Well, he called it a radical idea for a reason. I'd say ditch the idea immediately.
I suspect the idea behind it was that tier 2 to tier 4 skills would be class-specific skills (similar to how we have class-specific selection of ground skills) and only at tier 5 allow it to open up to different ships. Cutting down the ship training skills is fine, cutting down on ship choices at lower tier is bad.
I still like the idea of knowing my tactical captain would be more effecient in a tactical vessel and not as effective in say a science vessel. They might still save the universe in practically whatever ship they fly in Star Trek but the right ship for the right class should still make for more effective gameplay.
If we were talking about ground combat I know my tactical officers shouldn't be as effective as healing as my medics... maybe the new crew system can be used to 'cancel out' those penalties for flying an unmatched ship class or something. It just makes sense to me that fighters fight, fixers fix and healers heal. Sure they can multitask and still get the job done but they should still excel at their chosen field.
Glad to see a thread on this topic. There have been some interesting discussions internally about the ship/class restrictions. Intrigued to see more of your input.
Can you maybe enlighten us to the internal logic behind a move like this. Without that, the only input I can offer is simply, I don't like being restricted. By and large I like the skill system the way it is, though the T5 ship skills are getting a bit out of hand, I think simplification of that aspect can occur without tampering with the lower tiers and certainly without restricting them to career=ship class.
If we were talking about ground combat I know my tactical officers wouldn't be effective as healing as my medics... maybe the new crew system can be used to 'cancel out' those penalties for flying an unmatched ship class or something. It just makes sense to me that fighters fight, fixers fix and healers heal. Sure they can multitask and still get the job done but they should still excel at their chosen field.
Theres got to be middleground somewhere.
But that does not fit Trek logic when it comes to ship Captains. If we had to pigeonhole the Captains Kirk was a Tac officer in a Cruiser. Picard was a pseudo-Science Officer in a Cruiser. Janeway was a Science Officer in a Sci/Cruiser hybrid (in Trek not STO), Sisko was a Tac Officer in an Escort and Archer was a pseudo-Engineer in a Light Cruiser.
I honestly believe the answer to this is the crew system which we still don't know much about. I can imagine it being used to "rebalance" things. If your an engineer on a tactical ship you could have extra tactical positions or something so the 'crew' helps make up for the 'captains' lack of tactical knowledge on the ship, etc. This would allow for the mixed captain/ship classes and fits lore.
Realistically you choose a field and you excel at it and suffer in others. Unless your a genius thats just how life works. You can multitask and do others but you arn't as effective. I believe that's the way it should be in STO as well. If your tactical you would be better in a tactical ship than in a science ship. Your crew becomes the balance.