Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 121
03-14-2011, 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by spartan844
How about we just all agree to drop discussion.

The way I see it, we are no longer doing anything productive, and are just "batting around the bush" with old ideas. What we have is this:

MVAM is OP
Okay, but what if it's used on the old Advanced Escort?
Pet Spam
Not as much as the Carrier or Scorpion Fighters, and the Pets are idiots anyway.
Yeah, but Lt.Cmnder Sci Slot is OP and OP on one part now means that anything that can possibly have MVAM is OP.
Umm.... Okay......... Again, the pets are complete idiots, so the only real threat is whatever sector the player controls, of which only one would pose a real threat.
Yeah but it's three pets for no health loss, so it's impossible to find and kill the right guy
Only one has the nametag
I'll be dead by then
Than just hit the guy who doesn't use Beta or FAW, or for that matter, doesn't use Phasers and Photons
He still has 39000 hull.
The sheilds on escorts are weaker than just a bubble of Scotch tape around the ship, and unless they happen to have EPS I and ET II as their Eng. abilities, they will die very easily.
Yeah, but since me and my friends think that MVAM is a bad thing in PvP, we have to make sure that it gets hyper-nerfed to the point where PvE people can't enjoy it
That's not a valid argument
Fine then we'll just kill every Prommie we see.


Which is why this thread needs be closed. It's looking like the beginnings of a flame war.
Agreed.

Sorry but i need to add something. The biggest QQer flying a BoP, what is truly OP compared to MVAM AE. Why? It has Uni stations. Can use even CMDR sci skill. So MVAM AE lt cmdr sci skill is OP? HAHH then BoP?
Can MVAM AE battlecloak? No. So pets are fine. So remove MVAM AE and BoP cause both are bad for pvp. And remove Carriers because petspam lol...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 122
03-14-2011, 07:25 PM
Give up the BoP witch hunt.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 123
03-14-2011, 08:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle-Phoenix View Post
Agreed.

Sorry but i need to add something. The biggest QQer flying a BoP, what is truly OP compared to MVAM AE. Why? It has Uni stations. Can use even CMDR sci skill. So MVAM AE lt cmdr sci skill is OP? HAHH then BoP?
Can MVAM AE battlecloak? No. So pets are fine. So remove MVAM AE and BoP cause both are bad for pvp. And remove Carriers because petspam lol...
Seriously?

MVAM is a bop beater, its better in EVERYWAY. Battle cloak means little to nothing, unislots mean nothing when you'd most likely have a very very close build to the MVAM anyway.

What cryptic have done, is take 90% of bop builds, took away the cloak, give it more shields, more hull and a better turn rate, then added another tac console then given it another weapon slot, and then made it faster too and finally given it an extra ensign bridge officer, how can you think that's even?

I'd rather they just give the feds a bop, instead of a ship that completely out classes the bop in everyway.

BOP's with engineering cmdr slots are useless, bops with sci cmdr slots are much less useful then the tac cmdr. I don't know any decent players who don't run tac cmdr on a bop. Most bops then run sci ltcmdr, and the last two are at least one engineer and then you get to pick just one universal spot as all the others have already been picked for you by logic.

But all that is really mute, i really dont think you can make a bop that isn't able to be closely copied by a fed ship, and i'll bet the fed ship will be much better at its job.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 124
03-14-2011, 11:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FurQue
Seriously?

MVAM is a bop beater, its better in EVERYWAY. Battle cloak means little to nothing, unislots mean nothing when you'd most likely have a very very close build to the MVAM anyway.

What cryptic have done, is take 90% of bop builds, took away the cloak, give it more shields, more hull and a better turn rate, then added another tac console then given it another weapon slot, and then made it faster too and finally given it an extra ensign bridge officer, how can you think that's even?

I'd rather they just give the feds a bop, instead of a ship that completely out classes the bop in everyway.

BOP's with engineering cmdr slots are useless, bops with sci cmdr slots are much less useful then the tac cmdr. I don't know any decent players who don't run tac cmdr on a bop. Most bops then run sci ltcmdr, and the last two are at least one engineer and then you get to pick just one universal spot as all the others have already been picked for you by logic.

But all that is really mute, i really dont think you can make a bop that isn't able to be closely copied by a fed ship, and i'll bet the fed ship will be much better at its job.
^^This, exactly.

The BoP's most appealing aspect, the ability to slot unique combinations of BOff arrangements has become irrelevant, since there are now ships that can slot the same configurations, while still retaining all of the perks that accompany being a ship of their Commander-slot's relevant class (i.e. The Excelsior is a full Cruiser with a heavy upgrade from the Tactical LtC, the new MVAM is a full Escort with the powerful addition of the LtC Science, the Nebula/D'Kyr have Sci and LtC Eng).

The BoP is now heavily handicapped in comparison to those ships, with no appreciable, compensatory abilities. The Battle Cloak, while useful, is paid for by the heavy reduction to shields. The Console Configuration is debatable, since the ship has the 9 that is standard, might be interesting to give it 2 of every type of Console, then give it 2 or 3 universal slots. High turn rate = low hull (but, by comparison, the new MVAM AE-R, in Beta mode, gets a better turnrate with much better hull/shields).

The BoP needs a long look by the Devs, as it no longer has the claim to uniqueness that it once did,
-Big Red
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 125
03-15-2011, 12:22 AM
I think its kinda nuts to treat MVAMs as if theyre always in a MVAM mode for purposes of balance discussions... since they really wont, especially in any sort of serious (read: long) pvp match.

One thing I want to throw out there: the way MVAM works says to me that Battle Cloak might as well become a console; add a (sci?) slot to the BOP and make it a battle cloak console.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 126
03-15-2011, 12:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FurQue
BOP's with engineering cmdr slots are useless, bops with sci cmdr slots are much less useful then the tac cmdr. I don't know any decent players who don't run tac cmdr on a bop. Most bops then run sci ltcmdr, and the last two are at least one engineer and then you get to pick just one universal spot as all the others have already been picked for you by logic.
Just putting it out there...I would think this is an indication that the power trees are in need of balancing, not that any ship needs a nerf or a buff. If players of the ship which can field any officer configuration feel that there is only 1 viable config to run, it's a sign that other configs need to be made viable.


As to the MVAE discussion: Barring the MVAM ability doing what was shown on screen in Voyager (you press a button and shout "Romulans!" and an enemy ship explodes instantly - i.e. a clear "I win" button), it's going to take a lot more time then has currently passed to make a determination as to whether the ship needs tweaking.

In the end, the arguments in this thread for either side come down to a matter of personal opinion. Is the fact that one of the MVAM modes makes the MVAE better than the BoP in a stand up fight counteracted by the 10 minute cooldown that mode has? Is the battle cloak on the BoP overrated or underrated? Is what the BoP gives up for the universal slots balanced or is it too much? I might answer these question one way and the next person may answer the exact opposite.

Maybe we should give it some time guys and get more than just a weekend's worth of experience with the ship in the game before we go nuts, either way?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 127
03-15-2011, 06:32 AM
I say remove all the ancillary AP the pets get. The extra APs make it almost like it has another tactical Boff with BFaW, AP, AP:B, and HYT. Pull most of the buffs out and it would be fine plus tweak the power bonuses when broken into pieces.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 128
03-15-2011, 07:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FurQue
Seriously?

MVAM is a bop beater, its better in EVERYWAY. Battle cloak means little to nothing, unislots mean nothing when you'd most likely have a very very close build to the MVAM anyway.

What cryptic have done, is take 90% of bop builds, took away the cloak, give it more shields, more hull and a better turn rate, then added another tac console then given it another weapon slot, and then made it faster too and finally given it an extra ensign bridge officer, how can you think that's even?

I'd rather they just give the feds a bop, instead of a ship that completely out classes the bop in everyway.

BOP's with engineering cmdr slots are useless, bops with sci cmdr slots are much less useful then the tac cmdr. I don't know any decent players who don't run tac cmdr on a bop. Most bops then run sci ltcmdr, and the last two are at least one engineer and then you get to pick just one universal spot as all the others have already been picked for you by logic.

But all that is really mute, i really dont think you can make a bop that isn't able to be closely copied by a fed ship, and i'll bet the fed ship will be much better at its job.
Preach it!!! Preach it!!! Though it falls on deaf fed (and possibly the Devs) ears.

For the record:
THY1 CRF1 BO3 ApO3
ET1 EPTS2 A2Sif2
PH1 TSS2
BTSS1 TT2

or

THY1 CRF1 BO3 ApO3
PH1 TSS2 PSW1
ET1 EPTS2
BTSS1 TT2

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedJedi
^^This, exactly.

The BoP's most appealing aspect, the ability to slot unique combinations of BOff arrangements has become irrelevant, since there are now ships that can slot the same configurations, while still retaining all of the perks that accompany being a ship of their Commander-slot's relevant class (i.e. The Excelsior is a full Cruiser with a heavy upgrade from the Tactical LtC, the new MVAM is a full Escort with the powerful addition of the LtC Science, the Nebula/D'Kyr have Sci and LtC Eng).

The BoP is now heavily handicapped in comparison to those ships, with no appreciable, compensatory abilities. The Battle Cloak, while useful, is paid for by the heavy reduction to shields. The Console Configuration is debatable, since the ship has the 9 that is standard, might be interesting to give it 2 of every type of Console, then give it 2 or 3 universal slots. High turn rate = low hull (but, by comparison, the new MVAM AE-R, in Beta mode, gets a better turnrate with much better hull/shields).

The BoP needs a long look by the Devs, as it no longer has the claim to uniqueness that it once did,
-Big Red
Thanks to the fed misconception of its OP nature. Been screaming that its the players for months, not the ship but it fell on deaf ears and the empty space between them.
I can understand the federation as a fictional entity designing a vessel to surpass the BoP as a matter of keeping the arms race up-to-date in the face of a hostile opponent but to think it was designed in STO just because some feds have continiuosly whined to the OP nature of the BoP is horrible and is the source of my new state of cryptic disillusionment.

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8at-eNTrOpY View Post
Just putting it out there...I would think this is an indication that the power trees are in need of balancing, not that any ship needs a nerf or a buff. If players of the ship which can field any officer configuration feel that there is only 1 viable config to run, it's a sign that other configs need to be made viable.
Or its the sign of a vessel so handicapped to offset its perception of OP that specific builds are now needed to keep it viable in combat and alive long enough to make a contribution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FurQue
Just dont see how or why the mvam ship should be better in everyway.
Something had to be done to offset those "Iwin" teams of BoPs that plunder, pillage and burn through the Pugs and Premades with impunity.:p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 129
03-15-2011, 07:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8at-eNTrOpY View Post
Just putting it out there...I would think this is an indication that the power trees are in need of balancing, not that any ship needs a nerf or a buff. If players of the ship which can field any officer configuration feel that there is only 1 viable config to run, it's a sign that other configs need to be made viable.
Well no, the powers are fine, cmdr engineering powers should not be focused towards escorts/raiders, same with sci powers. More than happy with the bop the way it is, but its so called "versatility" is not what people are making out. There are only a couple of builds that are useful, the rest are much better served by their respective dedicted ship classes. An bop tank is sooo much worse than a cruiser tank for instance.

Just dont see how or why the mvam ship should be better in everyway.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 130
03-15-2011, 07:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FurQue
Well no, the powers are fine, cmdr engineering powers should not be focused towards escorts/raiders, same with sci powers. More than happy with the bop the way it is, but its so called "versatility" is not what people are making out. There are only a couple of builds that are useful, the rest are much better served by their respective dedicted ship classes. An bop tank is sooo much worse than a cruiser tank for instance.

Just dont see how or why the mvam ship should be better in everyway.
What would you suggest of a change for the MVAM to make it more balanced?

Ive been away a while and havent played with or against the ship yet, so cant really comment on its performance, but perhaps a lower turnrate for the Beta section?
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 11:56 PM.