Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,690
# 21
10-23-2013, 03:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daedalus304 View Post
Ok so here's the thing, for a long time STO has seemed useless in its class system.

many blamed it solely on the DPS oriented style and lack of other setups.

I think it's more because instead of following a traditional stance of DPS for DPS, Tanking for Tanking, and Heals for Heals, each class can use Bridge officers to do basically all of that.

I have freaking tanked as a Tactical in a cruiser because of the bridge officers that I have.

does anyone else see this?

does anyone else see the distinction between the classes just go away because of the bridge officers? it basically takes away the science officers job, the Engineers don't have enough threat as is so either way they can't tank properly.
Yes, AND IT IS AWESOME!

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrorshatner View Post
If they wanted to have more emphasis on the profession/class chosen, one way to address it would be to add synergies.

So for example:

Science captain gets bonuses in a Science ship
Science Boffs get bonuses from a Science captain

Repeat synergy for other professions.
So that is why Starfleet put Kirk (tactical) into a cruiser, Sulu (tactical) into a cruiser, Picard (science) into a cruiser and Sisko (engineering) into an escort? Good to know. Sorry, worst idea ever.
FKA K-Tar, grumpy Klingon/El-Aurian hybrid. Now assimilated by PWE.
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 132
# 22
10-23-2013, 04:36 AM
There is one glaring hole in the skill sets between classes:

Tactical has an ability which reduces tactical officer cooldown.

Add the exact same ability for Science and Engineering. That way, each class will have a slight advantage going heavy with their matching BOFF layout (compared to the others) but nothing large enough to break balance.

The differences as they exist now are fairly close overall. A TAC captain gets to do 50% more damage every 30s out of every 2 minutes, and a team damage buff (to a single target) for 30 seconds out of 2:30. Call that double damage for ~20% of the time overall, and you get a simple 20% DPS buff in anything as a TAC captain.

However, an engineering captain in the same build can run EPS for the same duration, which strengthens aux heals a lot, makes your ship move a turn faster, toughens up your shields and overcaps your weapons on most power level settings used. They also have miracle worker + grace under fire, nadion inversion and rotate shield frequency. Basically, while the TAC captain can do 20% more damage, the ENG captain can take a lot more fire without being destroyed or forced to retreat.

A science captain can call a photonic fleet to both draw fire and provide some additional DPS, as well as use SNB to strip any buffs off the target. I am not sure if this works against boss targets, but this ability is still extremely useful especially in PVP.

Each class has it's advantages. The main reason TAC is favoured is because of the lack of challenge in most endgame PVE. Once you get above ~5k DPS, STFs become easy. At or above 10K and they are jokes. I ran a pug ISE that ended with 10:15 left on the optional, I was the second highest parse at 10K DPS, everyone was over 6k. That mission was too easy at this level of player ability.

Basically, running TAC is the easiest way to break PVE through excessive firepower. If the content was scaled up (perhaps make the current elite "advanced" and add a new level of "elite" STFs where the borg use buffs, debuffs and cross heal, etc) then you will see other classes used more often, as more team play and abilities will be needed to complete the content as opposed to just vaporizing everything with your 10K DPS cookie cutter escort / 20k DPS cookie cutter aux2bat FAW cruisers.

Basically, it is not so much that the classes are broken, but that the endgame content is geared to favour the simplistic brute force solution.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,261
# 23
10-23-2013, 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostusthorn View Post
Yes, get rid of classes altogether. Let us pick skills like we want. We are command, not tactical or engineering. Command.
Make the big skills mutually exclusive, apa, snb,mw for example, pick one, the others get locked.
This.

Character creation should allow us to choose a "background" for our character that grants certain captain skills, but in the end we are above the department classes. We should also start as captains (rank) since that's what we are in this game.
-> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- -> Click if you prefer the old forum design! <-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
Lieutenant
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 78
# 24
10-23-2013, 08:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by roxbad View Post
Why is that a problem?
1. It undermines team play.

If everyone is DPS than team composition becomes irrelevant all that matters is number of ships x purity of DPS.

2. It makes player choice irrelevant.

If there is only one viable build it makes all our choices when leveling pointless since that choice can only make the character weaker.


3. It allows for only one type of play and alienates anyone who doesn't enjoy that DPS focused builds/game play>

Some players enjoy being support, minion masters, tanks/defenders, controllers etc. etc. If DPS is the only thing that matters that severely limits the appeal of your game. I for one do not enjoy playing the striker all the time and would enjoy some different roles.

4. It eliminates much of the reason for Alts (and the revenue that comes from players buying stuff for alts)

If there is only one build or one roll, their is much less incentive to run alts. Why would I bother grinding out equipment for 3-5 alts if they all are just going to do basically the same thing the same way? There is a lot more reason to run alts if they fill different roles, making the incentive for alts to have a diversity of options when putting together a group to take on game content.

5. It kills fun but doesn't add anything.

Having only one viable build doesn't add anything to the game and eliminates a lot of things which are fun. In short there is no advantage while lots of disadvantages as previously mentioned. It isn't like there is some kind of trade off which we gain by removing other viable options, it just flatly detracts from the game and limits it.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,776
# 25
10-23-2013, 08:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daedalus304 View Post
Ok so here's the thing, for a long time STO has seemed useless in its class system.

many blamed it solely on the DPS oriented style and lack of other setups.

I think it's more because instead of following a traditional stance of DPS for DPS, Tanking for Tanking, and Heals for Heals, each class can use Bridge officers to do basically all of that.

I have freaking tanked as a Tactical in a cruiser because of the bridge officers that I have.

does anyone else see this?

does anyone else see the distinction between the classes just go away because of the bridge officers? it basically takes away the science officers job, the Engineers don't have enough threat as is so either way they can't tank properly.
I think it's cool. My fed engi fly an escort, my KDF engi fly a carrier.
I don't see the problem.

Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 132
# 26
10-23-2013, 08:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by krisknives View Post
1. It undermines team play.

4. It eliminates much of the reason for Alts (and the revenue that comes from players buying stuff for alts)
I run alts to bypass the dilithium cap as much as anything. You can get 4k dil per character per day without really doing anything if you know how to DOFF for contraband, etc.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 694
# 27
10-23-2013, 08:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by krisknives View Post
1.
I'm just gonna flat out reject that response as it is too silly to thoughtfully consider. It is a huge straw-man stuffed with assumptions which ignore a myriad of other possible and more likely circumstance in order to support a predetermined position.

So my response is, where "x" = "No it doesn't", 5x.
Republic Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 545
# 28
10-23-2013, 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by krisknives View Post
1. It undermines team play.

If everyone is DPS than team composition becomes irrelevant all that matters is number of ships x purity of DPS.

2. It makes player choice irrelevant.

If there is only one viable build it makes all our choices when leveling pointless since that choice can only make the character weaker.


3. It allows for only one type of play and alienates anyone who doesn't enjoy that DPS focused builds/game play>

Some players enjoy being support, minion masters, tanks/defenders, controllers etc. etc. If DPS is the only thing that matters that severely limits the appeal of your game. I for one do not enjoy playing the striker all the time and would enjoy some different roles.

4. It eliminates much of the reason for Alts (and the revenue that comes from players buying stuff for alts)

If there is only one build or one roll, their is much less incentive to run alts. Why would I bother grinding out equipment for 3-5 alts if they all are just going to do basically the same thing the same way? There is a lot more reason to run alts if they fill different roles, making the incentive for alts to have a diversity of options when putting together a group to take on game content.

5. It kills fun but doesn't add anything.

Having only one viable build doesn't add anything to the game and eliminates a lot of things which are fun. In short there is no advantage while lots of disadvantages as previously mentioned. It isn't like there is some kind of trade off which we gain by removing other viable options, it just flatly detracts from the game and limits it.
I read all 5 of your points and they are already true with the current system. I know a lot of players who have left or play rarely because the game is built around DPS and anything other than a Tac is weaker and at a disadvantage. I am a Science Captain, yet I am most effective in an escort, where I can do only half the damage a Tac can. PvP could solve a lot of this if it were actually developed and balanced.

(PS) I see you just jouned this month, maybe you have yet to reach max level and reputation grind and STFs to see that it is TacScorts (now TacFAWCruisersAux2Bat) Online. The whole balance of STO has become so gimmicky and devoid of skill.

Last edited by buccaneerdtb; 10-23-2013 at 08:54 AM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 7,851
# 29
10-23-2013, 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by buccaneerdtb View Post
(PS) I see you just jouned this month, maybe you have yet to reach max level and reputation grind and STFs to see that it is TacScorts
Never assume the join date means anything. Usually when you see posts like that they're from someone's second or subsequent account. People like to hide behind alts on open forums.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 78
# 30
10-23-2013, 10:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mll623 View Post
I run alts to bypass the dilithium cap as much as anything. You can get 4k dil per character per day without really doing anything if you know how to DOFF for contraband, etc.
Oh of course. I think everyone runs alts to bybass the cap, which is why I said "much of reason" not all. I run many alts myself but I don't really play most of them, I just milk them for more in game currency. If they ever let me manage my DOFF from my phone I don't know that I would ever log into some of them again. I certainly haven't dropped cash to buy anything for them and while I don't have access to metrics I can say in my social experience I've found this to be fairly common in STO where as in say EverQuest or CoH most people I knew ran an average of three characters regularly and never rolled up an alt just for currency. Actually using alt for currency is a fairly unique element of STO's umm.....metagame? (Would that be the right term here?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by roxbad View Post
I'm just gonna flat out reject that response as it is too silly to thoughtfully consider. It is a huge straw-man stuffed with assumptions which ignore a myriad of other possible and more likely circumstance in order to support a predetermined position.

So my response is, where "x" = "No it doesn't", 5x.
Look, if you think I'm way off base, that is fine but you are not using the phrase straw-man argument correctly.

A star-man is "a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position." Since you asked a question, to which I responded, and did not in fact reference or represent your position in anyway I factually, have not engaged in a straw-man argument. I simply stated and explained my own views without reference to anyone else's stances, design philosophy or opinions.

Additionally, we've all got predetermined positions. It is something humans form experience with something. You asked a question to which I responded. You then failed to articulate an statement designed to change or even just challenge the position much less its supporting points, one which you requested I expand on to which I conversationally obliged. As such you've given no reason for anyone to re-evaluate their position nor even the opportunity for anyone to have done so. As such your statements about my response are rather confusing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buccaneerdtb View Post
I read all 5 of your points and they are already true with the current system.
Yes I agree. My original point was that eliminating the class system would just chance the real issue from being only one viable class to only one viable build. So yes these are, as I see it, issues already present in the game. Sorry if that got lost a few pages.
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 04:19 AM.