedback BEFORE it is set in stone. Freaking out, panicking and claiming that the end is upon us is never helpful, but providing clear, constructive, and well reasoned feedback is quite helpful.

And BTW, different people are reacting to this in different ways. There is no "everyone is doing X".

 

[Ronyn]

 

I'm not really concerned, myself, about being able to do any mission type on any tileset at any time, 

What we can and cant do now is exactly the problem. The new solar chart is supposed to fix these issues and be better.

In my view, 

if a new solar chart doesn't solve problems like having to do the same missions on the same tulesets....

if a new solar chart doesn't increase my ability to lean towards variety....

if a new solar chart is just a new UI with the same flaws.....

 

It isn't worth the trouble of doing.

 

 

people keep saying "better rewards" with no idea what they want exactly. Its good in theory, but not easy in application.

Some have no idea, some do.

Let's be real here. 300 is too much. We don't need 3 exterminates on the same tileset on the same planet. That is just plain redundant.

Now let's talk rewards. Should the vast majority of all the main rewards be crammed onto the small group of missions in the void? No.

 

What we need to be looking at is a middle ground. A way that we can have a reasonably wide group of choices and places to play on...

with the better rewards spread out among them.

 

There is no reason we need to be looking at this as "It's either 300 or 20"...

as if there aren't a whole lot of numbers in between that.

[vaugahn]

Let's be absolutely clear. Something being "an idea" and "not set in stone" does not mean we shouldn't respond to it with our feedback BEFORE it is set in stone. Freaking out, panicking and claiming that the end is upon us is never helpful, but providing clear, constructive, and well reasoned feedback is quite helpful.

And BTW, different people are reacting to this in different ways. There is no "everyone is doing X".

 

Here's the problem I have with all of this:

 

With all this talk of brainstorming and ideas not being set in stone, this would have been the perfect time to bring the playerbase into the development process and start talking about what we wanted out of a star chart rework, or the star chart in general. Some people did that, but the vast, massive majority of discussion on this topic has been about how bad that one idea was.

 

When you're brainstorming and someone comes up with a bad idea, you don't spend the rest of the brainstorming session talking about what a terrible idea that was. You just move on and keep brainstorming. That's the problem I have here. We passed up a golden opportunity to get what we wanted so we could hate more. 

 

Question:The last dev stream where Rebecca expressed certain things that must exist in a node rework...

did she indicate whether that was what the DEV's had come to or if it her personal opinion? 

 

She was using "we" and reading off the paperwork, so I doubt those were solely her opinions.

[(PSN)obsidiancurse]

youre doing it wrong, your suppose to selectively hear only the things you can use for panic.

 

It feels like people WANT to panic. If the dev says "n20 nodes, but you will be able to farm for anything at all times"- why do people say "20 nodes! ill have to wait forever to farm for X"  IMO the issue of 20 nodes is irrelevant if the Devs directly state that you will have access to as much content as we have now.

But I don't think they confirm how that content will be accessed do they? Just playing devils advocate here but for all we know nothing has changed from their original plans and the access to which they refer might just be through the previously mentioned missin crafting shenanigans?

[Ronyn]

Here's the problem I have with all of this:

 

With all this talk of brainstorming and ideas not being set in stone, this would have been the perfect time to bring the playerbase into the development process and start talking about what we wanted out of a star chart rework, or the star chart in general. Some people did that, but the vast, massive majority of discussion on this topic has been about how bad that one idea was.

 

When you're brainstorming and someone comes up with a bad idea, you don't spend the rest of the brainstorming session talking about what a terrible idea that was. You just move on and keep brainstorming. That's the problem I have here. We passed up a golden opportunity to get what we wanted so we could hate more. 

I agree with you in essence...

but well, while I haven't done a full on count, it seems to me that the vast majority of these discussions are arguments over whether or not, or if so how we should, respond to the idea presented.

 

By all means let's talk about the ACTUAL ways the solar chart can be done. 

 

 

She was using "we" and reading off the paperwork, so I doubt those were solely her opinions.

"We" would be a reference to the developers or the playerbase?

I'm not in a place where I can call it up and look at it right now...

[vaugahn]

I agree with you in essence...

but well, while I haven't done a full on count, it seems to me that the vast majority of these discussions are arguments over whether or not, or if so how we should, respond to the idea presented.

 

That's just what it's devolved into after the initial discussion. Like every big forum topic, we're now in the meta phase of discussing the discussion. 

 

"We" would be a reference to the developers or the playerbase?

I'm not in a place where I can call it up and look at it right now...

 

 

She says "every time something is proposed we ask ourselves, can I still access 100% of..."

 

By all means let's talk about the ACTUAL ways the solar chart can be done. 

 

I've already shared my feelings on the topic: all redundant nodes gone, and a transition from a world map to a more story-oriented progression. Basically, every mission type/unique node is a story when you first play it, and completing it open up normal variations of that mission for replay.

[Ronyn]

That's just what it's devolved into after the initial discussion. Like every big forum topic, we're now in the meta phase of discussing the discussion. 

Indeed. 

She says "every time something is proposed we ask ourselves, can I still access 100% of..."

Thanks for putting the link here. I was able to watch it. Very helpful.

 

I've already shared my feelings on the topic: all redundant nodes gone, and a transition from a world map to a more story-oriented progression. Basically, every mission type/unique node is a story when you first play it, and completing it open up normal variations of that mission for replay.

Right on.

Here is a quick breakdown on my stance. 

Ronyn's nine core guidelines for the solar chart redesign.

1: Players should be able to access any mission type on any node at any time, this should not be limited at any time. 

2: Players should be able to choose the level for each mission once they have been completed on it's default difficulty.

3: Players should be seeking rewards at every point on the solarmap, all the best rewards should not be crammed into just a few nodes.

4: Players should get better rewards for doing harder missions. Similar to the key tiering system in the void where harder means rarer loot.

5: Players should feel that each and every node is unique and interesting because there is no other node with the same tileset/mission combination.

6: Players should feel that moving through the start chart, unlocking nodes and planets is a clear type of progression.

7: Players should recognize the solar chart as a visual representation of an actual solar system as it use to be.

8: Players should feel as though the status quo of the solar charts consistently changes due to the various alerts, dark sectors, and faction battles.

9: Players should feel as though their actions in one node can impact the situation of another node when logically applicable. 

 

Obviously there is a ton more stuff that can be done but I think that is the base right there.

let's get that right then we can grow from there.

[motorfirebox]

 

Let's be absolutely clear. Something being "an idea" and "not set in stone" does not mean we shouldn't respond to it with our feedback BEFORE it is set in stone. Freaking out, panicking and claiming that the end is upon us is never helpful, but providing clear, constructive, and well reasoned feedback is quite helpful.

And BTW, different people are reacting to this in different ways. There is no "everyone is doing X".

You'll never hear me tell someone they shouldn't respond with feedback. If you're not panicking and proclaiming the end is upon us, then I'm not pointing any fingers at you.

 

That said, there are a lot of people panicking and proclaiming that the end is nigh. As I pointed out earlier, there's a reason DE laughed this thread off as a "doom thread" in the last Devstream.

[vaugahn]

Right on.

Here is a quick breakdown on my stance. 

 

As you can see, DE's stance aligns quite nicely with point 1, which IMO is the most important point.

 

I'd rather it was less about seeking rewards and more about story. If they could work the quests into the star chart that would be great.

[RoboDoge]

As you can see, DE's stance aligns quite nicely with point 1, which IMO is the most important point.

 

I'd rather it was less about seeking rewards and more about story. If they could work the quests into the star chart that would be great.

Doing missions for nothing is not gonna work. We have same issue now.

[Hypernaut1]

 

 

You'll never hear me tell someone they shouldn't respond with feedback. If you're not panicking and proclaiming the end is upon us, then I'm not pointing any fingers at you.

 

That said, there are a lot of people panicking and proclaiming that the end is nigh. As I pointed out earlier, there's a reason DE laughed this thread off as a "doom thread" in the last Devstream.

 

they laugh it off as a doom thread because some of the fears are just downright ridiculous.

 

If it wasnt for doom threads, it would be easier to share with the community. If it wasnt for this doom thread, im sure we wouldve had more information last dev stream, but instead they need to carefully examine everything they say because "20 nodes" can turn into rumors saying "DE is turning game p2w" which looks bad and demoralizes team when their own forums so easily want to get out their pitchforks.

 

You think if there was a doom thread about Excal they wouldve shared that rework with us so soon? probably not. Doom threads do us ALL a disservice to us all (including devs) when all it does is serve to misconstrue words, spread panic and not ask questions.

Edited June 8, 2015 by Hypernaut1

[RoboDoge]

they laugh it off as a doom thread because some of the fears are just downright ridiculous.

 

If it wasnt for doom threads, it would be easier to share with the community. If it wasnt for this doom thread, im sure we wouldve had more information last dev stream, but instead they need to carefully examine everything they say because "20 nodes" can turn into rumors saying "DE is turning game p2w" which looks bad and demoralizes team when their own forums so easily want to get out their pitchforks.

 

You think if there was a doom thread about Excal they wouldve shared that rework with us so soon? probably not. Doom threads do us ALL a disservice to us all (including devs) when all it does is serve to misconstrue words, spread panic and not ask questions.

Devs didnt leak content because they dont have anything defined yet. Community is not to blame for what you are blaming it for.

[Invalid_Infinity]

Actually it is not misinformation, as in Devstream 52, when DE Rebecca asks DE Steve about the starchart changes and DE Steve starts making goofy faces to make the other guys laugh; he clearly states that the nodes are intended to be reduced down to 20 rotating nodes that would be random like alerts, but not exactly like alerts. He then gives the example of one of the possible random alert style things that could happen being that Void Vor might show up with unique rewards for the player going to a node and beating him. Please actually watch or listen to the Devstreams before calling someone else a liar. You can listen youself around the tail end of the Devstream 52 starting righ before the hour mark and going to near the end of the stream itself.

 

DE Steve goes on to state that while he is sure that many veteran players will not like the changes - as DE Rebecca did not like the proposed changes - he feels that the change, while it will reduce the chart itself to random rotating nodes; could allow users who want to try particular missions to craft keys similar to Derelict missions. To his view, this will help primarily new players coming in warframe by both giving them something to do similar to a goal like the syndicate alerts while also not overwhelming them quickly with the vast number of nodes and missions available. Trying to cater to newer players is a noble goal in my opinion but I do not agree with removing the starchart and its progression to do so. I feel that if the starchart is intimidating to newer players and the benefits to the newer community members outway the negatives to veterans that simply want the chart to be improved with better rewards and incentives to replay, that the best idea might be to move the starchart proper to either the Relay or Clan Dojos so that veterans could still play varied missions and farm resources while the new player experience could present a random alert style node goal per day for newer players to both ease into the game and eliminate the need for as many taxis to mission nodes, invasions, or alerts. I think this caters to both sides of the arguement while not diminishing either goal.

I had watched that devstream.

 

If they start deciding to do things most veteran players would dislike then what is stopping them from changing the entire game?

What Steve said there really sets off alarm bells for me. I saw the same thing on a game Firefall during the beta. Helping make things easier for new players is fine but pissing off the veteran players (who deserve far more attention from DE) is not the way to go about it.

[Invalid_Infinity]

they laugh it off as a doom thread because some of the fears are just downright ridiculous.

 

If it wasnt for doom threads, it would be easier to share with the community. If it wasnt for this doom thread, im sure we wouldve had more information last dev stream, but instead they need to carefully examine everything they say because "20 nodes" can turn into rumors saying "DE is turning game p2w" which looks bad and demoralizes team when their own forums so easily want to get out their pitchforks.

 

You think if there was a doom thread about Excal they wouldve shared that rework with us so soon? probably not. Doom threads do us ALL a disservice to us all (including devs) when all it does is serve to misconstrue words, spread panic and not ask questions.

Yes, blame the community. Because this totally isn't a community driven game. No, not at all. Its not like we can provide any feedback at all about proposed or implemented changes! That would be wrong to do! 

Can you taste the sarcasm?

 

This game is community driven. If people like you do not like the community giving feedback about a particular topic then I suggest you find another game.

 

The developers are free to release any information to help clear up any misconceptions. If they do not release said information then we continue to speculate. That is how things work. 

[vaugahn]

If people like you do not like the community giving feedback about a particular topic then I suggest you find another game.

 

Calling the discussions we had about the star chart "feedback" is very generous. Threatening to quit is not feedback.

 

And they already released all the information needed to clear up those misconceptions, people have just chosen not to acknowledge it.

[Invalid_Infinity]

Calling the discussions we had about the star chart "feedback" is very generous. Threatening to quit is not feedback.

 

And they already released all the information needed to clear up those misconceptions, people have just chosen not to acknowledge it.

Then by all means provide a link to said information.

 

Blaming things on the community will solve nothing except cause toxicity. Just thought I should say that that kind of thinking is not good for the game.

Edited June 8, 2015 by Invalid_Infinity

[Hypernaut1]

Calling the discussions we had about the star chart "feedback" is very generous. Threatening to quit is not feedback.

 

And they already released all the information needed to clear up those misconceptions, people have just chosen not to acknowledge it.

exactly. Community wasnt giving feedback. It was basically "i dont care what you will try to do to make it work. i just dont like the sound of 20 nodes and i will quit if you even try this"

 

most of them didnt even TRY to understand what they were saying. people still insist that "20 nodes" means that they are taking exactly what we have now and just removing 200+ nodes without any kind of rework (despite DE saying we will still be able to farm for everything at all times) They will change what a node is, but most people dont even want to hear how. Its just "i dont like the sound of 20 nodes. You guys are evil and dont know how to make a game"

 

Thats not feedback. Potentially anything that can be said will be taken negatively, and positive things that are said are being dismissed.

 

Its not even really the community, because after the initial panic, there are a lot of posters that are willing to see what DE comes up with. Its just that the doom threads always seem to catch a lot of steam as soon as anything is announced. 

Edited June 8, 2015 by Hypernaut1

[vaugahn]

Then by all means provide a link to said information.

 

Literally just read the last page. I linked the video.

 

Or hell, go watch either of the last two devstreams.

[Invalid_Infinity]

exactly. Community wasnt giving feedback. It was basically "i dont care what you will try to do to make it work. i just dont liek the sound of 10 nodes and i will quit if you even try this"

 

most of them didnt even TRY to understand what they were saying. people still insist that "20 nodes" means that they are taking exactly what we have now and just removing 200+ nodes. They will change what a node is, but most people dont even want to hear how. Its just "i dont liek the sound of 20 nodes. You guys are evil and dont know how to make a game"

You must realize that they are suggesting cutting nearly all of the nodes in this game down to a mere 20. You know what that means? Faster star chart progression. That means players burn through the game faster. That means players run out of things to do. That means players will get bored faster and leave the game faster. 

[RoboDoge]

exactly. Community wasnt giving feedback. It was basically "i dont care what you will try to do to make it work. i just dont liek the sound of 10 nodes and i will quit if you even try this"

 

most of them didnt even TRY to understand what they were saying. people still insist that "20 nodes" means that they are taking exactly what we have now and just removing 200+ nodes. They will change what a node is, but most people dont even want to hear how. Its just "i dont liek the sound of 20 nodes. You guys are evil and dont know how to make a game"

Well, you are a bit wrong here. Steve did said in livestream when he mentioned original idea of Starchart change that every mission will not be available at all times. That statement made community flip out, and i consider it a good consequence of his statement. People were afraid of more RNG in the part of the game that shouldnt be affected by RNG rules.

 

 

What came after that is actually DE listening to community and reaction of the same, and adapting their original idea to the community wishes.

 

 

Tho, i dont approve of "if my toy is taken, ill rage quit" posts.

[Invalid_Infinity]

Literally just read the last page. I linked the video.

 

Or hell, go watch either of the last two devstreams.

I watched them.

 

I agree that it does need to be thinned by a little bit but this amount is far too much.

Never mind the fact that the "community manager" is more or less insulting the community in a very oblique way. That pisses me off more than anything else.

[vaugahn]

Never mind the fact that the "community manager" is more or less insulting the community in a very oblique way. That pisses me off more than anything else.

 

Where?

 

Well, you are a bit wrong here. Steve did said in livestream when he mentioned original idea of Starchart change that every mission will not be available at all times. That statement made community flip out, and i consider it a good consequence of his statement. People were afraid of more RNG in the part of the game that shouldnt be affected by RNG rules.

 

What came after that is actually DE listening to community and reaction of the same, and adapting their original idea to the community wishes.

 

The thing is, they said in that original comment that nothing was set in stone and they were still working out ideas. We took it as set in stone, which was the source of the freakout. 

[TheBrsrkr]

It isn't even a concept yet. The devs themselves said that it's not even on paper yet. But no. 60 odd pages of nothing but rage at even the idea of change. I'm sure more than half of you don't even play 20 of the 300 nodes we have, but taking them of is removing "player choice". We know literally nothing about it. We have no idea how or when it will be implemented. We, and indeed the Devs, have no idea how it's going to go down. Literally everything about it can change tomorrow. Right now all this thread is doing is being obstinate to change for the sake of it.

[Hypernaut1]

You must realize that they are suggesting cutting nearly all of the nodes in this game down to a mere 20. You know what that means? Faster star chart progression. That means players burn through the game faster. That means players run out of things to do. That means players will get bored faster and leave the game faster. 

how can you not see this is misinformation? no it doesn't mean that at all. Youre jumping to ridiculous conclusions based on little knowledge and little foresight.

 

where did they say " players will burn through game faster!" they didnt, and obviously it wont be a static 20 nodes that people play once. 

[RoboDoge]

Where?

 

 

The thing is, they said in that original comment that nothing was set in stone and they were still working out ideas. We took it as set in stone, which was the source of the freakout. 

Blame is on them also for not saying it is work in progress. Steve did word that quite horribly, and it sounded omnious. He could have said that rework is work in progress and everything can be changed based on feedback.

 

 

 

His statement sounded like change is already decided.