Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,671
First, the relevant three tweets from last night. For those who despise Twitter (as well as for the sake of completeness), this is what he said:
"Thinking about a ship armor slot. But it may stack too high with eng res consoles. Armor can do a lot more than consoles."
"How do you feel about gaining Armor, at the expense of converting existing eng res consoles into something else (don't know what yet)?"
"They could convert into an existing console, or something entirely new (just not direct hull damage mitigation)"

My own thoughts:
  • Existing Engineering consoles, other than armor, are fairly weak. I've found myself considering Engineer console slots (other than the 2 for double Neutronium) to be the place to put Universal consoles, particularly since some (the Borg and Romulan consoles) grant similar bonuses to existing Engineering consoles, but with higher returns.
  • I feel that an armor slot would be beneficial, if other universally useful Engineering consoles were created in the stead of the existing armor consoles (this would also help the Operations Odyssey, Fleet Galaxy, War Bortasqu', and Fleet Negh'var by making their 5th Engineering console slot more valuable). Existing Engineering consoles should get a look at, in order to make them more competitive, particularly for Cruisers (as high-Eng Escorts already have a significant advantage when it comes to RCS Accelerators).
  • While it is possible that Cruisers could receive a second armor slot as their "unique benefit" (similar to how Escorts have a higher turn rate and speed than any other ship, as well as being able to wield Dual Heavy Cannons), I feel that the Warp Core should be the Cruiser's signature strength. Heavier armor could come with it, and could help justify the crippled turn rates compared to similarly sized Escorts and Science Vessels (the Armitage and Vesta are bigger than some Cruisers!), however.
  • I think this is worth evaluating, but I think it would be best to implement it alongside the previously-posed Warp Core and Secondary Deflector slots.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 887
# 2
03-17-2013, 11:34 AM
I think its a good idea. I also think Cruisers should get access to Cruiser-only Heavy Armor.

I know some people would complain, but really the only reason to complain about these changes to Armor, is because it's just different. With armor slots in order to gain hull resist, you stick on an armor plate instead of several neutronium consoles. So what? Players can adapt. As long as they change the existing armor consoles into something useful, no one will really lose out.

However I also think they should make some kind of a trinity for ship-specific gear, maybe like this:

Escorts get Dual Heavy Cannons
Cruisers get Heavy Armor
Science Ships get ??? (I'm thinking Secondary Deflectors, maybe prototype warp cores? I don't know)
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,671
# 3
03-17-2013, 11:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kamiyama317 View Post
Science Ships get ??? (I'm thinking Secondary Deflectors, maybe prototype warp cores? I don't know)
The warp core is something that's the Cruiser's schtick. Most Science ships already have a secondary deflector on the model, and adding that slot for Science ships was given by Geko as a possible Science Vessel bonus in a recent interview.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,974
# 4
03-17-2013, 12:06 PM
I'm all for adding in armor slots. That's pretty much all I use engineering consoles for anyway. Well that and universals. After that do some change ups to the existing eng consoles and I think he would be on to something.

-Lantesh
Since Feb. 2009

It's time for STO to get a complete UI overhaul.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,249
# 5
03-17-2013, 12:26 PM
I think I quite like the idea of armour being a distinct ship component; but armour consoles are kind of the only engineering consoles that absolutely everybody can find a use for.

Unless we either got a whole bunch of new engineering consoles that are equally desirable as armour consoles, or existing engineering consoles were improved to have the same broad appeal of amour consoles, then engineering console slots will just become a dumping ground for universals.

Not that I wouldn't mind more free space for universal consoles; but devaluing engineering slots would be a pretty unbalanced way to bring that about.
Exploration suggestions thread - give it a read

BTW, you'd pronounce it 'Cap'n Manks'

I protest the removal of exploration clusters
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 135
# 6
03-17-2013, 12:50 PM
I'm not totally against an armor slot altho.........., armor values of the slot would have to at least EQUAL the existing armor benefits of what we use now. Anything else would be a NERF and I expect that Cryptic is looking at this to nerf escorts and buff crusiers now. Now later on or even in the same CHANGE, if you want to add BETTER armor or more armor slots for crusiers/science that's a totally different story. Addition balance takes away basicly nothing from anyone. The CHANGE needs to equal what stats everyone has now and then I would doubt you'd hear even a forum squeak about it other than raves.

I have seen Cryptic change consoles before (such as the shield effectiveness console just before F2P) and mostly what they pick to change it to is almost worthless. This then becomes a NERF, pure and simple. There are some players who have played the Mk XII console lottery to the extent of having all or most of their consoles now at Mk XII purple. I believe you might find the forums blowing up and/or alot less dedicated players if all or some of these consoles are made worthless junk, that is bound, and the only thing you can do with them is sell them to the replicator.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,000
# 7
03-17-2013, 12:40 PM
Whoa, hold it up a sec, there are engineering consoles apart from neutronium!?!

To be honest I would much rather see a slot for different warp cores. You can then make some that will give +15 to all power levels, reduces energy drain from using powers, enhances shield regen ticks or engineering abilities by 5-10%. That's what I can think of in the minute I take to type this, I'm sure there is much more that can be done.

Armour, well your 3rd neutronium only gives you 5% more resist so really only 2 neutroniums are worth it with the current damage resist mechanics. A special armour slot for cruisers would mean you have to slot less armour consoles but other than universal consoles there would be nothing to put in said engineering slots.
Cryptic Studios Team
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 84
# 8
03-18-2013, 02:41 PM
Thanks for starting this discussion.

First, let?s take Warp Cores out of the discussion. If STO gets a Warp Core, it will have little to do with armor.

Here is the bottom line we are discussing internally:

? We want to add a ship armor slot. Having more itemization is good
? Armor means Damage Resistance (to be consistent with ground Armor). Other enhancement bonuses can be available
? We don?t want to raise the survivability of every ship in the game.
? We feel Cruisers could use an increase in survivability.
? Armor could be added as a set piece.
? Armor could offer a ship material change.


So two options we are discussing:
Option 1:
? Only Cruisers Get Armor.
? No other changes needed (simple).
? We couldn't integrate armor as set piece for everyone, but it could possibly become part of a set only usable by cruisers.

Option 2:
? Everyone gets an Armor slot, but Cruisers can equip Heavy Armor.
? This is dangerous b/c it potentially raises the survivability of every ship in the game. To do this, Armor consoles would have to be changed. They would have to be something that is not related to damage mitigation (so not damage resistance, or bonus HP, or defense). The consoles would have to change to something new, or existing.
? Basic Armor could have lots of options and types, but in general, the damage resistance bonus would be equivalent to about 2 to 3 engineering consoles (for white quality - higher qualities could be better). Heavy armor would be worth much more.


So bottom line, would you be willing to loose Engineering Damage Resistance consoles for an armor slot that gives you about the same resistance, but also offers you more options.
Follow me on Twitter @CaptainGeko
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,605
# 9
03-18-2013, 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crypticgeko View Post
Thanks for starting this discussion.

First, let?s take Warp Cores out of the discussion. If STO gets a Warp Core, it will have little to do with armor.

Here is the bottom line we are discussing internally:

? We want to add a ship armor slot. Having more itemization is good
? Armor means Damage Resistance (to be consistent with ground Armor). Other enhancement bonuses can be available
? We don?t want to raise the survivability of every ship in the game.
? We feel Cruisers could use an increase in survivability.
? Armor could be added as a set piece.
? Armor could offer a ship material change.


So two options we are discussing:
Option 1:
? Only Cruisers Get Armor.
? No other changes needed (simple).
? We couldn't integrate armor as set piece for everyone, but it could possibly become part of a set only usable by cruisers.

Option 2:
? Everyone gets an Armor slot, but Cruisers can equip Heavy Armor.
? This is dangerous b/c it potentially raises the survivability of every ship in the game. To do this, Armor consoles would have to be changed. They would have to be something that is not related to damage mitigation (so not damage resistance, or bonus HP, or defense). The consoles would have to change to something new, or existing.
? Basic Armor could have lots of options and types, but in general, the damage resistance bonus would be equivalent to about 2 to 3 engineering consoles (for white quality - higher qualities could be better). Heavy armor would be worth much more.


So bottom line, would you be willing to loose Engineering Damage Resistance consoles for an armor slot that gives you about the same resistance, but also offers you more options.
So what would the difference be between regular armor consoles and heavy armor? Because as is, regular armor consoles already give you more than enough survivability in PvE regardless of ship class.

In order to really put cruisers apart, you'd need to have some huge differences.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Why the Devs can't make PvE content harder. <--- DR proved me wrong!
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,558
# 10
03-18-2013, 02:55 PM
I would like to see armor (or a hull slot) vary hull strength at the expense benefit of turn rate. Nothing to drastic, I'm thinking only a variance of a couple thousand/1 or 2 turn rate. Existing ships could be automatically provided with a hull piece that matches their current stats.

Perhaps heavy armored hull might provide an additional boost to damage mitigation, or maybe special effects when certain hull skills are used.

@greendragoon
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 08:02 PM.