Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 158
# 1 Could it be balanced?
08-20-2013, 05:04 AM
I have been doing some thinking and would like the PVP community?s opinion on balance of it.

I think the DEVs have talked about adding an armor slot to ships and cruisers would get 2 slots while science ships go 2 deflectors etc.

So here is my idea, add armor and targeting computer slot to all ships. Then give cruisers 2 warp core and armor slots, give science ships 2 shield and deflector slots, and escorts 2 targeting computer and engine slots.

Now it does sound a little OP to give each class 2 extra slots but here is my reason. One extra slot is for defense (armor, shield, and engines) and one is for offense (warp core, deflector, and targeting computer).

Not all thing are created equal. So the armor is a better defense shields(a lot of thing bypass shields now) and shields are better than engines(max defense bonus). For the offensive targeting would be the best(more damage) deflectors would buff science skills and debuff powers, while the warp core would boost power levels (this could almost be more of a defense one). Adding this many things will be very hard to balance.

I think the DEV?s said something about what to do with the current armor if they added an armor slot. I say leave them in the game just make other engineering consoles better. With the diminishing returns it will be a waste of space to use the current armor consoles.

What is the targeting computer? I am not sure, I was thinking to have them be extra weapon mods. With only one modifier but the rarity would change how much.

One nice thing about this if you add 2 more slots you could make 2 sets of 3. One set engine/shield/deflector the other computer/warp core/ armor. You could put the lockbox sets into the new computer/warp core/ armor and in turn limiting there OPness some.
I am @allenlabarge in game
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,244
# 2
08-20-2013, 05:51 AM
The more variables you add the more difficult balancing becomes so while it could be balanced it most likely would not be. This is the why improving balance via power creep rarely ends well.

But yes it could be.
STO has a diverse group of players with a wide range of expectations and playstyles. To that end the STO team should endeavor to create a variety of content with a diverse set of difficulty levels and challenges. Cake for everyone!
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,991
# 3
08-20-2013, 06:07 AM
The mention of the Heavy Armor slot for Cruisers and Secondary Deflector for Sci Vessels was before they did the Cores and Enhanced Armors/RCS for the Mine Holding. So that was a wee while back at that...

Regarding the two sets of three, one of the reasons they stated they did not do Reputation Cores was because they did not want a return to the 2+2 scenario that existed previously. Thus, there are Fleet Cores (no set bonuses) but no Rep Cores (which would allow for 2+2's, etc).

I'm having a little trouble following your proposal, mind you - so I'll ask for some elaboration before sharing any additional thoughts. To me, it reads as if you're suggesting the following:

Cruiser
2x Armor (+2 Armor)
2x Core (+1 Core)
1x Targeting (+1 Targeting)

Escort
1x Armor (+1 Armor)
2x Engine (+1 Engine)
2x Targeting (+2 Targeting)

Science Vessel
1x Armor (+1 Armor)
2x Deflector (+1 Deflector)
2x Shield (+1 Shield)
1x Targeting (+1 Targeting)

Or is it suggesting the following:

Cruiser
3x Armor (+3 Armor)
3x Core (+2 Core)
1x Targeting (+1 Targeting)

Escort
1x Armor (+1 Armor)
3x Engine (+2 Engine)
3x Targeting (+3 Targeting)

Science Vessel
1x Armor (+1 Armor)
3x Deflector (+2 Deflector)
3x Shield (+2 Shield)
1x Targeting (+1 Targeting)

One is adding +4 slots to each ship and one is adding +6 slots to each ship...either of those...well, that's beyond powercreep, no?

I mean, the original discussion on the Heavy Armor Slot and Secondary Deflector was to give Cruisers and Science Vessels something "unique" like Escorts get DHCs (which isn't unique)...the whole thing was a headscratcher to begin with, imho...

At some point (that point has long past), they're going to have to look at adding harder content for all the stuff they're adding...or...it's obvious what they think of the ability level of the majority of their playerbase...

...regardless of how anything is added in regard to PvP, it's going to be what it is - just something that widens the gap between newer and veteran players.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 158
# 4
08-20-2013, 06:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer View Post
The mention of the Heavy Armor slot for Cruisers and Secondary Deflector for Sci Vessels was before they did the Cores and Enhanced Armors/RCS for the Mine Holding. So that was a wee while back at that...

Regarding the two sets of three, one of the reasons they stated they did not do Reputation Cores was because they did not want a return to the 2+2 scenario that existed previously. Thus, there are Fleet Cores (no set bonuses) but no Rep Cores (which would allow for 2+2's, etc).

I'm having a little trouble following your proposal, mind you - so I'll ask for some elaboration before sharing any additional thoughts. To me, it reads as if you're suggesting the following:

Cruiser
2x Armor (+2 Armor)
2x Core (+1 Core)
1x Targeting (+1 Targeting)

Escort
1x Armor (+1 Armor)
2x Engine (+1 Engine)
2x Targeting (+2 Targeting)

Science Vessel
1x Armor (+1 Armor)
2x Deflector (+1 Deflector)
2x Shield (+1 Shield)
1x Targeting (+1 Targeting)

Or is it suggesting the following:

Cruiser
3x Armor (+3 Armor)
3x Core (+2 Core)
1x Targeting (+1 Targeting)

Escort
1x Armor (+1 Armor)
3x Engine (+2 Engine)
3x Targeting (+3 Targeting)

Science Vessel
1x Armor (+1 Armor)
3x Deflector (+2 Deflector)
3x Shield (+2 Shield)
1x Targeting (+1 Targeting)

One is adding +4 slots to each ship and one is adding +6 slots to each ship...either of those...well, that's beyond powercreep, no?

I mean, the original discussion on the Heavy Armor Slot and Secondary Deflector was to give Cruisers and Science Vessels something "unique" like Escorts get DHCs (which isn't unique)...the whole thing was a headscratcher to begin with, imho...

At some point (that point has long past), they're going to have to look at adding harder content for all the stuff they're adding...or...it's obvious what they think of the ability level of the majority of their playerbase...

...regardless of how anything is added in regard to PvP, it's going to be what it is - just something that widens the gap between newer and veteran players.
Power creep it is.

As far as how many, no more than 2 slots of one thing per ship.

Its hard when thinking about game mechanics because if you make something stronger it will make the small group PVP made but if you take stuff away it will make the large group mad.

My first idea with the targeting computer was to take away all weapon mods on have them only in the computer. But I thought it would make too many people mad.

As far as more than one set bonus I wonder if you could limit it so only the first slot counts.

One thing I wish is that set bonuses where just Boff powers that didn?t share any global cool downs. So one piece bonus would be a tier 1 power 2 set would be tier 2 and 3 set would be tier 3. Then you could have 3 tier 1 abilities, one tier 1 and one tier 2 or one tier 3. Then all you have to worry about is balancing Boff powers.
I am @allenlabarge in game
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,991
# 5
08-20-2013, 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by queue38 View Post
Its hard when thinking about game mechanics because if you make something stronger it will make the small group PVP mad but if you take stuff away it will make the large group mad.
It is small group vs. large group, but it is not PvP group vs. PvE group.

It is a small group of PvP and PvE folks vs. large group of PvP and PvE folks...
Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 158
# 6
08-20-2013, 08:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer View Post
It is small group vs. large group, but it is not PvP group vs. PvE group.

It is a small group of PvP and PvE folks vs. large group of PvP and PvE folks...
Yes I guess that is what I was trying to say. I'm just not good at explain stuff some times.
I am @allenlabarge in game
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,991
# 7
08-20-2013, 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by queue38 View Post
Yes I guess that is what I was trying to say. I'm just not good at explain stuff some times.
Oh, no worries - I was just trying to dodge a possible PvP vs. PvE thread hijacking. They lurk out there - waiting to pounce on such threads.

Regarding the idea, what about adding:

Tactical System Slot
Engineering System Slot
Science System Slot

Where they could introduce a group of restricted universal items...that could go in each slot. There could be a variety of Tactical Systems (offensive, defensive, mixed) as well as Engineering and Science Systems that do the same. A person could decide whether to slot an offensive upgrade, defensive upgrade, or mixed upgrade with a System designed for their particular ship (Cruiser - Escort - Science Vessel)...where they'd have to decide which the hybrids actually were, etc, etc, etc.

Tac might be 2x Tac, 1x Eng, 1x Sci buffs (just a very rough sketch)
Eng might be 1x Tac, 2x Eng, 1x Sci and Sci 1/1/2 sort of thing.

So maybe Energy Weapons, Targeting, Engine Performance, Sensors. Maybe Maneuvers, Threat Control, Hull Repair, Shield Emitters. As examples for an Off and Def thing for Tacs, etc, etc, etc. Then as you got into the VR and UR versions - additional modifiers...
Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 400
# 8
08-21-2013, 10:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer View Post

Regarding the idea, what about adding:

Tactical System Slot
Engineering System Slot
Science System Slot
THIS is a very good idea. So many of the suggestions I see are about ideas that would make all the ships basically perform the same. I like the idea of making cruisers even more cruisery, escorts even more escorty, and science ships even more sciency.
Republic Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,959
# 9
08-21-2013, 10:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by glassguitar View Post
THIS is a very good idea. So many of the suggestions I see are about ideas that would make all the ships basically perform the same. I like the idea of making cruisers even more cruisery, escorts even more escorty, and science ships even more sciency.
The problem is that due to the demands of endgame, "cruisery" is nowhere near as desirable as "escorty". It is not so much ships and classes that must be balanced, but the content.
______________________________________
Remember Me
For Geko: The truth about skill points.
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 07:56 PM.