Banned
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 846
# 101
09-17-2012, 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by husanakx View Post
Ok just being nit picky... but if a tac is putting graviton units on he is doing it wrong...

Partical Generators... ZERO points in grav... and if you can handle the extra squish a deflector with no graviton (ie take of the borg)... Aux to bat to drop aux power to between zero and 5... and then you TBR with alpha up. lol

If your pushing them at all as a tac... you are doing it wrong.
That was part of what I was pointing out. Although there are times when you need to push. Mind you, you should NEVER push as a tac to such an extent that you have graviton consoles. Max you should run is ranks in the skill. As a sci though? Graviton to the max baby. With my sci, sci and TBR2 I can on average kick people 15km away from their allies. If a friendly Escort and I can't get it done at that distance away when I have a Nuke and VM at my disposal and he has Buffs, then We're DoinitWrong.

Last edited by ghostyandfrosty; 09-17-2012 at 10:44 AM.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,926
# 102
09-17-2012, 10:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by husanakx View Post
Ok just being nit picky... but if a tac is putting graviton units on he is doing it wrong...

Partical Generators... ZERO points in grav... and if you can handle the extra squish a deflector with no graviton (ie take of the borg)... Aux to bat to drop aux power to between zero and 5... and then you TBR with alpha up. lol

If your pushing them at all as a tac... you are doing it wrong.
exactly. wile a tac sci is doing the only thing it can do well in a sci ship, its not doing the important debuffing and striping only a sci/sci can do well. what actually gets kills.

to say a tac uses a sci ship better then a sci can is laughable. its the sci captain who focuses not on damage that actually gets kills, and its the captain abilities that make a large part of that possible. the tac captain powers are only good for dealing damage, if you use a tac in a way that is the opposite of dealing damage, using graviton instead of particle, its the same thing as having a captain with no captain abilities.
______________________________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordlalo View Post
I just wanted to say, I've never seen a more disturbing avatar
the pvp build and help thread
gateway links(should actually work now) -->Norvo Tigan, Telis Latto Ruwon, Sochie Heim, Solana Soleus
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,532
# 103
09-17-2012, 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostyandfrosty View Post
Now if Tac sci were pumping more than an Escort or KDF Cruiser? You'd have an argument. But it doesn't.
Friggin let that sit for a while and ponder!!! Tac/cruiser give me my eng raptor cryptic or get cranking with the fixes.
Joined 06.10
PvP 2010-2011
PvP 2012-2013
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,392
# 104
09-17-2012, 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostyandfrosty View Post
When you make an actual argument worth debating that isn't coming straight out of an RPers Ass or Butt Hurt Sci players ass let me know champ. Till then you get the standard "You're a ****ing moron pveer" rant.

I'll make this simple for you chump. You have No Math proving that it's overpowered, because it isn't. All you have is an argument of "feel" which is a horrendous argument when it comes to Balance Discussions. Now if Tac sci were pumping more than an Escort or KDF Cruiser? You'd have an argument. But it doesn't.

When you have an argument that consists of more than "It breaks my immersion!" I'll actually debate with you. Till then, go Rp at drozana and stay off the forums.
If I agreed in the "damage wizard" role even having a place in this game, then I'd need #s to change it for balance reasons. But, I'm not suggesting it be changed for balance reasons nor have I ever done so. I'm saying it has no place in a Sci-Fi Space game. If you think this nerfs them in some manner boost them in another area. I've even suggested an area that would make sense, eg the Sensor based abilities.

It's not about immersion or being an RPer (which I'm not) it's about the basic gameplay design and role assignments and not wanting a fantasy game w/spaceship skins, but instead gameplay design founded in at least in some scientific theory. Off this subject I'd much rather have a high resistance based defense w/slight repairs to the yo-yo repairs, espcially hull repairs while in combat. As it is now it's a joke how quickly a ship can go from near zero hull to full hp in a blink of an eye.

The fact is you're again putting thoughts in peoples heads instead of considering what they write. You rant and rave non sensically in an attempt to make a point and ignore when you're called out it. When all else fails it's nothing but insults.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 735
# 105
09-17-2012, 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurleybird View Post
That's because STO has the worst PvE of any game I've played.
It's what we have, and i seriously doubt it's gonna change. Having one cookie-cutter build insanely OP compared to all other builds (for PvE that is) doesn't make it better. :/ Neither does having one captain class superior to the others for the task at hand.

And yes, PvE is silly easy, but with the timer running, it's about who can do it fastest, and then it's no contest at all...
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 846
# 106
09-17-2012, 08:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by p2wsucks View Post
If I agreed in the "damage wizard" role even having a place in this game, then I'd need #s to change it for balance reasons. But, I'm not suggesting it be changed for balance reasons nor have I ever done so. I'm saying it has no place in a Sci-Fi Space game. If you think this nerfs them in some manner boost them in another area. I've even suggested an area that would make sense, eg the Sensor based abilities.

It's not about immersion or being an RPer (which I'm not) it's about the basic gameplay design and role assignments and not wanting a fantasy game w/spaceship skins, but instead gameplay design founded in at least in some scientific theory. Off this subject I'd much rather have a high resistance based defense w/slight repairs to the yo-yo repairs, espcially hull repairs while in combat. As it is now it's a joke how quickly a ship can go from near zero hull to full hp in a blink of an eye.

The fact is you're again putting thoughts in peoples heads instead of considering what they write. You rant and rave non sensically in an attempt to make a point and ignore when you're called out it. When all else fails it's nothing but insults.
Yes, you said Sensor abilities, which help their best Asset exactly None. Infact the argument can be made that Sci would make more sense in that department. You say it has no place, in a sci fi game, neither does most of the crap that goes on in a given trek episode with Anamoly this that rapes physics, and is simply Magic with a fancy pants name assigned to it. You're in the wrong game, and in the wrong IP if you want "realism" based on any credible scientific theory. Maybe Babylon 5, or BSG would be more to your liking. I mean seriously have you ever watched Trek before? I just finished watching an episode of DS9 this morning about some gambling device that some how rewrote all the laws of probability on the station through Neutrinos. That is Magic. Hell that's one of the more tame examples I can come up with. That's not Science. Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

Yes you want boffless pvp. Which is Stupid, boring and Failsauce. That's why EVE is a niche game with less than a million players to it's credit.

You are again using the stupid "immersion" argument, and frankly again that has 0 place in a balance discussion. Which is what this is. We're talking about #s and hard math end of things here and you are coming in, wanting to change the window dressing.

The only Real Reason to change something like this, in a game that has pvp is #s and Balance Concerns. not Immersion. Given just how "fantastic" the devs have proven at doing anything, would you really trust them to make the game even half as fun or balanced as it is now, if they did a total Remove Tac from Sci, and remove spike healing and cross healing from the game?

I sure don't. Oh sure they might be able to give you your Bridge Commander game.. but frankly that would Suck Balls for the rest of us that enjoy not being able to sleep at the controls.

Your posts have no place on the pvp forum because it doesn't concern Balance, or existing gameplay. You're theorcrafting which is much more suited to the not so math inclined sections of this forum like STO Genital.

Also I find it utterly hilarious how you refuse to accept that what a Sci captain does is as much magic as a tac does. See above about the lady and protesting.

Last edited by ghostyandfrosty; 09-17-2012 at 08:33 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,392
# 107
09-17-2012, 10:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostyandfrosty View Post
Yes, you said Sensor abilities, which help their best Asset exactly None. Infact the argument can be made that Sci would make more sense in that department. You say it has no place, in a sci fi game, neither does most of the crap that goes on in a given trek episode with Anamoly this that rapes physics, and is simply Magic with a fancy pants name assigned to it. You're in the wrong game, and in the wrong IP if you want "realism" based on any credible scientific theory. Maybe Babylon 5, or BSG would be more to your liking. I mean seriously have you ever watched Trek before? I just finished watching an episode of DS9 this morning about some gambling device that some how rewrote all the laws of probability on the station through Neutrinos. That is Magic. Hell that's one of the more tame examples I can come up with. That's not Science. Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

Yes you want boffless pvp. Which is Stupid, boring and Failsauce. That's why EVE is a niche game with less than a million players to it's credit.

You are again using the stupid "immersion" argument, and frankly again that has 0 place in a balance discussion. Which is what this is. We're talking about #s and hard math end of things here and you are coming in, wanting to change the window dressing.

The only Real Reason to change something like this, in a game that has pvp is #s and Balance Concerns. not Immersion. Given just how "fantastic" the devs have proven at doing anything, would you really trust them to make the game even half as fun or balanced as it is now, if they did a total Remove Tac from Sci, and remove spike healing and cross healing from the game?

I sure don't. Oh sure they might be able to give you your Bridge Commander game.. but frankly that would Suck Balls for the rest of us that enjoy not being able to sleep at the controls.

Your posts have no place on the pvp forum because it doesn't concern Balance, or existing gameplay. You're theorcrafting which is much more suited to the not so math inclined sections of this forum like STO Genital.

Also I find it utterly hilarious how you refuse to accept that what a Sci captain does is as much magic as a tac does. See above about the lady and protesting.
I never said no Boffs way to make up more stuff. Btw 3 links I found in all of a minute of googling like I suggested you do earlerier:

http://venturebeat.com/2012/09/17/na...ng-warp-drive/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1424740.html

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/21418

For a fiction show it had plenty of forsite and was decent in theory. Give up the Star Trek was a fantasy show line already. For a IP that's been around for decades and outlived it's original creator it's predicted many techs, despite poetic license and incongruancies of the writers.

I never said no repairs nor no cross repairs, that's more b.s. on your part.

EvE is niche b/c it's a single shard hardcore PvP game and not just combat PvP.

Science in this game isn't "magic":

Gravity Wells are based on blackholes. http://www.newscientist.com/article/...-on-earth.html
There's sensor scrambling tech today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon <- theory behind Tachyon particles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla <- guy who worked on particle weapons b4 Star Trek, CPB has it's roots.
http://www.alan-shapiro.com/how-the-...-really-works/ <- Transport Theory. Sleath Fighters exist and are similar to the MES ability.
I've already listed link(s) w/Tractor Beams.

So again you just declare your opinion as fact and your opinion ie "fact" is wrong.

1st a game structure needs to be in place before balance takes place. I'm saying the structure is wrong. The thread is about Sci abilities and in that context I've suggested ways to change the structure as well as adjust abilities. You're arguing apples and oranges again to say only balance based on current structure matters and thereby attempting to create a forced choice to ignore suggestions to change structural mechanics.
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 846
# 108
09-17-2012, 11:12 PM
/Faceroll

Please, the only thing ST has in relation to science is coincidence of sharing same names with stuff from time to time.

Again, see episode reference.
If you think that science works at all like it does in Trek you're really out of touch with reality.

Also, lol on the stealth bit.

Seriously? MES isn't even CLOSE to what stealth technology is. MES is at most similar to "silent running" in a submarine. Only this is power signatures vs sound. Ie shut off every non essential system to minimize your energy profile. That isn't even close to Stealth Tech.

Now I know you're just trying to get attention.

The only thing you've proven is how much of a die hard trekkie you are by linking tenous at best similarities to reality that Trek has. Treks solution to Everything is Technobabble ie Magic. Not Science.

You also still have fail Miserably at providing a reason for Balance concerns (the only thing that matters) as to why tacs shouldn't be able to buff sci powers, and sci should be allowed to use their abilities in an Escort.

Seriously, how on earth is being able to Generate "black holes" At will not effing magic? You want to tell me that every sci ship, has the ability to throw out enough matter to equal a collapsing star's mass? Or even emulate the effect of a planetoid? At will? That's Reality and Physics Defying in of itself. That's Magic, pure and simple.
Otherwise I can think of much better uses for the sheer amount of energy required, and matter creation involved even for a grav well as "small" as the one in STO. Like oh I don't know making your ship literally immune to all harm, and just super charging your weapons to blow them to pieces in one shot, simultaneously.

You can scream "THAT IS SCIENCE" all you want, but that doesn't make it true. Face it champ, you like sci fantasy. You don't like science fiction.

Even Mass Effect, is harder science than Trek is. I'd even go so far as to say at best Trek is as much Science oriented as Warhammer 40k on a good day. Seriously, when's the last time you watched Trek? I mean anything post TOS. (and even then the "science" is junk, and goofy at best)

Do you have a single Legitimate Balance Concern for Tac buffing sci abilities? Seriously, do you have one iota issue. Or is it strictly a "zomg my immersion" rant? If you have any balance concerns now's the time to post them, and Prove them with Math. Otherwise you're just wasting everyone's time with an rp trollop rant.

Last edited by ghostyandfrosty; 09-17-2012 at 11:40 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,392
# 109
09-18-2012, 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostyandfrosty View Post
/Faceroll

Please, the only thing ST has in relation to science is coincidence of sharing same names with stuff from time to time.

Again, see episode reference.
If you think that science works at all like it does in Trek you're really out of touch with reality.

Also, lol on the stealth bit.

Seriously? MES isn't even CLOSE to what stealth technology is. MES is at most similar to "silent running" in a submarine. Only this is power signatures vs sound. Ie shut off every non essential system to minimize your energy profile. That isn't even close to Stealth Tech.

Now I know you're just trying to get attention.

The only thing you've proven is how much of a die hard trekkie you are by linking tenous at best similarities to reality that Trek has. Treks solution to Everything is Technobabble ie Magic. Not Science.

You also still have fail Miserably at providing a reason for Balance concerns (the only thing that matters) as to why tacs shouldn't be able to buff sci powers, and sci should be allowed to use their abilities in an Escort.

Seriously, how on earth is being able to Generate "black holes" At will not effing magic? You want to tell me that every sci ship, has the ability to throw out enough matter to equal a collapsing star's mass? Or even emulate the effect of a planetoid? At will? That's Reality and Physics Defying in of itself. That's Magic, pure and simple.
Otherwise I can think of much better uses for the sheer amount of energy required, and matter creation involved even for a grav well as "small" as the one in STO. Like oh I don't know making your ship literally immune to all harm, and just super charging your weapons to blow them to pieces in one shot, simultaneously.

You can scream "THAT IS SCIENCE" all you want, but that doesn't make it true. Face it champ, you like sci fantasy. You don't like science fiction.

Even Mass Effect, is harder science than Trek is. I'd even go so far as to say at best Trek is as much Science oriented as Warhammer 40k on a good day. Seriously, when's the last time you watched Trek? I mean anything post TOS. (and even then the "science" is junk, and goofy at best)

Do you have a single Legitimate Balance Concern for Tac buffing sci abilities? Seriously, do you have one iota issue. Or is it strictly a "zomg my immersion" rant? If you have any balance concerns now's the time to post them, and Prove them with Math. Otherwise you're just wasting everyone's time with an rp trollop rant.
Read the wiki on stealth fighters. Reduction in heat signature is included w/all the other detection methods. So, yeah they're masking the energy output of the engines.

The "magic" power source is the warp core of the warp engines. It's mentioned in the show numerous times how powerful it is and is the reason the protagonist ship needs to get X lightyears away before a warp core explodes. Accepting certain unknown future techs doesn't negate the Science foundation of Science Fiction.

Don't confuse Poetic License and incongruancies of an IP which has been around for decades and has had many hands on it w/a fantasy genre. There are also limits of TV production:

"Asimov wrote a critical essay on Star Trek's scientific accuracy for TV Guide magazine. Roddenberry retorted respectfully with a personal letter explaining the limitations of accuracy when writing a weekly series. Asimov corrected himself with a follow-up essay to TV Guide claiming despite its inaccuracies, that Star Trek was a fresh and intellectually challenging science fiction television show."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov

So, you don't have to take my word for it. You can take the word of one of the most prolific Sci-Fi writers of the 20th Century.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 734
# 110
09-18-2012, 03:53 PM
Yeah, ok, just gonna throw this into this "discussion."

I've got an Astrophysics degree, inspired by my love of Star Trek... only to learn that most of the 'science' in Star Trek is so far off the wall, it's not even funny.
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 03:01 AM.