Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > PvP Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 41
04-24-2011, 09:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nu-NRG
git? cvs? Or is the engine so rigid / un-flexible? Which would indicate that it was a bad decision to start with it at the first place? It would further more, indicate that planning STO on this engine, was not done for a long run, due to overhead of man hours to fix one SINGLE skill, cause it does not make sense.
What about git or cvs? It's not like a rollback could actually could be done. It's a lot more complicated than a website or a stand alone app there chief ^^
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 42
04-24-2011, 10:19 AM
Others have stated this, but exactly how many of you are programmers and game designers telling Cryptic their game engine and game mechanics are done incorrectly?

It seems like a minority of players are enforcing their ideas and views, via the forums, on the rest of us and Cryptic especially in the PvP front. Yes, the 'squeky wheel gets the oil' but when there is thread after thread plying complaints about the same thing it does get tiresome; even when we have been told already that it's being looked into.

This is essentially our fault. Complaints about a game mechanic like the fighter spam and mines got them reduced in effectiveness and BFAW was changed to compensate. The skill is not broken. It works when you use the power. It is not overpowered, the damage is spread out and not focused. Now we are complaining because of that change. When do the players say to themselves: "Wow! I have to learn a new way to fight." The are all kinds of ways to counteract BFAW (see Peregrine_Falcon's earlier post). In PvP there a very few coordinated teams that use BFAW even remotely effectively. (For that matter any coordinated group will almost always dominate a match regardless.) There are other powers that have changed and no one complains about those. Why? Because the monitory that dominates these forums have not become rabid about it.

I strongly agree with something the above posts have said is lacking: Tribble feedback does seem to be in part dismissed at times.

Seriously guys, can we please stop now? Thank you.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 43
04-24-2011, 10:37 AM
Since there are still players who think New Faw™ is fine and people just need to learn to adjust to the new situation and use one of the many viable counters, I have come to think that maybe they are right. Maybe all the balance changes were a bad idea. Just adapt and learn to live with the mechanics.

Therefore I suggest: Cryptic, bring back the old VM/SNB combo! This way the players who think that New Faw™ is fine will have 30 seconds of calm to think about their statement.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 44
04-24-2011, 11:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mancom
Since there are still players who think New Faw™ is fine and people just need to learn to adjust to the new situation and use one of the many viable counters, I have come to think that maybe they are right. Maybe all the balance changes were a bad idea. Just adapt and learn to live with the mechanics.

Therefore I suggest: Cryptic, bring back the old VM/SNB combo! This way the players who think that New Faw™ is fine will have 30 seconds of calm to think about their statement.
Nice idea! If craptic did that i would come back that moment and even wasted Cpoints for respec
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 45
04-24-2011, 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by amidoinitright View Post
Why couldn't they just change it back to how it worked before they "fixed" it? wouldn't that solve the problem?
Only if they change it back to FAW 1.0 (the one before any changes) -- that was useful for clearing photonic/carrier pets/ mines & was even useful against players if you managed to isolate one opponent (it required a bit of skill to be used tho), since it was more of a clearing tool it was only seen occasionally and not a must-have for everyone to improve dps.

FAW2.0 (after the nerfs & fixes) was pretty much pointless in my opinion, it wasn't even good enough to kill photonic or carrier trash anymore but made the user get aggro on everything - it was more a liability that gave good opponents an opportunity then a nice trash clearing tool anymore.

FAW3.0 (the one we have now) is from my experience only an issue once a large part of a team brings it and makes it their tactic to overwhelm a group's healing capabilities with continuous pressure.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 46
04-24-2011, 11:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jheinig View Post
By comparison, changing EiE was about 3 data elements. (Plus a few more to fix an error in the expression for efficiency skills that was discovered in the process.)
It makes me sad that 47 pages of feedback wasn't able to deter you from that -- from our chat it seemed like you were going to be more open to listening to the community. Efficient engines are fine as is. At the moment, the top three engines used at max level, in order are borg, aegis, and efficient. And even then not many people still use the efficients. In this case, nerfing efficient engines leads to less choice and variety at max level. That is a *bad* thing.

What does need nerfed is the sets, especially the borg set. Sets were a terrible idea in the first place, but now that they are here we either need more of them to increase variety or more standout items like efficient engines that lure people away from the set bonuses. At the moment, it seems that over half of good PvPer are using the borg set with covariants in order to maximize defense, where as before the sets came out only about one quarter of players were using efficients.

I understand the reasoning that they are overpowered at levels four through ten, but that is not nearly as important as balance at max level where most people play. In essence, this change is going to help balance lower levels at the expense of max level gameplay, which is a bad trade. The best solution would be to replace the mission reward with the nerfed efficient engines while keeping the old efficients as a craft-able mk X or Mk XI item. That way, you balance the lower tiers while leaving max level balance untouched.

A more important issue related to efficiency is that only Saurians can have the efficient trait, and that only federation players can get them. Efficiency should be both more common and cross faction. Having a crew full of efficient officers is like having one and a half extra engineering slots and is a completely unfair advantage.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 47
04-24-2011, 11:49 AM
Expect to find the unnerfed version of EiEs soon in a C-Store near you.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 49 ...
04-24-2011, 11:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurleybird View Post
... the top three engines used at max level, in order are borg, aegis, and efficient...
There are other?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 50
04-24-2011, 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tygerpaw View Post
Others have stated this, but exactly how many of you are programmers and game designers telling Cryptic their game engine and game mechanics are done incorrectly?

It seems like a minority of players are enforcing their ideas and views, via the forums, on the rest of us and Cryptic especially in the PvP front. Yes, the 'squeky wheel gets the oil' but when there is thread after thread plying complaints about the same thing it does get tiresome; even when we have been told already that it's being looked into.

This is essentially our fault. Complaints about a game mechanic like the fighter spam and mines got them reduced in effectiveness and BFAW was changed to compensate. The skill is not broken. It works when you use the power. It is not overpowered, the damage is spread out and not focused. Now we are complaining because of that change. When do the players say to themselves: "Wow! I have to learn a new way to fight." The are all kinds of ways to counteract BFAW (see Peregrine_Falcon's earlier post). In PvP there a very few coordinated teams that use BFAW even remotely effectively. (For that matter any coordinated group will almost always dominate a match regardless.) There are other powers that have changed and no one complains about those. Why? Because the monitory that dominates these forums have not become rabid about it.

I strongly agree with something the above posts have said is lacking: Tribble feedback does seem to be in part dismissed at times.

Seriously guys, can we please stop now? Thank you.
If people are going to take the time to post, it would be nice if they would take few short minutes to familiarize themselves with the subject matter. The general dismissal of our concerns for belonging to a minority, as well as a clear misunderstanding of the most basic problems here, adds nothing to the conversation. We are all worse off for it. Alternate opinions and input are very important and inspite of some pigheaded resistance they are welcome. It is just important the people educate themselves on a matter before closing the book on it.

BFAW is bad. Ignoring our feedback before releasing this "fix" is bad. Nerfing EIE is a tremendous waste of time, which is bad. Back store are good. That is all.
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 11:37 AM.