Go Back   Star Trek Online > Information and Discussion > The Academy
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Which would be better for leveling and ultimatly tanking/dps in a fleet environment. I know I want to pilot a cruiser and fill out a tank role, but both of the chars in question are still only lt7. in the light cruiser so far I simply can not tell a difference beetween the two.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
02-03-2010, 12:45 PM
In space the only difference your character class makes is the skills that you acquire as you level and your race bonuses that you picked during character creation.

At some point this may change but right now when it comes to space combat it doesn't really matter all that much.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
02-03-2010, 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompar
Which would be better for leveling and ultimatly tanking/dps in a fleet environment. I know I want to pilot a cruiser and fill out a tank role, but both of the chars in question are still only lt7. in the light cruiser so far I simply can not tell a difference beetween the two.
Simple answer is Tactical Captain in a Cruiser for space Tanking/DPS. The bottom line right now seems to be the only way to tank is either be the first one in and soak the alpha strike (the enemies will continue to fire on you until it is inconvenient or they take heavy damage from someone else it seems) or output loads of damage to keep drawing their attention. There is not a solid aggro system in this game as people would relate it to WOW for example. Your best bet is to take the toughest ship in terms of shield/hull combo and output as much damage as you can on that ship which would be a Tac officer.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
02-03-2010, 01:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGarrett
Simple answer is Tactical Captain in a Cruiser for space Tanking/DPS. The bottom line right now seems to be the only way to tank is either be the first one in and soak the alpha strike (the enemies will continue to fire on you until it is inconvenient or they take heavy damage from someone else it seems) or output loads of damage to keep drawing their attention. There is not a solid aggro system in this game as people would relate it to WOW for example. Your best bet is to take the toughest ship in terms of shield/hull combo and output as much damage as you can on that ship which would be a Tac officer.
Yea the game is in need of some good aggro generating skills for proper tanking, but when you mention things like that you get shouted down by folks who don't like applying standard MMO archetypes to Star Trek.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
02-03-2010, 01:25 PM
I tried an engineer in an escort in beta and did not like it. The Engineer defensive skills just didnt seem to help enough in an escort to make up for the lack of DPS as compared to a Tactical officer in an escort.

However, I believe it is doable with the right setup.

As for agro management.. I dont want to see 'taunt' type abilities in this game. I WOULD like to see a way for Escorts and Science ships to escape 'agro' in some way to allow those Cruisers to take more of the damage.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
02-03-2010, 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakoriz
As for agro management.. I dont want to see 'taunt' type abilities in this game. I WOULD like to see a way for Escorts and Science ships to escape 'agro' in some way to allow those Cruisers to take more of the damage.
Don't misunderstand me - I love the system the way it is. Perhaps my wording was poor - what I tried to say is that the ai in this game is programmed to behave differently than what people would be used to from other MMO's.

On the other note, "escaping aggro" is definately doable by clever use and timing of evasive maneuvers, jamming targeting, cloaking (for Klingons) or simply timing your turns to keep yourself away from the heavy firing arcs once you learn where they are. I do not want to ever see Taunt like abilities in this game - totally not in the spirit of Trek, unless our characters have nemesis-like enemies and that would make it unique in a sense.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
02-03-2010, 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakoriz
I tried an engineer in an escort in beta and did not like it. The Engineer defensive skills just didnt seem to help enough in an escort to make up for the lack of DPS as compared to a Tactical officer in an escort.

However, I believe it is doable with the right setup.

As for agro management.. I dont want to see 'taunt' type abilities in this game. I WOULD like to see a way for Escorts and Science ships to escape 'agro' in some way to allow those Cruisers to take more of the damage.
I'm familiar with the typical MMO architypes... and think the game needs more semblance of them.
But at the same time I agree adding "taunt" abilities would just be lazy. I am fine with escorts and science ships being able to escape aggro... but I think better would be adjusting cruisers to have inherent extend shields abilities or similar.

So the "tank" may not necessarily be the one being pursued by the enemy, but is the one providing protection.
Extend Shields is the obvious beginning place. Unfortunately most of the abilities I can think up that would provide this function would seem to fall more into the science officer realm.

It could work though (and makes sense actually)... Science officers could be the tanks in ship (extend shields, jamming sensors, etc.) and the healers (medics) on the ground. Tactical would be DPS in ships, tanks on the ground. Engineer would logically be healers in ship (sending shuttle teams to aid repairs, etc.) and then dps/support on the ground... possibly ground tanks too I suppose.

There is no rule that says your role has to be the same in both play type scenarios... I think people assume it though.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
02-03-2010, 01:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocSavag View Post
Yea the game is in need of some good aggro generating skills for proper tanking, but when you mention things like that you get shouted down by folks who don't like applying standard MMO archetypes to Star Trek.
Lol I'm actually one of those people who hate having to reference other MMO's to get a point across, but I found not doing it caused more headache. Too many people need the comparision it seems, and if I didn't say "could be compared to" or whatever I get a lot of hate on that regard too. Oh well, win some, lose some.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
02-03-2010, 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGarrett
Lol I'm actually one of those people who hate having to reference other MMO's to get a point across, but I found not doing it caused more headache. Too many people need the comparision it seems, and if I didn't say "could be compared to" or whatever I get a lot of hate on that regard too. Oh well, win some, lose some.
I am not so much looking for a 'tank' style such as wow or some such, but def looking to be able to absorb maassive amounts of damage, yet still deal enough to '****' off enemies enough so that they focus fire on me more so than science vessels or escorts. This is of course 'aggro' 'threat' etc, but not even sure what kind of mechanics the game has for this or not.
My main concern with being a tactical officer vs. an engineer is at higher levels you can 'train' your officers of the same class, and for a 'tank' ie. survability situation it probably makes more sense to train your engineers than your tac officers am i right?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
02-03-2010, 01:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompar
I am not so much looking for a 'tank' style such as wow or some such, but def looking to be able to absorb maassive amounts of damage, yet still deal enough to '****' off enemies enough so that they focus fire on me more so than science vessels or escorts. This is of course 'aggro' 'threat' etc, but not even sure what kind of mechanics the game has for this or not.
My main concern with being a tactical officer vs. an engineer is at higher levels you can 'train' your officers of the same class, and for a 'tank' ie. survability situation it probably makes more sense to train your engineers than your tac officers am i right?
Yes you are right in a sense - it really is up to you. All I am saying is from what I have experienced, when you output a massive burst of damage the enemy will often times turn to focus it's fire on you. If it is convenient for the enemy to start firing on you now because the other target flew out of it's main damage window, it will often switch as well. There really is no fail safe way to keep an enemy firing at you, which is what my understanding was the role of WOW tanks. Most people who use the wording Tank on here want to be what a WOW tank was, so I apologize for misunderstanding.

But like I said, if you want to soak a lot of damage then cruiser is probably your best bet. If you want to do enough damage to keep an enemy consistently firing on you, then a Tactical captain can best achieve this assuming he has spent his skill points wisely, uses the right equipment, and then uses his Tactical only buffs.

Lastly, training your BO's seems to be a big concern for people. Honestly, you might find by the time you are getting to your skills which when you cap allow you to train something, you simply don't have the skill points to actually cap that skill without handicapping yourself in another area. It sounds like you already have a friend or two you play with (the science vessel) so you can always get others to train your engineers for you. Like you could train their tactical officers for them. It really is up to you however.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:14 AM.