Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
03-02-2012, 03:32 PM
I'd like to see every ship at least incorporate one universal slot much like the Odyssey. Flexibility is always a nice thing even if the rank is an ensign.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
03-02-2012, 03:35 PM
I support this idea as it would be extremely fun. I dont really see how anyone can say for sure that any of this would be OP without testing. There would be inherent strength and weakness in every build. A person that goes so heavy on DPS for example would have a hard time effectively healing themselves and those would have to adjust there build to survive. As far as people wanting an edge there is nothing wrong with wanting an edge. If you put the work in to find the edge thats like real life. As long as people who want to put the work in to find the hidden counters and defenses then thats like real life too. Doing this might open up needs for new Sci powers for examples and that would make Sci players happy and Science more interesting an fun if they had great countermeasure systems that made for a totaly different defense scheme and gameplay. I am not a Sci player but maybe I would want to be one if they had cooler stuff. So I have no problem with this but it would have to prioritized with new content and other development of course.


Quote:
Originally Posted by C_Carmichael View Post
You assume everyone plays for Min/Max or for PvP with that reasoning.

But, many people play for other reasons which would benefit from having more flexibility.

Since you think balance would be an issue, I would like some specific examples in how Universal Bridge Officer slots on (since you cited it) a Prometheus, would give advantages over other players, who would also have Universal Bridge Officer slots at their disposal.

Purely theoretical of course.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
03-02-2012, 03:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer
The MVA has 4T/3S/2E consoles and 3T/1S/1E stations. 30k hull. 4.6k shields. 15 turn. +15 weapons.

The Guramba (since both the MVA and Guramba are 2k CP ships) has 4T/2S/2E consoles and 2T/2E/1S stations. 31.5k hull. 4.7k shields. 15 turn. +10 weapons. +5 engines.

Switch their BOFFs. Would the ships still have a semblance of balance?

To be honest, it would cause more problems for PvE than PvP. PvP's already a mess of imbalance.

PvE though... 3 Sci/1 Tac/1 Eng MVA's and 3 Eng/1 Tac/1 Sci Defiant Re's flying around with the regular MVA's and Defiant Re's.

In the end, by offering the illusion of diversity - would result in less.
Once again though, you are looking at it from a purely min/max standpoint.

Yet, just above, I pointed out a case for actually gimping myself based on a ship preference.

The ultimate factors in ship balance, are the innate stats and the consoles, not the BO slots.

You derive added effciency in attacks from increased turn rate and manuverability, at the sacrafice of hull strength, while your consoles boost those innate stats on the ship.

Ultimately, Bridge Officers are flavor. The flavor of how you operate in combat.

I'm still not seeing how having Universal Stations in all ships, inherently unbalances the game.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
03-02-2012, 03:39 PM
@C_Carmichael


Take a look at the Ship Tier Revamp Proposal thread.
The general proposal is that ships have additional equipment slots for Warp Cores (which would affect the power available to weapons systems and therefore how many weapons the ship can carry - although I also propose that it also allows you to upgrade the Warp Coils in the nacelles allowing faster "warp" speeds) and Computer Cores (which would determine the console slot layout for the ship and have an affect on the BOffs available too), each with a Tactical, Science and Engineering focused version which can be mounted on any type of vessel, and with different Mk's which you gain access to whilst moving up the ranks. This would allow players, and is the whole point behind the idea, to use lower tier ships whilst in higher ranks.
However, and where it's relevant to you, it also says that the Tac, Sci or Engi cores can be put onto a ship of a different "career" (the attached/linked proposal jpg even shows a working example where a Science Nova class with a Tactical Computer Core at first, then later replaced with a higher Mk Engineering Computer Core).
Just this idea alone would allow you some flexibility to be an officer from one branch and fly a ship from another branch.

Other ideas growing on that proposal from the same thread which are also related to your post includes this one:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turtlewing View Post
...Generally speeking lower tier ships are smaller. For that reason I don't mind them having fewer slots for weapons and consoles. However I really dislike that they are so limited in Boff slots.

I think that given the existing limit on the rank to which you can promote your Boffs. All ships should have if not an end game Boff layout, at least a Commander slot for their "specialty" and Lt slots in each other area.

I also like the console and Boff layout being tied to ship class. It gives some variation between ships in the same branch (For example the Nebula and Intrepid retrofits, play very differently even both being science ships).

All and all I think an optimal solution might involve your solution, minus the computer core, and instead just give every ship an end-game ready Boff layout.

[edit]
After re-reading and rethinking. I like the computer cores as well. Tack on an addendum that computer cores don't alter Boff stations at all and give every ship a Boff layout of
at least:
1 x Commander, 3 x Lieutenant
and at most:
1x Commander, 1X Lt Commander, 2x Lieutenant, 1x Ensign...
And this by myself on the same thing...
Quote:
Originally Posted by wimpoman
...and also the idea......that every ship has an "end game" BOff layout. Since you can't promote Bridge Officers beyond your own rank, giving a starter ship a Commander slot would mean you could only promote a BOff to that position once you have reached the rank of Captain yourself, but until then your Lt/Lt.Cdr BOff can still sit in that slot with no problems.
While these don't mention "universal" BOffs, they don't mention BOffs of any carreer branch either. And although I don't agree that all bridge officer slots should be universal, I understand your reason for posting that premise and would in fact be in favour of every ship having at least one, if not 2/3 universal BOff slots.

Thinking about it, I reckon giving every ship a Commander Bridge Officer Slot in the field to which the ship belongs (Science, Tactical or Engineering), then a universal Lieutenant Commander BOff slot, followed by a Lieutenant slot in each of the branches for which the ship doesn't belong and at least one universal Ensign slot (plus maybe an additional universal Ens slot at middle ranks and a universal Lt slot at Admiral too) - so on a Tac ship for eg: Cdr Tac BOff; Lt.Cdr univ BOff; Lt Engi BOff; Lt Sci BOff; Ens univ BOff - would be great IMHO!
(Since you can only promote BOff's upto the rank below yours, if you yourself were a Lt.Cdr then you could only have a Lt BOff in any slot, but a Lt BOff can indeed go into a Cdr slot.)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
03-02-2012, 03:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by C_Carmichael View Post
This is the point I'm trying to get across. It's not always about min/max for people playing, and certainly in a game based on Star Trek. Sometimes, its about the little things, like RP and your favorite ship, setting out on your own adventure, doing it your way, because you can.

That's the point of my proposal.
That gets into the folks that want a T5 Connie +1 though...

...you can't do it your way. It's not your game. CBS/PWE/Cryptic...it's their game.

STO's not about the journey. It's very un-Star Trek-like in that regard.

Also, to an extent - you already answered your own question to an extent - the ships in the series/movies performed multiple roles. The ships did not change. The crew did not change. If they were doing X, Y, or Z... tada - it was the same people.

It would only be in regard to the min/max, where an issue such as this would come up. But you say it's not about that...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
03-02-2012, 03:44 PM
Thinking about it, I reckon giving every ship a Commander Bridge Officer Slot in the field to which the ship belongs (Science, Tactical or Engineering), then a universal Lieutenant Commander BOff slot, followed by a Lieutenant slot in each of the branches for which the ship doesn't belong and at least one universal Ensign slot (plus maybe an additional universal Ens slot at middle ranks and a universal Lt slot at Admiral too) - so on a Tac ship for eg: Cdr Tac BOff; Lt.Cdr univ BOff; Lt Engi BOff; Lt Sci BOff; Ens univ BOff - would be great IMHO!
(Since you can only promote BOff's upto the rank below yours, if you yourself were a Lt.Cdr then you could only have a Lt BOff in any slot, but a Lt BOff can indeed go into a Cdr slot.)[/quote]



I could get with this...
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
03-02-2012, 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by C_Carmichael View Post
Once again though, you are looking at it from a purely min/max standpoint.

Yet, just above, I pointed out a case for actually gimping myself based on a ship preference.

The ultimate factors in ship balance, are the innate stats and the consoles, not the BO slots.

You derive added effciency in attacks from increased turn rate and manuverability, at the sacrafice of hull strength, while your consoles boost those innate stats on the ship.

Ultimately, Bridge Officers are flavor. The flavor of how you operate in combat.

I'm still not seeing how having Universal Stations in all ships, inherently unbalances the game.
Flavor?

My Tactical and Engineering Officers cannot jam your sensors.
My Engineering and Science Officers cannot fire torpedo spreads.
My Science and Tactical Officers cannot eject warp plasma.

Bridge Officers are your "powers" - your "spells"... your abilities.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
03-02-2012, 03:50 PM
I'd like to see al Ensign slots be universal at a minimum.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
03-02-2012, 03:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptAhaab
Thinking about it, I reckon giving every ship a Commander Bridge Officer Slot in the field to which the ship belongs (Science, Tactical or Engineering), then a universal Lieutenant Commander BOff slot, followed by a Lieutenant slot in each of the branches for which the ship doesn't belong and at least one universal Ensign slot (plus maybe an additional universal Ens slot at middle ranks and a universal Lt slot at Admiral too) - so on a Tac ship for eg: Cdr Tac BOff; Lt.Cdr univ BOff; Lt Engi BOff; Lt Sci BOff; Ens univ BOff - would be great IMHO!
(Since you can only promote BOff's upto the rank below yours, if you yourself were a Lt.Cdr then you could only have a Lt BOff in any slot, but a Lt BOff can indeed go into a Cdr slot.)



I could get with this...
Hmmmm?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
03-02-2012, 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptAhaab
Thinking about it, I reckon giving every ship a Commander Bridge Officer Slot in the field to which the ship belongs (Science, Tactical or Engineering), then a universal Lieutenant Commander BOff slot, followed by a Lieutenant slot in each of the branches for which the ship doesn't belong and at least one universal Ensign slot (plus maybe an additional universal Ens slot at middle ranks and a universal Lt slot at Admiral too) - so on a Tac ship for eg: Cdr Tac BOff; Lt.Cdr univ BOff; Lt Engi BOff; Lt Sci BOff; Ens univ BOff - would be great IMHO!
(Since you can only promote BOff's upto the rank below yours, if you yourself were a Lt.Cdr then you could only have a Lt BOff in any slot, but a Lt BOff can indeed go into a Cdr slot.)


I could get with this...[/quote]

Tier 1: Ensign, Ensign, Ensign.
Tier 2: Lt, Ensign, Ensign, Ensign.
Tier 3: Lt Cmdr, Lt, Lt, Ensign.
Tier 4: Cmdr, Lt, Lt, Lt.
Tier 5: Cmdr, Lt Cmdr, Lt, Lt, Ensign.

Those are what we have on the base ships. Given three of each would be taken up by the three careers, T2 would have an Ensign uni, T3 an Ensign uni, T4 a Lt uni, and T5 the Lt Cmdr/Ensign unis?

To an extent though, that is along the lines of what they have done with the ships - instead of giving the uni though, that slot reflects if the ship is Eng/Sci/Tac...
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 07:04 AM.