CG - how about before you work on the next improvement you want to give us that we as a community have not asked for you implement a few the player base has requested for years. Why don’t you tell me how I am supposed to keep track of 60 purge effects across five opponents so I can drag out a battle long enough. Three wins so far but not getting 60 purge because I lose track after about my third turn. While you are fulfilling our dreams, a fleet builder too. I don’t care what it means on your end for crews. I really don’t. I just want to be able to add a fleet to my TW defense quickly like I can the squads or have prebuilt offense fleets for GAC. I have given up on leadership tools but before we get R10 stuff or the next temporary ability thing added, give us what we have asked for.
"nottenst;c-2366539" wrote: The least they could do is when you do fail tell you how many you achieved. Even that little bit would help.
THIS!
I mean, don't get me wrong, I want a feat counter across the top the way that they do with RaidBoss health, but it would take almost zero programming to display a page immediately before the "feats accomplished" page that tells you how many of each thing being counted that you did.
At least that way you would know if you were on the right track or if you really need to re-think your approach. They obviously have that number in memory, since they have to compare to the goal in order to correctly (though we only assume it's correct) credit points to people who completed the feat.
Just one page you click through before the feat points are displayed, with information already in memory. If that took a full day of programmer time, I'd eat a piece of meat.
about the fleets being saved and how it doesn't work with reinforcements (or so they say), why not just allow people to save CapShip+3 as a fleet? Maybe they could even have you save fleets in 2 parts, starting ships (including cap) and reinforcements. Sure, this means that you might theoretically put the wrong reinforcement squadron with your starting fleet, but that would be the player's responsibility and would still be dramatically less of a pain in the tuchus than the current system. Honestly, it feels like they run up against problems and use those as a reason not to try, rather than saying to themselves, "But what could we give the players, easily, and without spending much money?"
Why can't we sort mods by level? And why can't we flip the sort to increasing rather than decreasing so that we can easily find and dispense with new mods that have no value? Ascending sorts are not any harder than descending sorts. I'm pretty sure programmers have done it before. I'm pretty sure that even your own programmers can do that if you ask them, CG. Go ahead. Ask. I bet they're fully qualified to do that kind of thing. Just like the checkbox that allows you to see (or prevents you from seeing) mods already equipped on another character, when you open the sort button just have two checkboxes, one for Ascending and one for Descending. You can even make Descending the default, I don't mind. The other options all stay the same, and there you are: Dramatic improvements in quality of life for players with virtually no effort from your programmers. (Who, again, I fully trust are more than capable of this - just ask them!)
You could implement at least the first and third of these features with less than 6 hours of programming from a single skilled coder, most of it just spent compiling and then checking functionality, pass the provisional code around the squad to test with another 6-12 hours total time spent, and you've got less than 20 hours, or less than 1% of one programmer's annual salary, invested in 2 things that would win you many friends among the player base.
I'm not enough of a coder to know how long the fleet squadrons split into two idea would take to code, but for a billion dollar corporation to spend money to have someone read the same complaints over and over again without spending $1k or less to fix those complaints isn't even penny-wise, and it's certainly pound-foolish.
I recognize you're a for-profit corporation, but these are just good ideas that are easy to implement, save you money by saving work-hours from your public relations people, and would win you goodwill.
If they're better for your bottom line and better for your customers and gives you positive PR, why not do them?
Have you ever thought that maybe their ability to count feats doesn’t work reliably at all (behind the scenes), and displaying it live in battle would highlight that fact?
"kello_511;c-2366558" wrote: Have you ever thought that maybe their ability to count feats doesn’t work reliably at all (behind the scenes), and displaying it live in battle would highlight that fact?
That would be a great question if I had not already highlighted that possibility in the comment you're responding to.
At least that way you would know if you were on the right track or if you really need to re-think your approach. They obviously have that number in memory, since they have to compare to the goal in order to correctly (though we only assume it's correct) credit points to people who completed the feat.
