Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,670
# 21
03-24-2013, 09:18 AM
Yikes, Ill post now before I lose my thoughts reading that wall of text

I don't like the way the game forces player/ships into a particular role but see the importance of those roles. The worst idea IMHO is gifting ships a bonus when a particular captain in flying it. I'm more of the mind that captains with their boffs and doffs should get the bonus' depending on the combination, in whatever ship they can seat them just like the escorts who can seat tac boffs with APO, CRF and equip cannons. Almost anyone can use a tractor beam but I feel that ship with a seated high level aux2bat or ep2aux should have a better tractor ability than a escort who can only slot the tractor ability (as an example).

I think this is what BG was getting at, and I think there should be some 'wicked combo's for other than TACs, if the BOFF seats are filled correctly.
KBF Lord MalaK
Awoken Dead

You're gonna upgrade my Chel Grett for FREE but charge me $27 to upgrade my Kamarag ?
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,000
# 22
03-24-2013, 11:17 AM
I also had another thought, what about synergy between skills from other players being used concurrently. An example of this might be gravity well being used and warp plasma at the same time, this would create a sort of mini nebula which not only draws players to the centre but also disables sensors and propulsion while doing increased damage.

You would also be able to have different scaling of this so using the level 1 abilities of both will create a fairly weak nebula which is not much better than using them independently. If both abilities are level 3 though you will want to avoid falling into the nebula and death is very likely.

Just a thought.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 102
# 23
03-24-2013, 03:46 PM
As much as I like the idea of skill-combos (and I really do like it-- the Grav-Well + Warp Plasma = Micro-nebula idea that BPharma mentioned sounds so Trek that it's incredible), I'm worried that it really wouldn't help the current situation all that much. It sounds awesome and fun, but I fear that it won't be sufficient to fix the role-disparity problems that the game currently suffers from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegeek View Post
Nerfing Tac/Escort is not the answer. Neither is buffing DPS for Eng/Cruiser or Sci/Sci.
I agree with you that buffing weapon DPS for cruisers and science vessels isn't necessary-- my tac/support cruiser hits like a ton of bricks when provoked, and a science vessel is supposed to be deriving its effectiveness from shutting down an enemy with devastatingly obnoxious control powers, not from dealing direct damage.

Unfortunately-- and I almost hate to say this, since my primary character is a Tactical officer and I spent well over a year flying an escort...
...escorts do need to be nerfed a little. Not only do escorts have overwhelming damage capabilities, but they also have the ability to stave off the effects of taking damage for quite some time (my patrol escort has tanked cubes in KAS:E for close to two minutes before). Call me a pessimist if you will, but I don't think that any sort of fix for restoring some semblance of role parity between escorts, cruisers, and science vessels can proceed without some sort of defuff/small-scale nerfing to escorts.
And I sincerely hope I'm wrong on this count, since PWE/Cryptic seems to be totally smitten with escorts and tactical ships. (But really, what kind of fan of DS9 wouldn't be, right?) The odds of them actually following through with a debuff to escorts is slim to none.

... if I went a little far afield from the intended topic here, sorry. I'm kinda' bad about that. P


Quote:
Originally Posted by cmdrskyfaller View Post
<Not copying the whole thing here>
I found your post to be quite enlightening. I've been experimenting with science control powers to try to step back from my KDF sci's standard heal-boat set-up, and have found all of them that I've tried so far to be utterly useless except for high-end Gravity Wells. (Haven't tried Charged Particle Burst, Energy Syphon, Tyken's Rift yet, or a high-level Tachyon Beam yet.) This certainly helps explain why this situation has arisen. I cope with things much better when I know the reason for it. :P
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,241
# 24
03-24-2013, 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by miri2 View Post
As much as I like the idea of skill-combos (and I really do like it-- the Grav-Well + Warp Plasma = Micro-nebula idea that BPharma mentioned sounds so Trek that it's incredible), I'm worried that it really wouldn't help the current situation all that much. It sounds awesome and fun, but I fear that it won't be sufficient to fix the role-disparity problems that the game currently suffers from.
You can do this manually with the Nebula class starship and the Vesta and Sci oddy. Dump the Gwell and hug them in warp plasma .

The irony of it is... this comboa...uses a science ability... and a cruiser ability... and both are massively damage boosted by atk pattern alpha/fire on my mark/go down fighting tac capt skills. Massively. And they're not 'weapon' damage.

Quote:
I agree with you that buffing weapon DPS for cruisers and science vessels isn't necessary-- my tac/support cruiser hits like a ton of bricks when provoked, and a science vessel is supposed to be deriving its effectiveness from shutting down an enemy with devastatingly obnoxious control powers, not from dealing direct damage.
Yep, the sci and cruisers dont need DPS. They need their role abilities back to a functional state AND tac/escorts need to have the abilities that they were given which makes them immune to sci and cruisers REMOVED (tac team shield balance & omega immunity).


Quote:
I found your post to be quite enlightening. I've been experimenting with science control powers to try to step back from my KDF sci's standard heal-boat set-up, and have found all of them that I've tried so far to be utterly useless except for high-end Gravity Wells. (Haven't tried Charged Particle Burst, Energy Syphon, Tyken's Rift yet, or a high-level Tachyon Beam yet.) This certainly helps explain why this situation has arisen. I cope with things much better when I know the reason for it.
Thank you for reading it.

particle burst and tachyon beam are worthless since flow cap effectiveness is completely neutered thanks to the power insulator skill super-effectiveness. Tachyon 3 and charged particle burst with 9 flow cap/particle and max aux for example barely drains 3k shields in 10 seconds (or 4k instantly in particle burst). Know how much a shield regens in high shield power? 2 to 5k (split between 4 shields). A single shield heal @ ensign level heals far more than that too. A single proc from a regen heals more than that.

Siphon does work great to gain power but it does nothing to drain it. In yet another brilliant example of absolute lazy/I-care-less programming, Cryptic made it so that the siphon drains nothing (power insulators) but gives the ship a non-nerfed power bonus.

oooh by the way, since its a LT level ability guess who benefits a LOT from it? Escorts! YES! Howd you guess?

Tyken rift is almost harmless. Stuff just flies away from it and the drain is neutered by power insulators.


Pre-F2P my science ship ran at min power levels with 2 beam arrays and 1 torpedo fore/rear. Escorts and cruisers engaged me with an abundance of caution because science ships came in multiple specs and they had no way of knowing if I was a drain-type, a shield tank type, a system-shutdown type, a sensor assault type or a combination of one of the above plus gravity well type.

In combat the science ship would literally debuff the target down to putty and proceed to kill it with its weak weapon power and gravity well. Try doing that to any ship today and you will just get laughed at.
http://media.tumblr.com/160cacdb395f8340dac90864182ebe16/tumblr_inline_mx9yxhItkb1qg9pkt.jpg
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,020
# 25
03-24-2013, 06:50 PM
It's late and I'm too lazy to read through this thread right now so apologies if this idea's already been mooted:

Class choice should bring with it an inherent bonus: Tacs do 10% more damage, Eng gets 10% more healing or resists (or 5/5), Sci gets 10% more Sci 'zing'.

Ship choice adds to this: Tac ships +10% damage, Eng ships heals/resists, Sci more zing.

Power levels are dictated by Warp Core so you can swap in a 'Combat' Core for +15 to Weapons Power or whatever.

Captain Powers should be tied to the skill system, not levels - invest enough skill points in a given skill and *bam* you get a Captain ability - more points=higher level abilities.

Boff skills should enhance and augment existing Captain skills - the better the Boff (i.e. Common/Very-Rare etc.) the bigger the bonus.

As an example, a Sci Captain picks an Escort - she gets 10% more DPS for using an Escort and 10% extra Sci 'zing' for being a Sci - she puts 6 points in Graviton Generators and gets GWell2 as a Captain power - her rare Sci Boff has a skill that boosts Graviton Generators so *bam* it becomes a beast for a few seconds sucking everything in (in a Sci ship, with 9 points, GWell3 unlocked and a Very-Rare Boff nothing's getting out of there).

All weapons of a given rank should do the same DPS and use the same amount of power unless there's a specific reason not too - beams as primary weapons should do slightly less than DHCs because they're more effective at long range.

An Engineer in an Escort still wouldn't be able to do sustainable DPS at the same level as a Tac in the same ship, but a Tac in a Cruiser would be comparable (just with some extra healing/resists).

I'm sure there's lots of gotchas I haven't thought about yet, but the basic idea is that a given class in their class specific ship will always be superior in their field than say a Tac in a Cruiser but if you wanted to be a 'DPS' Sci or Eng, you could.

TL;DR

Ship and Class each gives a base bonus.

Skill Tree choices grant Captain Abilities.

Boff Skills enhance Captain Abilities.
Please join our peaceful protest to help make STO a better game
Proudly not contributing to PWE's bottom-line since October 2012
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 102
# 26
03-24-2013, 11:05 PM
While there is something to be said for what you've suggested, Weylandjuarez, I do have three specific issues with what you've proposed. I'm going to address them in order of how long my responses are, to maximize how much people get through before declaring "TLDR" and moving on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by weylandjuarez View Post
All weapons of a given rank should do the same DPS and use the same amount of power unless there's a specific reason not too - beams as primary weapons should do slightly less than DHCs because they're more effective at long range.
Actually, the reason that weapon types do more/less damage than each other right now is for a specific reason-- the width of their fire arcs. Turrets do the least damage because they have the widest fire arc. Next are Beam Arrays, with a somewhat narrower arc, next are Single Cannons with a slightly narrower arc yet, then Beam Banks with their 90-degree arc, and finally, at the highest DPS, are Dual Cannons and Dual Heavy Cannons-- which share the same fire arc, so have the same DPS.
If it wasn't for the auto-shield-redistribution effect of Tactical Team, the narrower fire arcs of dual cannons would be a huge resilience problem for escorts, since they would have to disengage with their most powerful weapons to allow thier foreward face to recover, and they would suffer a massive fall-off in DPS if they were to try to "flinch" their forward shield arc out of the way of high-damage attacks (as I was want to do with my torp-boat, enabled by its wider fire-arc).


Quote:
Originally Posted by weylandjuarez View Post
Class choice should bring with it an inherent bonus: Tacs do 10% more damage, Eng gets 10% more healing or resists (or 5/5), Sci gets 10% more Sci 'zing'.

Ship choice adds to this: Tac ships +10% damage, Eng ships heals/resists, Sci more zing.
I suppose this depends on how you work out what the specific difference between ship classes would be, but if the whole of my ship-specific qualities boils down to a 10% buff to whatever its job is, I'm not sure that's enough differentiation. For example, if a Defiant-class is 10% shootier than a Galaxy-class, and a Galaxy is only 10% more resilient than the Defiant... that strikes me as potentially trivializing the enormous size, crew, and handling differences between these two polar-opposite classes of ships.
What's more, I'm a little concerned that just being 20% Cooler at your job (shoost, tank, and thwarting, respectively) won't be a sufficient difference to lead to a defined role. If you're only 10-20% harder to kill than your buddy, is it really that important or even helpful to draw agro from him to yourself, especially if he's only 10-20% shootier than you are?
Maybe its. I could just be underestimating what 10% really means in absolute terms, but I'm a little sceptical.


Quote:
Originally Posted by weylandjuarez View Post
Captain Powers should be tied to the skill system, not levels - invest enough skill points in a given skill and *bam* you get a Captain ability - more points=higher level abilities.

Boff skills should enhance and augment existing Captain skills - the better the Boff (i.e. Common/Very-Rare etc.) the bigger the bonus.

As an example, a Sci Captain picks an Escort - she gets 10% more DPS for using an Escort and 10% extra Sci 'zing' for being a Sci - she puts 6 points in Graviton Generators and gets GWell2 as a Captain power - her rare Sci Boff has a skill that boosts Graviton Generators so *bam* it becomes a beast for a few seconds sucking everything in (in a Sci ship, with 9 points, GWell3 unlocked and a Very-Rare Boff nothing's getting out of there).
This is the part that I have the most issue with, because I really like the current BOff system for allowing me to do something really coll-- I change my role to what's needed, or what I feel like playing. With one or two alternate BOffs, for instance, I was able to transition fairly successfully from tac/escort-gunboat to tac/cruiser-healboat. Moreover, my KDF sci character can switch at the start of a mission from heal-boat to control-boat, based on what the party seems to need, simply by having my three science Boffs change seats (hypothetically, at least-- I'm still working out the skill spread on the alternate science Boff).
On top of all that fun, having the majority of your powers localized on your Boffs allows a player, through a little bit of BOff re-training, to test several skills before setting on a build that works for them without having to re-specialize their captain.
The Boff system as it exists now creates some capabilities in this game which I believe are fairly unique to STO (at least, as far as I can tell), and I would be very sad to see them go.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 545
# 27
03-24-2013, 11:47 PM
I like the general idea, however:

1) the real problem is that a lot of players do not spend time learning how skills and abilities work and how combine abilities in a combo. So most of players do not have a decent build. This is why when you think that cruisers and sci vessels are bad, there is always a cruiser or a sci ship that do its work well and can deal a reasonable damage.

2) I do not like the idea of giving to eng abilities a sci or tactical buff. The same about sci and tactical abilities. Ex. I do not like

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegeek View Post
1. Emergency Power to Weapons temporarily interacts with Beam Overload and causes a drain of Aux power on the target (if BO is fired within 5 seconds)

2. Distributed Energy Modulation interacts with Jam Sensors and gives the attacker's beams a chance to proc a Scramble Sensors effect.
sinergy should be some career's specific abilities (or ships specific abilities) enabled only if you fly a certain ship: sci vessel for science captain, escorts for tactical captain, cruisers for eng captain.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,020
# 28
03-25-2013, 02:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by miri2 View Post
While there is something to be said for what you've suggested, Weylandjuarez, I do have three specific issues with what you've proposed. I'm going to address them in order of how long my responses are, to maximize how much people get through before declaring "TLDR" and moving on.
Thanks for the feedback!


Quote:
Originally Posted by miri2 View Post
Actually, the reason that weapon types do more/less damage than each other right now is for a specific reason-- the width of their fire arcs. Turrets do the least damage because they have the widest fire arc. Next are Beam Arrays, with a somewhat narrower arc, next are Single Cannons with a slightly narrower arc yet, then Beam Banks with their 90-degree arc, and finally, at the highest DPS, are Dual Cannons and Dual Heavy Cannons-- which share the same fire arc, so have the same DPS.
If it wasn't for the auto-shield-redistribution effect of Tactical Team, the narrower fire arcs of dual cannons would be a huge resilience problem for escorts, since they would have to disengage with their most powerful weapons to allow thier foreward face to recover, and they would suffer a massive fall-off in DPS if they were to try to "flinch" their forward shield arc out of the way of high-damage attacks (as I was want to do with my torp-boat, enabled by its wider fire-arc).
Yes, and this is something I don't see changing drastically, more it was intended to convey that 'main' weapons (DHC/Beams/DC/DBB) should do comparable DPS and drain in a typical end-game tactical layout - the DPS varying (modestly) based on the utility of the weapon.

We sort-of had this originally, but now the lesser efficiency of DCs, the huge energy drain of Beam Arrays and the lack of potency of DBBs means we don't and DHC is the undisputed DPS king.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miri2 View Post
I suppose this depends on how you work out what the specific difference between ship classes would be, but if the whole of my ship-specific qualities boils down to a 10% buff to whatever its job is, I'm not sure that's enough differentiation. For example, if a Defiant-class is 10% shootier than a Galaxy-class, and a Galaxy is only 10% more resilient than the Defiant... that strikes me as potentially trivializing the enormous size, crew, and handling differences between these two polar-opposite classes of ships.
What's more, I'm a little concerned that just being 20% Cooler at your job (shoost, tank, and thwarting, respectively) won't be a sufficient difference to lead to a defined role. If you're only 10-20% harder to kill than your buddy, is it really that important or even helpful to draw agro from him to yourself, especially if he's only 10-20% shootier than you are?
Maybe its. I could just be underestimating what 10% really means in absolute terms, but I'm a little sceptical.
Well, 10% is just a number I picked late at night But really, all this is replacing is the bonuses to Warp Core we get at the moment (which you could get back from a specialized Warp Core component) - ships can still have varying hull/shield modifiers and capabilities.

The idea behind it is that things like APA/GDF shouldn't exist - the crazy damage multipliers they apply completely unbalances the game and makes Eng/Sci look neutered in comparison. Giving a Tac/Tac setup a flat 20% DPS bonus that's always running plus some interesting Captain/Boff skills that modify how you deliver that DPS (Rapid Fire/Bypassing Shields/FAW/System Disables etc.) means that DPS can be kept within 'manageable' levels and allow Eng/Sci to get their mojo back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miri2 View Post
This is the part that I have the most issue with, because I really like the current BOff system for allowing me to do something really coll-- I change my role to what's needed, or what I feel like playing. With one or two alternate BOffs, for instance, I was able to transition fairly successfully from tac/escort-gunboat to tac/cruiser-healboat. Moreover, my KDF sci character can switch at the start of a mission from heal-boat to control-boat, based on what the party seems to need, simply by having my three science Boffs change seats (hypothetically, at least-- I'm still working out the skill spread on the alternate science Boff).
On top of all that fun, having the majority of your powers localized on your Boffs allows a player, through a little bit of BOff re-training, to test several skills before setting on a build that works for them without having to re-specialize their captain.
The Boff system as it exists now creates some capabilities in this game which I believe are fairly unique to STO (at least, as far as I can tell), and I would be very sad to see them go.
The way I see it is that you wouldn't lose any (great) Boff skills, instead they'd become basic Captain abilities that the Boffs can enhance in interesting ways - I'd need to think it through a little more but a good example is how some of the Doff procs work at the moment like Gravity Well Aftershock - taking basic skills that are already in the game and making them far more potent (as mentioned, a fully specced GWell should be epic but counterable by a Captain that's got points in skills that counter the effects and a Boff ability that enhances those skills).

Anyway, that's all before a morning coffee so it's as likely as random as the first post

I don't seriously expect to see any major changes like this though but I would love to see a system that makes all classes equally potent in their own fields but also free to mix it up a bit.

It'd require an (unlikely) rethink of things like Rep passives/Doff procs, and even more significantly, content but even so, the system we have at the moment is so broken it does stupid things like rendering entire builds redundant via a handful of skill points in Power Insulators (Drain builds).
Please join our peaceful protest to help make STO a better game
Proudly not contributing to PWE's bottom-line since October 2012

Last edited by weylandjuarez; 03-25-2013 at 02:46 AM.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 102
# 29
03-25-2013, 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by weylandjuarez View Post
We sort-of had this originally, but now the lesser efficiency of DCs, the huge energy drain of Beam Arrays and the lack of potency of DBBs means we don't and DHC is the undisputed DPS king.
Y'know, Dual Beam Banks actually aren't that bad, I'm starting to discover. I'm experimenting with running 3 banks on the fore of a support cruiser (and 3 beam arrays and a turret aft) to focus the damage cone of Fire At Will... and I've so far been getting some pretty good use of it. It helps that I have Emergency Power to Weapons twice, though...



Quote:
Originally Posted by weylandjuarez View Post
Captain/Boff skills that modify how you deliver that DPS (Rapid Fire/Bypassing Shields/FAW/System Disables etc.) means that DPS can be kept within 'manageable' levels and allow Eng/Sci to get their mojo back.
Ooh... I do like that idea of making weapon-damage-buffing tac skills modify damage functionality without increasing macro-scale DPS (like Beam: Overload had a damage bonus followed by an effective damage penalty). That could bring escorts from everything-dies-always to softeners and finishers, if, for example, the damage bonus from Rapid Fire was counter-balanced by power drain or a brief window of down-time for the cannons to literally cool down.
I'm not sure that's necessarily the best way to fix them (I'm pretty bad at coming up with "bests"), but it certainly is an interesting prospect.


Quote:
Originally Posted by weylandjuarez View Post
The way I see it is that you wouldn't lose any (great) Boff skills, instead they'd become basic Captain abilities that the Boffs can enhance in interesting ways - I'd need to think it through a little more but a good example is how some of the Doff procs work at the moment like Gravity Well Aftershock - taking basic skills that are already in the game and making them far more potent . . .
I'm not really worried about losing the powers, as such, I'm worried about losing the ability to easily slot them in and out, based on what I intend to do that mission (for example, swapping two science officers with each other to go from HE-1, ST-2, TSS-3 to JS-1, TB-2, VM-1).



Quote:
Originally Posted by eurialo View Post
2) I do not like the idea of giving to eng abilities a sci or tactical buff. The same about sci and tactical abilities.
I dunnow. What appealed to me most about the idea was the possibilities for team-work. While, yes, a Nebula-class could do the micro-nebula combo all by its lonesome, I love the idea even more of someone dropping a Gravity Well, and a team-mate looking at it, thinking "Score!", and rushing in to dump Warp Plasma onto the situation.
Even with the combos being performed by a ship on its own, to keep combos limited to just one officer type severely limits them, since many powers within the same class share cooldowns (especially for tactical officers, but the same applies to certain sci builds). But more importantly, the primary appeal (to me at least) of this combo system is the fun, inventive nature of it-- much like how TNG solved so many of its problems: pooling resources from multiple disciplines, shoving it through the main deflector dish, and watching the techno-sorcery unfold!
Almost all of the most inventive combos I can think of would involve crossing disciplines
(E.g.: Warp Plasma + Ionize Hull = Spike shield-drain within the plasma cloud; Beam Overload + Directed Energy Modulation = Drastically increased Proc rate; Attack Pattern Delta + Feedback Pulse = Weapons power drain; just to spit-ball a few ideas).
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 545
# 30
03-26-2013, 03:17 AM
I think in a team a combo involving eng/sci/tact abilities should be done by cooperating captains/ships (think about a team leader calling for a GW so that escorts can use CSV to quickly destroy spheres in a infected space elite... not using a special "CSV" improved by a GW secondary effect).
Closed Thread

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 08:49 PM.