i WOULD SAY FIRST MAKE A MEANINGFULL GROUP AND GRUP FIGHTR AND AGRO SYSTEM´,  THEN CARE FOR DEATH PENALTY

as long as all npc shoot at the fist opponent and you are  sometimes insteant tost in a group a death panelty means noone will be first

by the way what is the point in a forced group for missions like scan 5 astroids ?

The complete group system need  changes .. and the way a group fught works first before you should consider penaltys

By all means, add a death penalty. Punish your players. See how long it takes for subscriber numbers to dip below sustainable levels. Even thinking about adding something like this after release is just begging for trouble. Honestly, I don't think this bunch could design their way out of a paper bag!

Gotta love constructive criticism..

One way in which to incorporate a death penalty would be to completely lose crew members. Either upfront, or over time creating a greater need to search out new crew as "reinforcements" should you need them.

Losing ships would work as well, creating a better economy in the long run IMO. Can players sell ships at present?

Stat decreasing is to arbitrary IMO, if they want meaningful, they need real loss.

The option for perma death klingons? Give them greater stats than normal, yet the risk of dying one to many times could result in permanent death.

A few ideas, though they would probably be viewed as too extreme.

How about instead of having a death penalty, give bonuses to XP and performance for not getting killed in a mission. That way players who like to just jump right back in the action without facing a penalty can be happy, and the risk vs reward players can have something to strive for.

I also think that STO would be a perfect game to try a mission bonus system similar to Guild Wars. Players who either beat the mission quickly or who did a few difficult side objectives could earn bonus XP and skill points. That would give the hardcore players an extra carrot while not really penalizing casual players.

Originally posted by BattleFelon

I also think that STO would be a perfect game to try a mission bonus system similar to Guild Wars. Players who either beat the mission quickly or who did a few difficult side objectives could earn bonus XP and skill points. That would give the hardcore players an extra carrot while not really penalizing casual players.

I like this idea. So far, I've had one mission (that I recall) with an optional objective. I still wonder what, if anything, changes in that mission if you don't complete the optional objective. The mission text leads you to believe that the final battle may be harder if you don't do the optional stuff which would be cool if the reward was better for making the final battle harder.

Why do people gotta bitch and moan cause they dont have a penalty, quit your bitchen, could be like eve and lose your ship and shell out more money for your rare equipped items.  Its bad enough you die from level glitches in the game and your constantly spawn killed by overpowered npcs.  So STFU!

Originally posted by Dugath

This games needs to be put to death. It is just a bad game..

 

Seriously.. take this game.. remove all Star Trek content.. the Characters and ships..ect.. just replace it with other non-star trek stuff.. call the game Space Adventure or something..

Would people play this game then? Heck I doubt it would have ever been released..

 

This game is just a bad game. Lots of people bought it because of the IP.. Lots of people will leave once their 30 free days is up.

Only the die hard Star trek people will continue to play and say "oh this is a great game".. 

No depth to the game.

all missions are more or less the same

Unplayable Klingons

Loads of downtime

Craptasitc PvP

way way too instanced. to the point where it does not seem like a MMO

I really..really tired to like it.. the fast leveling, with no real game content, shallow game play.. it just because so boring I can not even bring myself to finish the remaining free days I have..

You can say the same for pretty much every game out right now.

 I agree that there should be a death penalty. But not at this point. The game is way to easy.  They need to worry about being more creative with there quests and add more content along with a degree of difficulty. 

Originally posted by xoring

Originally posted by xuiton

They should of made STO a sandbox and maybe something simliar to WW2 online where player controlled space affects the boarders of the federation and klingon empire.

 

Doesn't EVE already offer that?

Yes but I am talking about actual system/planets being controlled were neutral or already controlled by federation/klingons.

Like it any war, key points and cities are generally valuable targets.

Personally i think the original team before cyprtic took it over were on the right track.

Originally posted by Falcomith

 I agree that there should be a death penalty. But not at this point. The game is way to easy.  They need to worry about being more creative with there quests and add more content along with a degree of difficulty. 

Wouldn't adding a meaningful death penalty add at least SOME difficulty to the equasion?

Originally posted by Anubisan

Originally posted by Falcomith

 I agree that there should be a death penalty. But not at this point. The game is way to easy.  They need to worry about being more creative with there quests and add more content along with a degree of difficulty. 

Wouldn't adding a meaningful death penalty add at least SOME difficulty to the equasion?

Of course. But the issue is that its so easy right now, there really isnt a need for it. I have been playing since closed beta and maybe died twice, except when it came to PvP.

 a death penalty would ruin this game for me there is no need for it but if there must be one then take a lesson from eve you have to start back at earth space dock or deepspace k7 or DS( whereever you last "checked in" possibly some kind of clone service

Originally posted by Malickie

Gotta love constructive criticism..

One way in which to incorporate a death penalty would be to completely lose crew members. Either upfront, or over time creating a greater need to search out new crew as "reinforcements" should you need them.

Losing ships would work as well, creating a better economy in the long run IMO. Can players sell ships at present?

Stat decreasing is to arbitrary IMO, if they want meaningful, they need real loss.

The option for perma death klingons? Give them greater stats than normal, yet the risk of dying one to many times could result in permanent death.

A few ideas, though they would probably be viewed as too extreme.

thats even less trek.... sorry Picard, you'll have to buy your own ship

Originally posted by xuiton

Originally posted by xoring

Originally posted by xuiton

They should of made STO a sandbox and maybe something simliar to WW2 online where player controlled space affects the boarders of the federation and klingon empire.

 

Doesn't EVE already offer that?

 

Yes but I am talking about actual system/planets being controlled were neutral or already controlled by federation/klingons.

Like it any war, key points and cities are generally valuable targets.

 

Personally i think the original team before cyprtic took it over were on the right track.

As I keep saying to people; if you like EVE, play EVE. That might have made it a better MMO, but it would have been less "Star Trek". There are other IP's that are focused around space war and battles like that, but to me Star Trek was never really about fighting a war, it just included some occasional skirmishes.

Originally posted by MikeB

Star Trek Online Executive Producer Craig Zinkievich believes that Star Trek Online needs a more "meaningful" death penalty, according to a recent comment made to IncGamers.

Needs a more meaningful one?  There isnt one!  This guy and Cryptic in general are full of out-of-touch cop-outs.  Now you think it needs a more meaningful death?  After a large portion of the community has bailed for one of numerous reasons?  Comon.

For starters, how can you make an MMO/MMORPG where there is death penalty at all?  No joy in winning or sadness in losing? Without some penalty for losing, the pvp in the game becomes, and in this case, did become a mindless stupid gameplay environment that very little enjoys; again, which is the case today.

The winners gain nothing in this game because their fallen opponents are right on their heels again, and the losers don’t care if they lose because it means nothing.

The game is surrounded by pampered children, or adults with the mindset of entitlement and being a pampered child, and who don’t know what its like to actually accomplish something, but the expectation for everything to be handed to them.

There is no reasonable complimentary opposite to winning in this so-called game. You win in space and on ground, you get a battery or such (a weak reward), you lose on space or on ground, you miraculously reappear next to the fight to battle like a button mashing mindless drone without consequences again.

Lack of consequences to death has turned this title into a series of suicide runs for the same exact reward I get for battling tactically and strategically. The grossly equivalent rewards for those that die often are enough for anyone to leave this game.
So yes, the lack of any penalty for being a suicide player is astounding. As a Klingon that must rely on pvp matches to level, when these suicide players enter a match just to roll into klingons without putting up any fight, but just to died repeatedly and quickly to get the match over so they can rinse and repeat, that’s considered good game-design and fair play at my game-play expense?

How dumb many feel for absolutely no sense of accomplishment, but to be able to magically appear next to the battle within seconds of your ship being blown up, just to mash and combat more for the same reward as someone that didn't die at all or as often.

There should be greater rewards for those that die less or not at all...more substantial and realizable rewards. There are several things missing, underwhelming and poorly implemented in STO, and this has got to rank at the top of the list. . .they, those that die purposely and repeatedly without consequence, advance their own rush for experience at others game-play and immersion expense are exasperating a real problem; they are rewarded handsomely for being losers; figuratively and literally by Cryptic.

If Craig wants all the ideas he could ever want, go look at the forums for cripes' sakes. We hashed through this very very well. My favorite scenario was a cutscene of your ship blasting out escape pods, you arriving at the nearest base and requisitioning a new ship according to the specs of your old one.

Loot gear would be gone and you'd need to get some crew replacements to get up to your former ship's repair stats, but you'd be flying a nearly equal ship out in a few minutes or so. But it would be a DIFFERENT ship, even if it had the same name, and that would keep the immersion for you.

I also favored possibly losing the use of an "injured" bridge officer or two while they were in sickbay, but that was deemed just tooo hardcore lol.

 Edit: forgot, if you got the ship blown up again, you'd be knocked back to your former class of ship until a replacement of your current class could be found. Still no permanent penalty, but you'd not be able to go all suicidey over and over to win a mission - one boom too many and you'd be in a ship which may not be able to do that mish.  The replacement time would be just exactly long enough to let the mission enemies reset, thereby defeating any exploit ;)

Originally posted by MikeB

Star Trek Online Executive Producer Craig Zinkievich believes that Star Trek Online needs a more "meaningful" death penalty, according to a recent comment made to IncGamers.

Mr. Zinkievich explains Cryptic Studios' stance on death penalties:

I get that people want to feel a sense of risk when they’re fighting in battles, but if the only emotion you feel when you’re playing a game is fear that you’re going to lose some time due to an arbitrary gameplay mechanic, we’re probably not doing something right.

However, Mr. Zinkievich does agree that Star Trek Online could use a more meaningful death penalty, adding:

We are looking into finding a meaningful way to give players a deeper sense of loss when something bad happens. But we want it to feel right, rather than just like an arbitrary penalty.

via IncGamers.

So there you have it! What kind of death penalty do you think would be appropriate for Star Trek Online? Let us know in the comments below.

NONE!! IT's perfect the way it is.    I love it when I see people say, I want to play something different, it's just the same ol same ol, then here comes STO, no death penalty (for a change) wow, you can actually have fun and not worry about paying money to fix your armor or something.   I think the death penalty should be left in real life, I'm playing a game, and have no need for it.  Especially since there is no penalty in death, you die, you die.   IN a game, there should be no death period.   You should lose the challenge.  In a bike race, do they shoot the losers?   But the losers still feel the sense of loss.  Believe me, If I'm trying to complete a mission and I die and have to start ALL OVER AGAIN, I feel the sense of loss.   Leave it as is CRYPTIC.   It's perfect.

Originally posted by Cik_Asalin

Originally posted by MikeB

Star Trek Online Executive Producer Craig Zinkievich believes that Star Trek Online needs a more "meaningful" death penalty, according to a recent comment made to IncGamers.

 

Needs a more meaningful one?  There isnt one!  This guy and Cryptic in general are full of out-of-touch cop-outs.  Now you think it needs a more meaningful death?  After a large portion of the community has bailed for one of numerous reasons?  Comon.

 

For starters, how can you make an MMO/MMORPG where there is death penalty at all?  No joy in winning or sadness in losing? Without some penalty for losing, the pvp in the game becomes, and in this case, did become a mindless stupid gameplay environment that very little enjoys; again, which is the case today.

 

The winners gain nothing in this game because their fallen opponents are right on their heels again, and the losers don’t care if they lose because it means nothing.

 

The game is surrounded by pampered children, or adults with the mindset of entitlement and being a pampered child, and who don’t know what its like to actually accomplish something, but the expectation for everything to be handed to them.

 

There is no reasonable complimentary opposite to winning in this so-called game. You win in space and on ground, you get a battery or such (a weak reward), you lose on space or on ground, you miraculously reappear next to the fight to battle like a button mashing mindless drone without consequences again.

Lack of consequences to death has turned this title into a series of suicide runs for the same exact reward I get for battling tactically and strategically. The grossly equivalent rewards for those that die often are enough for anyone to leave this game.
So yes, the lack of any penalty for being a suicide player is astounding. As a Klingon that must rely on pvp matches to level, when these suicide players enter a match just to roll into klingons without putting up any fight, but just to died repeatedly and quickly to get the match over so they can rinse and repeat, that’s considered good game-design and fair play at my game-play expense?

 

How dumb many feel for absolutely no sense of accomplishment, but to be able to magically appear next to the battle within seconds of your ship being blown up, just to mash and combat more for the same reward as someone that didn't die at all or as often.

 

There should be greater rewards for those that die less or not at all...more substantial and realizable rewards. There are several things missing, underwhelming and poorly implemented in STO, and this has got to rank at the top of the list. . .they, those that die purposely and repeatedly without consequence, advance their own rush for experience at others game-play and immersion expense are exasperating a real problem; they are rewarded handsomely for being losers; figuratively and literally by Cryptic.

 

Wow I should have read this before posting that last. Way before alaunch I started a thread about death penalties on their forums and postulated that without a meaningful penalty, Klingons would go suicidal as soon as they started to lose, because it's FRIGGIN' IN CHARACTER FOR KLINGONS lol.

But you're saying it's the FEDDIES that do this instead? wow. I envisioned that in fleet actions Feddies - bad Feddies - might send a suicider or two in first  just to weaken key enemies enough for the rest of the fleet to easily tip the balance, but - dang.

I'm actually surprised at how much I like the game. I have two Klingon affiliated characters that I have a blast with, and I've almost entirely neglected my Federation character. Most of the people complaining are probably playing the game in some sort of "traditional" sense, e.g. bounce from mission to mission without reading the text- striving for that uber loot. The PvE grind is the absolute worst part of the game (themepark in the WoW mold). There are tons of groups advertising for players in the group finder, yet they'll complain about doing everything alone (even though the open instancing works nicely).

For me, tweaking and cultivating a captain, ship, and bridge crew to your own unique playstyle and matching wits against other players is where the fun is. It feels great to rally your side and pull off a narrow win. A ton of options to customize, my only gripe is the lack of a skill reset.

In my opinion, it's the WoW players who are negatively impacting the game. They think that was the first and only MMO, and everything should be exactly like it. Even though it has years of work, polish, and content added to it since release. While there are some people spending their time in main hubs answering questions, there are a bunch of kids and trolls just berating people to "Go back to WoW", "This isn't WoW LOL!!1", "WHERE IS MANKRIKS WIFE", etc. It's a bunch of people who can't get over WoW popping their cherry, and they're in a desperate grab for attention where they think WoW has become nostalgic already. Hint: it isn't, and in my eyes it never will be, get over it.

Anyway, go on about death penalties, going to head back and continue having fun.

Originally posted by Malacor

i WOULD SAY FIRST MAKE A MEANINGFULL GROUP AND GRUP FIGHTR AND AGRO SYSTEM´,  THEN CARE FOR DEATH PENALTY

as long as all npc shoot at the fist opponent and you are  sometimes insteant tost in a group a death panelty means noone will be first

by the way what is the point in a forced group for missions like scan 5 astroids ?

The complete group system need  changes .. and the way a group fught works first before you should consider penaltys

Learn to use the team controls.

In the social window go to team options and change option from open team to team invite.

No more forced grouping.

It helps to check out all the controls in a game when you start playing.