Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 62
# 101
11-29-2012, 07:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
I must agree. Hull gamewide is somewhat useless unless you are a master of Hull and/or resist stacking.
It is too easily destroyed and too quickly destroyed. Hull should be hard to hurt and slow to heal in my opinion.

How many times have we seen a Cruiser or other vessel in canon still functioning with whole decks exposed to space due to being attacked. Kirk made a carreer out of it.
QFT.

You always saw ships slowly loosing their shields during battle in the shows and movies, but I don't think I ever saw them recovering until afterwards.

I'd actually like to see both damage and healing toned down to make resistances and base heals (like shield regen rate) more relevant. Fighting would be much more strategic, and intense, if you knew that your shield levels and hull damage were going to persist for extended periods rather then recovering instantly.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,919
# 102
11-29-2012, 07:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wackywombat View Post
I'd actually like to see both damage and healing toned down to make resistances and base heals (like shield regen rate) more relevant. Fighting would be much more strategic, and intense, if you knew that your shield levels and hull damage were going to persist for extended periods rather then recovering instantly.
I disagree, it would only serve to make burst damage (escorts) even more effective...

At the moment an cruiser is a hard target for an escort, now strip them of their ability to heal up quickly from that and it's the easiest thing in the game to take down as they can't escape the overwhelming force of DHCs, even a science ship would last longer...
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 62
# 103
11-29-2012, 08:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
I disagree, it would only serve to make burst damage (escorts) even more effective...

At the moment an cruiser is a hard target for an escort, now strip them of their ability to heal up quickly from that and it's the easiest thing in the game to take down as they can't escape the overwhelming force of DHCs, even a science ship would last longer...
I did suggest damage be reduced, and it would have to depend on how it's balanced. I'm not talking dropping damage by 1 or 2 percent here, but extending a fight so it takes 2-3 times longer for the average player to loose (or take down) shields.

If done properly escorts would STILL do the most damage, but would also have the least amount of HP and DR skills. Being able to position your escort and staying out of the different weapon arcs would actually be necessary again, rather then sitting in one place and opening up with DHCs for the entire time.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,757
# 104
11-29-2012, 09:48 AM
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by wackywombat View Post
QFT.

You always saw ships slowly loosing their shields during battle in the shows and movies, but I don't think I ever saw them recovering until afterwards.
If you go back and do a study you will find that is not always true. For Example if the Enterprise was attacked by say a race considered weaker than themselves they shields tended to last longer but against a race considered stronger or more advanced then the shields dropped quicker.
The difference between being attacked by say the Breen versus being attacked by the Borg.

Quote:
I'd actually like to see both damage and healing toned down to make resistances and base heals (like shield regen rate) more relevant. Fighting would be much more strategic, and intense, if you knew that your shield levels and hull damage were going to persist for extended periods rather then recovering instantly.
I would prefer healing and resistance stay the same for shields as one's Shield resist can be Buffed strictly by Shield Power levels, EPTS*, TSS* directly to offset damage.

Hull does not have such a mechanic as a power level that can increase its resistance, for that we have armor and alloys. If the diminishing returns for Armor/Alloy did not start with the first console placed on a ship such a mechanic may function better.
The upside is though you can buff that resistance (both shield and hull actually) with abilities like PH, HE and A2sif or especially A2D.

Maybe the key is to give Auxpower an inherent Hull damage resistance dependent on its level that is in addition to what ever else the player may use abilitywise?
I was under the belief that a vessels Intertial dampners system was an automatic effect and the A2D ability was a conciuos effort to send more power to said system in a emergency.
Roy Hatch (stryker) soldier, friend, and good man.
1945-2014
RIP
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 346
# 105
11-29-2012, 11:25 AM
The sheer intellectual dishonesty exhibited in threads such as this is impressive.

I don't think it's possible to explain anything to the likes of bareel. For every argument you produce, he has an army of strawmen to assail.
Nobody could keep up with the ludicrous statements made in these threads: afterall, it's much easier to make a silly claim ("Escorts are better tanks than Cruisers!" than to refute it.

So yeah, you guys keep believing that a Ship with 350%-400% of an Escort's survivability, ~60%-75% of an Escort's damage and potentially a bit of control (EWP) is UP compared to said Escort.
If Cryptic is wise enough not to listen, good; if they aren't, we'll just all play Cruisers Online.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 62
# 106
11-29-2012, 11:32 AM
[quote=bitemepwe;6845611]
Quote:

If you go back and do a study you will find that is not always true. For Example if the Enterprise was attacked by say a race considered weaker than themselves they shields tended to last longer but against a race considered stronger or more advanced then the shields dropped quicker.
The difference between being attacked by say the Breen versus being attacked by the Borg.
True, but you could get the same effect from a large shield capacity and strong resistances.

You always heard "Shields down to X%" in a fight, but never "Shields recovered to X%". Granted, the shields probably were recovering but my point was the damage always seemed to be cumulative, there were no quick fixes.

I'm just splitting hairs really, the effect is the same.



Anyway, to come back to the discussion at hand, I like the idea that AUX level would provide bonus armor resistance. Actually since you brought it up, I think if Cryptic spent some time trying to re balance the power systems it would help cruisers immensely.

The incentives and bonuses for putting power in the shields and weapons systems are MUCH higher then the aux and eng. Almost to the point where it's a waste unless you have a specific build/ability you want to buff.

If Aux and Eng had more relevant bonuses, the cruiser's inherent power bonuses would have more weight and help even things out a little bit.


How does this crazy idea strike you: The max power level for Eng, Shields and Weapons would be dependent on your Aux level (or Eng). Not a 1 for 1, but enough that you couldn't set power to 25 and forget about it.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 592
# 107
11-29-2012, 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by quiscustodiet View Post
The sheer intellectual dishonesty exhibited in threads such as this is impressive.

I don't think it's possible to explain anything to the likes of bareel. For every argument you produce, he has an army of strawmen to assail.
Nobody could keep up with the ludicrous statements made in these threads: afterall, it's much easier to make a silly claim ("Escorts are better tanks than Cruisers!" than to refute it.

So yeah, you guys keep believing that a Ship with 350%-400% of an Escort's survivability, ~60%-75% of an Escort's damage and potentially a bit of control (EWP) is UP compared to said Escort.
If Cryptic is wise enough not to listen, good; if they aren't, we'll just all play Cruisers Online.
The idea that escorts are just as effective/better tanks as cruisers comes not from the fact that escorts are tanks in the same sense that cruisers are, but that they can more effectively tank in PvE combat thanks to a number of skills that enhance escort survivability in combination with a number of high level, no drawback damage boosting skills that punt the escort's damage up to the point that cookie cutter cannon-build escorts can in many cases park their asses right in the face of a target and soak more than enough damage to utterly destroy said target before dying...and do it in such a small fraction of the time it takes for a cruiser to kill the target that even if it moves off between kills and waits until hull and shields are fully regenerated without heals that it can still make better time in clearing out enemies than a cruiser that's fitted out with hull and shield heals and dives into combat without any rest.

It's not true 100% of the time, especially when you're fighting the larger bosses that really do take multiple people working on it to kill in any sort of appreciable time frame, but it holds true for enough of the game that it is a valid argument for "Escorts are overpowered when compared to the other ships." Again, this is a generalization, but can you honestly tell me you can't solo a cube with an escort and kill it in less time than a cruiser or science vessel could?

This is where the idea that escorts are better tanks come from.

Though I wonder, where the hell did you get the idea that a cruiser can manage ~60-75% of an escorts damage output from? Because as far as I could tell this thread was about Federation cruisers, not Klingon Battle cruisers.

Oh yes, and personal attacks do such a good job of making people see your point.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,757
# 108
11-29-2012, 12:01 PM
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by wackywombat View Post

True, but you could get the same effect from a large shield capacity and strong resistances.

You always heard "Shields down to X%" in a fight, but never "Shields recovered to X%". Granted, the shields probably were recovering but my point was the damage always seemed to be cumulative, there were no quick fixes.

I'm just splitting hairs really, the effect is the same.
It was an example to show that the Canon use of the technology is different than what we have to use in STO. In Star Trek some races are just not as advanced as others and their weapons tech shows this. In STO all weapons are equal regardless whom uses them.



Quote:
Anyway, to come back to the discussion at hand, I like the idea that AUX level would provide bonus armor resistance. Actually since you brought it up, I think if Cryptic spent some time trying to re balance the power systems it would help cruisers immensely.

The incentives and bonuses for putting power in the shields and weapons systems are MUCH higher then the aux and eng. Almost to the point where it's a waste unless you have a specific build/ability you want to buff.

If Aux and Eng had more relevant bonuses, the cruiser's inherent power bonuses would have more weight and help even things out a little bit.
You are correct to a point in my opinion.
Weapon and Shield power does have obviuos returns though Engine and Auxillary does as well.
Literally the higher your Engine power the better you turn. Its just an easily overlooked effect compared to the others.
The Higher your Aux the better most Science powers work.
So they do have extra effects, just not ones thawhen compared to the results from weapons and Shields seems all that great.
So, yes a revamp with the Power Stats doing a little more passive bonuses would be cool.


Quote:
How does this crazy idea strike you: The max power level for Eng, Shields and Weapons would be dependent on your Aux level (or Eng). Not a 1 for 1, but enough that you couldn't set power to 25 and forget about it.
Nah, I will pass on that.
Only becuase we already know from the IP that Auxillary doesn't control the avialibility of the other power levels.
Auxillary in the IP was always a power source beyond the normal. Literally an backup or emergency power source.
Or so thats how I always considered it.
Roy Hatch (stryker) soldier, friend, and good man.
1945-2014
RIP

Last edited by bitemepwe; 11-29-2012 at 12:12 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,984
# 109
11-29-2012, 12:14 PM
Before any discusion on balance can begin though there must be consensus that the cruiser hull itself is underpowered. That alone was the purpose of this thread. Not abilities, not weapons, just base hull design.

However now that we have reached, I hope, that consensus their is a wide variety of options available depending on the direction one wants to push the game. There is the equal but different style and then there is the ship role style mostly exemplified in PvP. I am a fan of the equal but different style myself so that is the direction my suggestions will go.

Offensive Capability
Cruisers get eight weapon slots but can realistically only use 6 or 7 with a typical setup because of weapon drain mechanics. The obvious solution to that problem is to introduce rear mount only torpedo weapons with the same firing arc as standard cannons. Another potential fix would be to give them an innate weapon energy drain resistance although that could interact in an odd way with some builds. But I will rant about weapon design later on in the post.

Defensive Capability
Because this game focuses more on sustainability than it does raw health that is what should be increased. An escort avoids more damage and a science vessel regenerates faster so the obvious solution is for the cruiser to resist more damage. A flat 10% resist all that operates outside of normal diminishing returns to all damage would be rock solid.

And on weapons, why is weapon balance designed soley upon their firing arc instead of how a ships complete weapon layout will be in practice other than cryptic expected us to keep a beam array on our cannon build escorts? This annoys me.

Instead they should be taken (and balanced) as pairs or units taking into account how the front weapon and rear weapon arcs will overlap.

edit addon

[quote=bitemepwe;6845611]
Quote:
Maybe the key is to give Auxpower an inherent Hull damage resistance dependent on its level that is in addition to what ever else the player may use abilitywise?
I was under the belief that a vessels Intertial dampners system was an automatic effect and the A2D ability was a conciuos effort to send more power to said system in a emergency.
I have stated many times that AUX should grant a passive hull resist. Although in retrospect perhaps if it provided a small passive hull regen that would be better.

We also need new engineering consoles designed like the new embassy science ones. A flat resist boost with an additional effect or two like energy weapon damage, accuracy, regen rates, something.

Last edited by bareel; 11-29-2012 at 12:29 PM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 592
# 110
11-29-2012, 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bareel View Post

And on weapons, why is weapon balance designed soley upon their firing arc instead of how a ships complete weapon layout will be in practice other than cryptic expected us to keep a beam array on our cannon build escorts? This annoys me.

Instead they should be taken (and balanced) as pairs or units taking into account how the front weapon and rear weapon arcs will overlap.
If this is really the case why didn't cryptic set equip limits for dual cannons/dual heavy cannons?
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 11:59 PM.