Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > PvP Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
This is eerily similar to Warhammer Online, where the early-tier BGs were easily the most enjoyable experience in the game.

This stage of the game has superior balance: Feds get cruisers and science ships; klingons essentially only get escorts (some with universal BOFF slots), but have cloak.

Also, there is simply less button-mashing. In T5 you have no fewer than 12 BOFF powers to put on your hotbar, in addition to your personal powers and universal powers like Evasive Maneuvers, not to mention batteries, manually-activated mines and torps if you are like me and bind spacebar to "fire all phasers," and so on. Trying to manage all this crap while maneuvering your ship just gets overwhelming. In T2 you just have four BOFF powers, most of which will probably be defensive, and 1-2 personal powers.

Simpler action = more fun action. See TF2.

Finally, there are very few B.S. overpowered abilities. There's no VM, and if you spec for subnucleonic, extend shields, or RSP stacking you will severely gimp your offensive abilities. So it can be done, but you pay a severe price.

I've pretty much abandoned my T5 main in favor of my T2 alts. There's no T5 PvE, and T5 PvP just can't compare.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
03-04-2010, 05:17 PM
I had a great deal of enjoyment in T2, while I would not call it "simple".
There is a great deal of tactical richness to be found in T2, while the BO powers may be less the art of flying and fighting your ship is a great deal of fun.

Yours in T2 Tactical Plasma,
Star*Dagger
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
03-04-2010, 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Star*Dagger
I had a great deal of enjoyment in T2, while I would not call it "simple".
There is a great deal of tactical richness to be found in T2, while the BO powers may be less the art of flying and fighting your ship is a great deal of fun.

Yours in T2 Tactical Plasma,
Star*Dagger
Perhaps "simple" was not the right term, any more than TF2 is simple. But both have a purity of gameplay not found in the T5 button-mashing-fest.

Doubt I'll be logging onto my T5 for a long time.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
03-04-2010, 06:22 PM
I'd go one step higher. T2 is pretty decent, but it's prone to a lot of moves you can't counter. Say you run with Sci team in your only sci slot, but then you get tractored. You get burned. You attack someone, and they pop RSP, but you don't have it. You get burned.

Some things can be countered with some teamwork (such as, you're missing sci team and you get jammed), but it's really rock/paper/scissors at t2, and I'm not a fan of that kind of play.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
03-04-2010, 07:25 PM
And Cryptic may need to take note of this thread methinks.

This is in line with some other people asking for less Ability based Combat and more tactical Ship, basic Offense Defense Combat system.

And I wish for that too, Warhammer ticket me off the higher we went due to the ever growing list of CC and meta combat abilities. But Warhammer is not exactly a good candidate to compare this with.

because Ships are not suposed to be characters or play as Characters.

You want CC and traditional Fantasy mechanics..fine, implement them in the ground portion of the game, the spaceportion should not be like that.

The best candidate for comparison would be POTBS in my opinion, Ship to Ship combat at its best, if only that game did not involve involuntary Loss, or a revamped economy that eliminates the "20 min PvP and 5 days of PVE grind to Finance it" I would still be playing it.

Coming from UO it is not the loss per se that bother mes, it is however what comes in between, In UO we did not have to grind for hours on end to have fun in PvP, so while there was involuntary loss you could re-equip yourself in a matter of minutes without going broke either. In other words, UO was not Money Centric. POTBS is unfortunatelly Money Centric, and so is EVE.

But POTBS Combat (PvP) was memorable glorious, intense, tactical and a hell of a fun ride! be it in Ad Hoc engagements or Port battles, devising tactical strategies for the next battle maneuvers trying to come up with unnexpected ones, you really felt being in the battlefield and that both sides engaged in strategic mind games, no different than all ofthe great battles in our history.

I have hoped STO would be a tactical Combat of that level, at this time it is not in par with that caliber, and while it is still tactical and I am thankful about it, it is so only up to a certain degree...and it could be lots better.

On a side not, I am not a PVEer per se, I usually dislike PVE specially if it is forced upon one in a game, but STO is the first game where I actually enjoy it, because it does have a tactical element to it, and to me it doe snot feel repetitious at all. But PVP is more like WoW and Warhammer (where stacking abilities and immobilizing the enemy is the norm of fighting and to me that is not fight at all)...and that is disappointing.

I hope for improvements there.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
03-04-2010, 08:50 PM
POTBS ship combat works well because it is SLOW, incredibly slow compared to STO. POTBS had lots of potential that was never realized.

I agree 100 percent on Warhammer and the CC. T1 and T2 were by far the best. T4 was a joke with all the roots, knockback, knockdown, pulls etc.

I don't mind some CC. I think people enjoy the pvp and combat because it is fairly quick. In POTBS you can get into an extended battle that last a very long time. With the extreme death penalty leaving or allowing your self to get killed is usually not an option as you might also get 5 of your friends sunk too.


There is no way to have tactical battles in STO with maps the size of postage stamps.

The Klinks need a better Sci ship period but especially in T2.

I enjoyed all tiers. None stuck out more than another.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
03-04-2010, 11:15 PM
Tier three stuck out the most for me. Tier one and two seemed horribly one sided and I played both. Tier three felt the most balanced but a science ship would round out 3 and 4. Tier 5 needs a carrier change they need to buff it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
03-04-2010, 11:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baconnaise
Tier three stuck out the most for me. Tier one and two seemed horribly one sided and I played both. Tier three felt the most balanced but a science ship would round out 3 and 4. Tier 5 needs a carrier change they need to buff it.
only if they fix the spawning abuse.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
03-04-2010, 11:37 PM
I think you're right. I would love this game to be more like Starfleet Command: Volume II. No powers, no abilities, just maneuver, reroute power levels, time your attacks, watch your phaser capacitor, etc.

Heck, SFC2 even had enjoyable music.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
03-04-2010, 11:42 PM
Hmm i like t5 the most, but must end in pretty balanced setup with no idiots stacking overused skills.
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 01:58 PM.