Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
08-01-2011, 03:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorFury View Post
2. I am tempted to suggest that maybe APB and FoMM apply a debuff to shields as well as hull before we "nerf" shield resist stacking? Its a thought at least. Sometimes easier to give then to take away....plus the pve crowd will be less prone to cry.

3. And I still would like to see extend shields re-worked. I would suggest lowering the range, applying some type of "penalty" to the caster while it is being channeled, and/ or making it go away if the range between caster and target is exceeded.
2. Thats a good idea I like that make debuffs in general effect shields as well as hull... this would make sensor scan pretty godly although I guess it already is.

3. ya the chain extending god mood is annoying too. I guess my idea would likely put more extend into the game, which makes that buff to the range it got look really OP. I think if it gets broken at any point it should end the effect as well... would make some of the soft counters like tractor beam repulsors more effective.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
08-01-2011, 03:23 PM
Aside from Fire at Will and Scramble Sensors....

1. Science Fleet. This skill is way overpowered. 10% resist to shields it should be, flat.

2. Tactical Team. 10 Seconds of immunity essentially. Horrible idea. There should be no shield distribution at all, and it should simply cleanse for 5 sec (maybe keep +18 EW and PW for 10?)

3. MVAE. Bought it, have it on my fed. Way too powerful, needs more drawbacks. No way should feds have the best damage ship in the game (sci and support cruisers should be their specialty)

Others include the Intrepid still dominating the other science ships, photonic fleet/fleet support, particle burst having no counter/too easy to use.

Healing i dont have too much of a problem with. Maybe hazards shouldnt have the high resist on top of the massive hull heal as well. Extends should be 5km like it used to be.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
08-01-2011, 03:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorFury View Post
1. Science Fleet should be brought in-line with tac and engineer fleet.

2. I am tempted to suggest that maybe APB and FoMM apply a debuff to shields as well as hull before we "nerf" shield resist stacking? Its a thought at least. Sometimes easier to give then to take away....plus the pve crowd will be less prone to cry.

3. And I still would like to see extend shields re-worked. I would suggest lowering the range, applying some type of "penalty" to the caster while it is being channeled, and/ or making it go away if the range between caster and target is exceeded.
Like no other shield buffs/regens/or resists while up. I mean right now you cannot RSP while ES why make so you cannot EPtS, TSS, RSF while ES. Of course you could receive them but in effect you would be locked out from those skills on your power bar.

Cryptic please actually balance the turning of the ships. Yeah yeah I know the raptor has the same turn rate as non defiant/MVAM/BoP escorts but does it really. Either have all the ship classes have their own turn points based on dead center or put the actual turn rate with the compensation for geometry in each ships specs. Fed ships turn axis is closer to center then KDF ships.

Pengs and things like it please I would much rather get a weak reward that is niche than an OP'd one that rules all. It is always easier to buff than to nerf. Putting things live that are OP'd only cause more grief because while the PvP community is small its vocal so we are easy to ignore but if you put something OP and the PvE community assimilates it into their immersion they sure as hell are going to get louder than any one in the PvP community. So putting something weak live is preferable to something buffed because people take the buffed for granted so once you take that away it is like a drug. Rememebr some of the QQ for old RSP on how the servers would crash and all the angels would cry because of the nerfing of such an OP'd defensive skill.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
08-01-2011, 03:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husanak View Post
2. Thats a good idea I like that make debuffs in general effect shields as well as hull... this would make sensor scan pretty godly although I guess it already is.

3. ya the chain extending god mood is annoying too. I guess my idea would likely put more extend into the game, which makes that buff to the range it got look really OP. I think if it gets broken at any point it should end the effect as well... would make some of the soft counters like tractor beam repulsors more effective.
2. I might say leave sensor scan as is.....but make APB and FoMM effect shields.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
08-01-2011, 03:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorFury View Post
2. I might say leave sensor scan as is.....but make APB and FoMM effect shields.
indeed... honestly don't think I would want someones full aux 120 debuff sensor scan on the shield resists.
Perhaps as a trade to keep sci / sci captains happy Sensor Analysis could debuff shields...

Bottom line ya shield resists either need to be reduced... or they need to give us ways to debuff them outside of SNB..... getting kinda sick of teams with 3+ sci ships so they can chain sci fleets and SNB. With no other way to debuff the shield resist.... it just turns into Sci Captain online. LOL
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
08-01-2011, 03:34 PM
Target Shields 3, and SNB does wonders for that sci fleet problem.

As does Tykens 2 or 3 and Target 2
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
08-01-2011, 03:51 PM
Yes! Let's have a productive discussion. So we're not talking about the clearly broken stuff so I won't comment on SS III, Peng, or FAW (Which is sorta fixed? But still better than BO so yah...). Obviously we're all going to talk about thing's we'd personally enjoy, but hopefully thing that will help the game overall.

I agree that Ability Stacking should probably go away, ie APB I, II, & III. Use the best of whatever, but I think that should stick to the specific named ability. So APB III and APD III would still stack (Obviously it would take a coordinated effort from two team members to fire off both at once). Reason being it would encourage team members to build ships that compliment each other. For example since I prefer to heal/buff my team mates I run APD since they tend to run APB themselves (And I grant the APD to my team mates).

Applying this to heals is I think a more complicated issue. Let's say two team mates heal one ship. Perhaps the HP healing from both should apply, but the resistance buff should only apply from one of the two (Whichever is the better resistance).

Be it debuffs or buff, the system I think should not automatically favor version III over version II. Granted that would be the simple way to do it, but I think it would be better if it favored which ever had the better stats. True most of the time it will be the version III skill, but suppose someone who puts no training into HE uses HE III and their ability stats are actually worse than someone with HE II fully trained and higher aux? I think in that case version II should be favored since it has a better proc.

...

Shield resists are indeed imbalanced at the moment and should be looked into. Making it so they can't stack up to such a high resistance would work I think. Heck I can get up to 85% resistance on my cruiser (For a limited period of time), and I'm an engineer!

Moving on to something I'd like to see in turn though, and this may be a bit controversial for PvPers. But I'd actually like to see it be easier to hull tank. Right now shields are king, granted if shield resistance was lowered that would change things, but hull is overall rather weak. A lot of this is due to powers like ATB/APD/APO but those powers just don't effect shields the way they do hull. And even without them (As they are easy enough to clear with Tac Team), 50,000 hull on a cruiser goes away ALOT faster than 5,000 on a shield facing. Now I'm not saying I want it to take as long to kill 5,000 hull as it does now to kill 5,000 shield... but personally I would like to see hull tanking become more viable than it currently is for those who spec into it (Like I do on my cruiser, but not on my BoP).

Perhaps this could be accomplished by having the ship skills add a little bit more passive resistance to hulls (Nothing crazy though)...

...

As someone else already mentioned, detecting cloak can be a pain. Though most players invest 0 skills into Sensors in any regard, I'd be ok with Cloak detection being a lil easier than it is now. I'm not really sure how to do it though, right now you need to be in a Nebula and be a Science Captain to be able to reliable detect cloaked ships.

I'm not really sure how to handle this though. Heck I remember when cloaked ships showed up on the minimap... Perhaps uncloaked ships could get a passive 15% bonus to cloak detection (The idea being that they can use active sensors to look for cloaked ships). Something both factions could use, but only when uncloaked.

...

Those are the big things for me, beyond that I would say remove Scorpion Fighters, Deuterium, and make carriers have fewer pets (Especially fighters) but make them equally stronger and do more damage to make up for it (Purely due to client lag, not to nerf them).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18 Azurian has a point
08-01-2011, 04:02 PM
*starts digging the whole*

PuGs n Premades will never be on the same playing field, the question is who benefits most from resits and heal stacking? The gamedesign does its part to tip things towards a certain sense of balance.

If two copies of TSS no longer stack, I can design my 5 man team around this problem. Era gets ES1-3, Trin HE1-3 etc, ...
A pug, however, could never hope to match that. Each member would bring a fairly similar mix of TT, EptS, ET etc. Wouldn't we effectively punish them for sharing heals, while granting premades even more powerful copies of the same abilities?

I for one would be weary of such a change.

*flame suit on*

To be clear, I still think Science Fleet needs a balance pass vis a vis the others.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
08-01-2011, 04:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by havam
*starts digging the whole*

PuGs n Premades will never be on the same playing field, the question is who benefits most from resits and heal stacking? The gamedesign does its part to tip things towards a certain sense of balance.

If two copies of TSS no longer stack, I can design my 5 man team around this problem. Era gets ES1-3, Trin HE1-3 etc, ...
A pug, however, could never hope to match that. Each member would bring a fairly similar mix of TT, EptS, ET etc. Wouldn't we effectively punish them for sharing heals, while granting premades even more powerful copies of the same abilities?

I for one would be weary of such a change.

*flame suit on*

To be clear, I still think Science Fleet needs a balance pass vis a vis the others.
Well as it is now, that's how it is done for debuffs. One team member uses APB III, another APB II, and another APB I and they stack. But if they all use APB III then they don't stack. The idea is that if APB I, II, & III are all cast one on target then only the strongest debuff sticks and the others fade away.

Similarly with Heals, HE I and HE III wouldn't stack (Atleast the buff in my few) while the pure hp healing from HE I & HE III or even HE III & HE III would still stack (Just not the bonus resistance, you only get whichever is highest).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
08-01-2011, 04:09 PM
Muhaha, ok that first part made me giggle.
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 06:57 PM.