Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 147
# 31
03-17-2013, 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by darramouss1 View Post
You know, this thread has some pretty good ideas going through it. Here are my 2c worth.

Currently there are three pieces of equipment that I deem to be necessary to the running of the ship. They are the engine, deflector and shield system. I think there should be more. I think that, aside from sci, tac and eng consoles there should be...

Engines - This governs top speed and turning.
Deflector - This can modify top warp speed and provides bonuses to some skills.
Shields - Obvious.
Hull - This would be what the ship's outer hull is made of, its armour. A heavy armour class for cruisers is a good idea.
Computer System - Affects effectiveness of computer based abilities and some would assist resisting the affects of opponent abilities.
Warp Core - Affects power levels across different systems and has some affect on power transfer rates.

To help differentiate the classes there would be some items (the best items of their class) that should be limited to certain classes. As a proposed idea...

Escorts - Access to DCs and DHCs and faster, more maneuverable engines.
Cruisers - Larger Warp cores and stronger hulls.
Science - More exotic deflectors and computers, such as the bio-neural based computer on Voyager.

This system would involve a large commitment on Cryptic's behalf but I feel such a system would benefit the game immensely.

Thoughts?

I kinda dig this idea, but I doubt they would go for it, it would possibly force another look at the skill tree, and a complete revamp of the equipment system as we know it.

Would like to see some of these ideas in game though.
InGame - @Darth_Tauri
Joined - 9/2011
"You Best Make Peace With Your Dear & Fluffy Lord" - Malcolm Reynolds

Last edited by kevaldt; 03-17-2013 at 04:12 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,639
# 32
03-17-2013, 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by darramouss1 View Post
Engines - This governs top speed and turning.
Deflector - This can modify top warp speed and provides bonuses to some skills.
Shields - Obvious.
Hull - This would be what the ship's outer hull is made of, its armour. A heavy armour class for cruisers is a good idea.
Computer System - Affects effectiveness of computer based abilities and some would assist resisting the affects of opponent abilities.
Warp Core - Affects power levels across different systems and has some affect on power transfer rates.
The deflector is less important for maintaining the warp field than the engines and the warp core... as far as I know, only the transwarp conduits and quantum slipstream drive actually depend on the main deflector for activation.

Personally, I'd prefer heavy warp cores to be the signature equipment item of Cruisers, rather than heavy armor.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,474
# 33
03-17-2013, 05:43 PM
Quote:
"How do you feel about gaining Armor, at the expense of converting existing eng res consoles into something else (don't know what yet)?"
Tough to answer this, it's pretty vague....

I feel like the most important issue here is that cruisers need at least the level of protection they have (30-40% damage reduction typically), to perform well.

I guess I don't see what problem Geko is trying to solve. What exactly is the goal here? Are we trying to make cruisers tougher, or everything else less tough? Or just trying to get armor out of the engineering slots so that engineering slots are more exciting? The answer to that will have a big influence on the mechanics of an armor slot... Adding a special armor slot can't cost cruisers protection without badly impacting their gameplay, but at the same time giving all ships the ability to mount equivalent armor protection with a single slot is madness. Would ships have an "armor multiplier" to go with their shield multiplier? Could we still fine tune the thickness and type of our ship's armor?

*frustration* So many ideas, so many questions, so little voice.
Commander
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 336
# 34
03-17-2013, 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by momaw View Post
Tough to answer this, it's pretty vague....

I feel like the most important issue here is that cruisers need at least the level of protection they have (30-40% damage reduction typically), to perform well.

I guess I don't see what problem Geko is trying to solve. What exactly is the goal here? Are we trying to make cruisers tougher, or everything else less tough? Or just trying to get armor out of the engineering slots so that engineering slots are more exciting? The answer to that will have a big influence on the mechanics of an armor slot... Adding a special armor slot can't cost cruisers protection without badly impacting their gameplay, but at the same time giving all ships the ability to mount equivalent armor protection with a single slot is madness. Would ships have an "armor multiplier" to go with their shield multiplier? Could we still fine tune the thickness and type of our ship's armor?

*frustration* So many ideas, so many questions, so little voice.
An armour slot would be nice either way. The two slots currently being taken up by armour consoles on my cruiser can then be devoted to SIF Generators instead. The only problem is whether or not this would actually be good for cruisers in particular, since making every ship only carry one armour console would actually make cruisers much much worse than they are now. Inversely, this would actually benefit escorts a lot more...

Then there's the issue with Engineering consoles not being particularly useful or not working as well as they should. It would also be nice if EPS Transfer really had an impact on weapon energy recharge rates, but it doesn't seem to do anything useful. Likewise, it seems that Emergency Force Fields is worse than useless; at least Biofunction Monitor has a noticeable impact on the survivability of your crew.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 173
# 35
03-17-2013, 06:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eraserfish View Post
Then there's the issue with Engineering consoles not being particularly useful or not working as well as they should. It would also be nice if EPS Transfer really had an impact on weapon energy recharge rates, but it doesn't seem to do anything useful. Likewise, it seems that Emergency Force Fields is worse than useless; at least Biofunction Monitor has a noticeable impact on the survivability of your crew.
Engineer console choice is terrible at present. RCS consoles especially are a trap for cruiser captains, as the percentage modifier benefits science and escort type vessels far more.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 166
# 36
03-17-2013, 06:38 PM
Dedicated slots for armor is a pretty big no-brainer but I still find it really misses the point.
Shields are supposed to be the first line of defense and thus it would be more sensible for the tanking ships to have dedicated slots for shields and armor.

Currently Tactical slots are dedicated towards enhancing damage - that makes sense
Science Slots are dedicated towards enhancing space magic AND shields
Engineering Slots are dedicated towards enhancing power AND armor / resistance

It would seem that Science and Engineering have had way too much crammed into them as a sort of catch all for various console functions.

If you make dedicated slots for shields and armor, science ships can actually fit consoles that boost their science magic effects.
Cruisers can actually fit consoles that boost their power levels to fire those energy hungry beams.

Not to mention that making new slots might actually allow for much bigger and complete sets.

However, it is abundantly obvious that Cryptic severely lack the competence to make such alterations.
Afterall, this is the same fools that thought adding environmental suits into the game would require people to take their existing armor off.

A smart individual would have thought - hey, why not make a specific slot for envirosuits to begin with ?
Captain
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,394
# 37
03-17-2013, 06:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by graleron View Post
Engineer console choice is terrible at present. RCS consoles especially are a trap for cruiser captains, as the percentage modifier benefits science and escort type vessels far more.
The consoles that boost engine, aux, shield or weapons power directly have always been moderately useful.

RCS consoles do what they're supposed to do well enough. (Yeah escorts get a bigger boost from them, but escorts also don't really need to use them at all).

Engi consoles are far more flexible than tactical consoels, for instance, which only do one thing. Just one thing.

And science consoles have been tweaked so many times, their usefulness is still all over the map.
Commander
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 336
# 38
03-17-2013, 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by graleron View Post
Engineer console choice is terrible at present. RCS consoles especially are a trap for cruiser captains, as the percentage modifier benefits science and escort type vessels far more.
Boosting power to one subsystem can be useful, but I feel that they're overshadowed by armour consoles. Two slots that would originally go to armour consoles can then be replaced by two Field Emitters, which would mean up to an additional +8 Shield power. This is one reason why I would support separating armour consoles from Engineering, because then these moderately useful consoles would be somewhat viable choices. It would also allow cruisers to actually have a noticeable advantage in power levels over other ships, which I feel is lacking at the moment. That being said, I do wonder if a buff to power consoles is necessary as well...

Furthermore, the slots then freed up would actually make SIF and RCS viable options, since they're not competing with the infinitely better and more essential armour consoles. So what if RCS is more effective on escorts and science vessels; if you find the RCS helps your turnrate by a measurable amount, then why not go for it? Again, the only caveat is whether or not cruisers do actually get a measurable benefit out of moving armour consoles to a separate slot, as opposed to simply benefiting escorts more. If the latter is the case, then we're pretty much going back to square one.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,474
# 39
03-17-2013, 07:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by snoggymack22 View Post
RCS consoles do what they're supposed to do well enough. (Yeah escorts get a bigger boost from them, but escorts also don't really need to use them at all).

Engi consoles are far more flexible than tactical consoels, for instance, which only do one thing. Just one thing.
I can't say I agree that RCS consoles do what they are supposed to do when the ships that most desperately need the agility gain next to not benefit from having them, and the ships that have the greatest benefit have the least need for them.

And since this game is all about DPSing everything into scrap before it overwhelms you, the "just one thing" that tactical consoles do is insanely valuable. As somebody said earlier, they throw their universal consoles into engineering because +damage and +shields are just too essential.
Commander
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 336
# 40
03-17-2013, 07:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by momaw View Post
I can't say I agree that RCS consoles do what they are supposed to do when the ships that most desperately need the agility gain next to not benefit from having them, and the ships that have the greatest benefit have the least need for them.

And since this game is all about DPSing everything into scrap before it overwhelms you, the "just one thing" that tactical consoles do is insanely valuable. As somebody said earlier, they throw their universal consoles into engineering because +damage and +shields are just too essential.
...unless you're a beam cruiser captain, in which case Tactical Console slots do nothing for you!
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 06:06 PM.