Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,351
# 201
12-10-2012, 02:13 PM
So what I am mostly hearing is that hull and crew are not very effective in STO. Okay Cryptic guys, WORK ON THIS!!!!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 144
# 202
12-10-2012, 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
I agree, hull is worthless in STO due to how easy it is to destroy it, reheal it and it offers nothing really unless one is hull tanking (which is less effective than shield tanking, imo)
The simple solution is to make energy based weapon less effective against hull in the same way like torps are less effective against shields. This would lower the overall damage a little bit but make torps essential.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,351
# 203
12-11-2012, 09:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xiphenon View Post
The simple solution is to make energy based weapon less effective against hull in the same way like torps are less effective against shields. This would lower the overall damage a little bit but make torps essential.
Sounds good to me, but also make crew more useful.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,766
# 204
12-11-2012, 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xiphenon View Post
The simple solution is to make energy based weapon less effective against hull in the same way like torps are less effective against shields. This would lower the overall damage a little bit but make torps essential.
Actually I agree. As a game mechanic this would work.
Richard Hamilton (1975-2014)
goodbye good friend. We will see you in the DMZ in the sky oneday, save a shot for us.
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,656
# 205
12-11-2012, 12:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xiphenon View Post
The simple solution is to make energy based weapon less effective against hull in the same way like torps are less effective against shields. This would lower the overall damage a little bit but make torps essential.
Except that it doesn't entirely make sense that energy weapons should have a disadvantage against hull. Hull is physical structure, with no special ability to dissipate energy other than physical properties of the material. I think hull points are an adequate representation of those physical properties, and that if you want to have more resistance to energy than the hull represents you can equip an armor "console".

Further, I've never ever seen any Trek episode where it was stated that phasers or disruptors or any other weapon was less effective against an unshielded target.

Energy weapons are not just for stripping shields, IMO.

What I'd like to see better represented in STO is the inertial damage that torps represent. When a starship gets hit by any torpedo, the ship gets shaken up. Sparks fly. Crew gets damaged. Even full shielding doesn't seem to completely negate the impact of a torpedo. And that's the way it ought to be in STO.
Volunteer Community Moderator for the Star Trek Online forums -- My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a "forums and website" support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs regarding moderation inquiries.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,206
# 206
12-11-2012, 02:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegeek View Post
...<SNIP>...

What I'd like to see better represented in STO is the inertial damage that torps represent. When a starship gets hit by any torpedo, the ship gets shaken up. Sparks fly. Crew gets damaged. Even full shielding doesn't seem to completely negate the impact of a torpedo. And that's the way it ought to be in STO.
Completely agree with the above. Kinetic damage should have inherent shield penetration or increased bleed-through damage without any automatic damage reduction due to shields. One possibility is to only minimize damage blocked by shields, but not its bleed-through effect.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,590
# 207
12-11-2012, 03:11 PM
Actually I think the guys have something here. Crew loss on a Cruiser is stupid. And I mean STUPID. My FPE can go head to head with a Borg Sphere and lose maybe 30 crew over the duration of the fight. My Odyssey will do the same thing... and lose over 1500 crew over the duration of that fight. Granted the fight is longer, but only by about 50%. If my FPE took that long, it would only lose about 40% of it's crew, whereas my Odyssey loses 60%. Granted they are mostly incapacitated, and only about 20% are dead, but still.

And what really irks me is that not only does crew loss affect hull regen rate, but it also affects most if not all team abilities, i.e. Tactical Team, Engineering Team, Science Team. Their effectiveness is greatly reduced by a weakened crew. And I mean greatly.

But here is the kicker. Say my FPE and Oddy went into a hellish battle, and both came out with just 1% crew alive. Basically the end result of a SB24 run. My FPE will restore it's full crew in about 2 minutes. Tops. My Odyssey? 5 minutes. Minimum. If I am lucky. Um... WHAT??? And what really irks me is how hull regen is related to % crew alive, which means that inside and out of combat, escorts will always have better hull regen, simply because their crews get restored so much faster due to smaller size. If anything, cruisers get shafted out of their intended role simply because they can't restore crew fast enough to allow their hull regen to stay high.

If anything, I would propose that crew either 1) Not affect the ship as much, if at all, become a null value, 2) actually be restored % wise, not numbers, or 3) Have ways to restore them faster that aren't costly or hurt your ship.

I am leaning more towards #2. But that's just me.

*Note: Ironically I don't have this problem with my Tor'Kaht. She's got a nice big-ass crew of 1500, and for starters, she doesn't lose nearly as many as my Odyssey (above situation she loses maybe 200 tops, and the SB24 hell fight equivalent she only loses maybe 750), and she restores them faster. Gotta love them Klingons and their... what was it, 7 redundant internal organ systems? So this whole argument is kind of a moot point for KDF battlecruisers XD.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Why the Devs can't make PvE content harder. <--- DR proved me wrong!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 245
# 208
12-11-2012, 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hereticknight085 View Post
*Note: Ironically I don't have this problem with my Tor'Kaht. She's got a nice big-ass crew of 1500, and for starters, she doesn't lose nearly as many as my Odyssey (above situation she loses maybe 200 tops, and the SB24 hell fight equivalent she only loses maybe 750), and she restores them faster. Gotta love them Klingons and their... what was it, 7 redundant internal organ systems? So this whole argument is kind of a moot point for KDF battlecruisers XD.
That would be Tactical Readiness
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 563
# 209
12-11-2012, 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegeek View Post
Further, I've never ever seen any Trek episode where it was stated that phasers or disruptors or any other weapon was less effective against an unshielded target.
The NX class from Enterprise doesn't have shields, and it seems to be quite a tough little ship. Their only defensive measure is to polarize their hull in anticipation of combat.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,273
# 210
12-11-2012, 07:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegeek View Post
Except that it doesn't entirely make sense that energy weapons should have a disadvantage against hull. Hull is physical structure, with no special ability to dissipate energy other than physical properties of the material. I think hull points are an adequate representation of those physical properties, and that if you want to have more resistance to energy than the hull represents you can equip an armor "console".

Further, I've never ever seen any Trek episode where it was stated that phasers or disruptors or any other weapon was less effective against an unshielded target.

Energy weapons are not just for stripping shields, IMO.

What I'd like to see better represented in STO is the inertial damage that torps represent. When a starship gets hit by any torpedo, the ship gets shaken up. Sparks fly. Crew gets damaged. Even full shielding doesn't seem to completely negate the impact of a torpedo. And that's the way it ought to be in STO.
Not to mention that torps have a limited function in PvP for a good reason. Shield tanking is far too effective in this game, there's often not enough time to sink a torp through a gap in the shield tank, because the torps take a leisurely 3-4 seconds to reach the target (assuming the target doesn't hit a massive engine buff and literally match speed with the torp, giving them time to snap on yet another shield buff/TT).

IMO, they should make torps faster. More people might use 'em in PvP, then
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 11:46 PM.