Well, after being gone for quite some time I decided, with some fleet mates, to come back and see what has been done.
I have to say the graphic improvements and game adds are nice to see but sadly, most good games are based on design and not a good paint job.
Since this is a feedback forum and not a biyatch session can I make a few points to possibly either make this game better OR the next Star Trek game worthy of the name?
Sadly, an 11 year old game called Star Fleet Command 1 2 and Orion Pirates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Tr...rfleet_Command (based on Star Fleet Battles board game) was and still is FAR superior (light years) to anything in this game as far as PVP or space combat goes. It too, was based on a 2 dimensional plane (yes STO is 2 dimensional folks) but the space combat allowed for different tactics on weapons and ship size. Are the graphics better in STO...absolutely but game design and play are more important for longevity. It also allowed weapons that had different ranges and abilities according to race and allowed for mixed fleets of ship classes without being cookie cutter. I suggest anyone that designs this game and/or others that want to see this game try and get a copy and see what I am talking about.
PVP is rather weak and it has a LOT based on game play (see previous paragraph). I mean, wouldn't it be nice to have fleets that had frigates, light cruisers, heavy cruisers, dreads and carriers? And actually have battles that were based on fleets, and other rather than all the same level ships? The way combat works now the lesser ship is an insta-pop. and that brings me to the ships and weapons.
Combat in space and ships are just messed up. Weapons should not be different levels. May I make a HUGE suggestion? Lose the spell abilities and have all like weapons do about the same damage (have different range brackets perhaps?) and restrict them to race based weapons? ie Feds get phasers only and Klings get dizzys? Ships should just get bigger (more power, weapons, shields etc) not more damage PER weapon.
There is a lot more I could go into detail on but if ANYTHING if you cannot duplicate or BETTER SCF1,2 or OP (Orion Pirates) you are going to have a weak space game because of the sheer amount of loyal fans to these games. Dumbing down the game is not the solution, Perhaps, a possibility is to base the space combat off FASA's Star Trek combat game...would be a HUGE improvement over what we have today.
Long, tedious button mashing events that add little to missions IMHO. BTW, I played WOW (which this game is based on) for years and there was actually strategy in ground combat. The only suggestion is possibly basing it off what SWG used to have before the CU. Or, what would be REALLY cool is a first person shooter like Bad Company 2..but that's a bit of a stretch. I really didn't buy the game for ground combat because the space combat is what I like most.
In conclusion, game looks AWESOME, unfortunately when you look under the hood there is a rubber band motor running it.
hello ROK .. remeber the old days of ROOKS TAVERN .. and the Slave Girls 1-4 .. all of them were servers done by amatures .. and VERY well done I might add. Even SFC-3 had at least one REALLY good MOD done: Generations at War. At that time I was a member of one of the better fleets that logged onto either one of those games.
At any rate: I agree with part of your accessment. I dissagree (partlially) with the 2-D . There is a lot more 3-D "ISH" (if that makes sense) .. which I think is an improvement over the SFC series. I also think that you are partially correct on the PvP part. Larger PvP groups are needed. The smaller groups work well for those who have fleets. For those who dont (this time I'm usually by my self) .. the larger groups work MUCH better. Blizzard discovered that some time ago. They also discovered that having more than one type (or style) of PvP ALSO works better for keeping more people envolved.
Contient is a really BIG issue. Even PvP needs better goals. There are other issues as well (ie: crafting) ... but that is for another thread.
Ships that follow a more logical reflection of their hull class or design: frigate (FF) Destroyer (DD) Light Cruiser (CL) Cruiser (CA) Carrier (CN) Dreadnaugh(DN) Battleship (BB) usually could identify what the ship was capable of dooing. What we see now is a tier system that mixes togeather all of those hull classes and assigns to them a value structured unlike any previous "TREK" game or other "battle" game that uses ships. In a way this is due to the nature of DPS, Healer, or other values that this and simular games use.
Believe me when I tell you I can understand why a number of folks would prefer the other system when it comes to identifying the ship you are facing or USING. IMHO having a wider varriety of ships available would further expand the game and provide additional roles for players to be envolved with.
Using the current system I DO believe that Cryptic is doing a good job of trying to balance the game. (yeah .. I know .. some dissagree. But that's cool).
I do think that some of the games does tend to center around more of a click fest than it does tactics. IMHO that can change for the better with time.
Bottom line: Good points .. some I agree with ... the rest ... well .. hey let's keep brain storming and hope that as we discuss things that some good ideas shake out !