Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,016
# 61
02-08-2013, 12:32 PM
Oh, ANOTHER one of these threads

Quote:
Originally Posted by disposeableh3r0 View Post
the fact that your 1v1 ended in stalemate just shows that there is a balance issue.
Sorry, but a stalemate means that it WAS balanced. Neither side had an advantage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apocalypsespace View Post
My guess is that most people that hate escorts don't fly one . I tried the new Ambassador for some fleet action .

Cruisers have it easy when it comes to PvE . Even with the default craptacular equipment and only 3/4 Bridge Officers it was far easier to deal with then my usual hell bent fire breading escort .

Hell I'm thinking to move to cruisers permanently . It just transforms the game from "OMG die die .... boost shield , BRACE FOR IMPACT " into "Yea , you can shoot but you're still going to die".
This.
_____________________
Come join the 44th Fleet.
startrek.44thfleet.com
Lieutenant
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 32
# 62
02-08-2013, 01:32 PM
As someone who flies as a Science Officer in a Science ship in the Federation, and Tactical Officer in a Hegh'ta Bird of Prey, I quite like the OP's idea. If they make the Escorts less efficient at tanking things like Tactical Cube, then they could do what they're supposed to do-be glass cannons. I have to hit and run bosses and enemies in crowds in the Hegh'ta or I'll get killed very quickly, even with high cap shield and consoles, as well as armour hardening ones. Making the larger ships that are classed as Escorts more destroyer like in stats would go a long way towards the balance issue.

For those who keep saying the balance is fine, then perhaps you should argue more in favour of overall scores in certain scenarios to be calculated taking into consideration the scis and the cruisers particular specialities, in more than just one scenario.

I've done a fair few STF's in my Mirror Reconnaissance Science Vessel and the only scenario I can recall that I ended up with the Very Rare loot was Hive Onslaught, where the optional goal is to survive... and that's only happened twice.

My fleetmate wanted to test out his Breen ship so we PvPed 1vs1 against each other, but we had to give it up after 45 minutes of neither one dying. The one time he got through my shields and took my health down to over half I manouvred to put a floating chunk of planet between us, and the one time I got his shields down and health to half he escaped by running out of my range.

Last edited by ladydragonfury; 02-08-2013 at 01:47 PM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,669
# 63
02-08-2013, 01:56 PM
I mentioned this in a PvP thread.

Basically, I think there need to be consoles that make a % of your total hull immune to damage in any single attack.

Each console provides 10% reduction. Cruisers have a 0.9 modifier. Sci have a 0.8 modifier. Escorts have a 0.7 modifier.

The stat is available in all three flavors (Sci, Tac, Eng). Using these consoles sacrifices other stats as the other bonuses provided are lower.

The net result is that a fleet cruiser cannot take more than 10% total hull damage in any single attack if fully decked out. 20% of total hull for sci. 30% of total hull in any single attack for escorts.

(Then for PvP, you also need strong healing disruption for weapons and/or BOff powers.)

Effectively, this means that a dedicated tanking cruiser CANNOT DIE in fewer than 10 hits regardless of the OMG super-attack being launched. 5 hits for sci. 4 hits for escorts. More hull is still better and a high hull escort may be a semi-suitable tank but a cruiser with the same stats will last over twice as long under fire.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,669
# 64
02-08-2013, 02:09 PM
Assitionally, I'd probably look at giving:

Destroyers and Flight Deck Carriers a 0.75 modifier, Battle Cruisers and Dreadnaughts a 0.85 modifier (with some other offsetting buffs for Dreadnaughts like turnrate or weapons power), and Carriers something like a 0.92 modifier.

Meaning it would take:

13 hits to down a tanking carrier
10 hits to down a tanking cruiser.
7 hits to down a dreadnaught (More damage than a cruiser, slightly weaker, stronger than a science tank)
5 hits to down a tanking sci vessel
4 hits to down a tanking destroyer
4 hits to town a tanking escort (but a destroyer's hull benefits from being higher and has more resistance)

(Naturally, BO stations and other mitigation will influence all of this. This is sitting there and taking successive burst attacks.)

This would be huge in STFs and PvP. Less relevant in solo play where one shotting almost never happens. Stats based around the assumption of 10 tanking consoles.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 622
# 65
02-08-2013, 02:40 PM
This thread has earned a mighty guffaw. *GUFFAW*
All cloaks should be canon.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 92
# 66
02-08-2013, 04:09 PM
I don't know, I wouldn't mind the maneuverability of a BOP on some fed ships. Like, the aquarius especially should have a higher turn rate. And universal boff slots would be nice. But I don't think the change would really do much to help.

There are some issues with the various types of ship, but I think things need to be broken down more.

Like PvP or PvE?

If we're talking PvP, I think the ships are pretty comparable. You can be successful with science ships, cruisers, or escorts. If you're consistently losing, I suspect the issue is more likely one of skill and talent. In fitting your ship, flying your ship, or both. Just because you can't take an escort with a cruiser doesn't mean other people are plagued by the same inability.

PvE has more issues, but mostly they're not inherent to the ships. They're more in how the game works. Agro should be reworked, with more ways to get/keep agro so that "tanking" is more meaningful. The rewards and prizes system needs restructuring so that it is not based solely on dps, and things like like CC, healing, and tanking all count towards the total. The power consumption of beam weapons should be looked at, and possibly reduced.

Those are all reasonable areas to ask for review and possible improvement. Unfortunately they're unlikely to get any attention any time soon.

Why? Because people are too busy whining about damage, likely to the point the devs tuned out any such discussion.

You think cruisers are underpowered? Ok, but they're not intended as a dps ship. So why would most potential changes proposed involve either boosting their damage or nerfing escort damage? You want cruisers improved? Propose changes dealing with tanking, or engineering powers, or other things that fit with a cruiser's niche. You want sci vessels improved? Ask for improvements in crowd control, debuffs, and the like.

If you really want to be a dps monster that bad, then stop trying to role-play as picard, get out of the slow, weakly-armed cruiser with the built-in nursery, arboretum, forward lounge, and the babies-on-board window sign. Get yourself into an escort. Which is actually built to fight, so actually has DPS.

The ships have different roles. The role of dps isn't for all of them. If you want to fly a cruiser for LOL-RP reasons, that's perfectly fine. But it's unreasonable to want or expect the devs to redesign an entire category of starships because you want your LOL-RP and epic damage, too.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 168
# 67
02-08-2013, 04:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladydragonfury View Post
As someone who flies as a Science Officer in a Science ship in the Federation, and Tactical Officer in a Hegh'ta Bird of Prey, I quite like the OP's idea. If they make the Escorts less efficient at tanking things like Tactical Cube, then they could do what they're supposed to do-be glass cannons.
If Escorts are supposed to be as you say "Glass Cannons." Then please do explain to me why it is that at the battle of Sector 001 when 29 Starships of a variety of classes including 5 Cruisers, and 3 Science Ships, only 4 escort class ships (The Defiant and 3 others) were left in fighting condition (well the Defiant was about to blow up) at the time when the Enterprise arrived on the scene out of all those 29 ships? That seems to indicate that there is a moderate level of tankiness involved in the Escorts themselves. Especially since the ship they were fighting amounted to a Tactical Cube housing a Unimatrix.
______________________________
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,005
# 68
02-08-2013, 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by syberghost View Post
I don't think the problem is that Escorts are OP. Escorts are supposed to do the most damage; they're in effect the space DPS class.

The problem is that Cruisers can't effectively Tank, and Science can't effectively Heal.

Ideally, Escorts that concentrate on DPS would be the best at it, Cruisers that concentrate on Tanking would be best at it, and Science that concentrate on Healing would be best at it. But as things stand, it's not that Escorts are best at DPS that's the problem, it's that they're best at Tanking as well, and Healing is completely unnecessary.

Any time you screw up the balance on the trinity, DPS is going to dominate, because Tanking and Healing extend fights, DPS ends them. The only way to fix it is to make the other ships clearly superior at their intended roles.

So Cruisers need better threat control, and need to get credit for damage absorbed when measuring their place in a group. Science need to get credit for heals when measuring their place in a group.

Those things alone may very well fix the problem. If it doesn't, then they can look at Escort changes; but even then, I wouldn't say make them do less DPS, I'd say make it harder for them to heal themselves or make them less tanky; or at least make doing those things reduce their DPS.
This guy hit the nail right on the head.

Threat management in this game is a mess. If cruisers aren't given the ability to take aggro off of my Fleet Defiant without doing more damage than me, then I need to be able to take a bit of punishment. Otherwise, I'm either popping after 15 seconds of combat, or severely moderating my attacks to the point that I may as well be flying a Light Cruiser.

Still, no ship in this game, Escort or otherwise, should have the durability of a wet tissue. As was pointed out in another post, Escorts should have high DPS and medium survivability, and Cruisers should have high survivability and medium DPS. Science ships should be wild cards, with extremely high utility in their abilities for controlling and debuffing enemies.

In short, Escorts are fine as they are. It's the other ships that need a good looking-at.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 335
# 69
02-08-2013, 04:42 PM
Out of couriousity, why do escorts have to be glass cannons?

Klingon ships in general always tended to have far fewer safety systems and back up systems, they are all guns and some armor with a cloak. The Federation has always been about keeping their crews alive. numerous safety systems and ships built to survive. Using the Defiant class ship as an example, look why it was built and what has been said about the ship.
1. The ship was built to fight the Borg after Wolf 357. The federation saw a ton of ships get housed by one cube. This was the prototype ship to combat the Borg. Lots of experimental weapons and a hull meant to survive.
2. Look at all the times on DS9 that there was reference to numerous safety protacals that Chief O'Brien either bypassed or had to remove to let the ship run right.
3. The U.S.S. Defiant was the prototype, all the improvements, modifications, system re-routes and lessons learned from combat in the ship along with it getting blown up by the breen obviously went into the future ships of that class.

As a result of all of this I don't think that the escourts are over powered, but rather that every ship in the game is far to un-unique. I never understood why the defiant class ship was not an admiral level ship. (Sisco only got the ship because he requested it, had built it, and had to fix it). With the introduction of the specific ship only consoles this problem in the game has started to get better, but still look at the number of Why does cryptic hate my favorite ship threads. There have been many times where the points made in those threads have been valid, and times where the person is just being a total fanboy. An NX class ship should never be in a fight with a Galaxy class ship for any longer than it takes for a phaser beam to evaporate the NX class ship!
If any changes are made to ships in the game, I'd like to see the individual ship classes make a big diferance. make it dificult for me to not want to fly this ship or make me have to pick stats over appearance. Just compairing two high end escourts, the defiant class and the steamrunner class is an easy way to do this. The steamrunner is a more engineering friendly ship. The defiant class ship is all guns. Given the option, i'd love a shot a fully customizable ships with boff layouts, console layouts and weapon placements, but this would require such a huge reworking of the game i doubt its possible. Please do not weaken any ships in the game Devs, if anything allow ships to become stronger and more specific to their class.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 701
# 70
02-08-2013, 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by avarseir View Post
Escorts are not in anyway OP. It very much depends on the captain, the build and how the captain wants to play it.

The problem is there're many cruiser/sci captains who want to be an escort, instead of focusing on their strengths, they want to be something else.
/thread.

Basically this.

I spend a great deal of time in Ker'rat at just about every rank, and people either have amazing builds and skills to go with it in ANY type of ship, or get blown up fairly quickly. I've learned through trial and error what works best, what doesn't, what pops enemies quick and who can hand me my arse in a fight.

Players need to quit crying and adapt to new and different situations with whatever career and ships they choose, as well as understand their BOff abilities and have reserve BOff characters to switch out.

Seriously people, this was my 1st MMO plus I'm old. If I can get this concept, anyone can.

_________________________________________________

I'm still Romulus_Prime. Joined STO in January 2010.

Last edited by kain9prime; 02-08-2013 at 04:57 PM.
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 11:03 PM.