Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 12,222
# 51
08-20-2013, 07:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by masterkeychnk5 View Post
If you dig as deep as i did with numberous cloak and non cloak builds, i will tell you there re just as much cons as pros for aux2bat builds.
It's got to be done by ship, though. Ship X isn't going to have the same pros/cons as Ship Y.

Somebody looking at AtB on a Steamrunner is not looking at the same thing as somebody looking to do it on an Excelsior.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,400
# 52
08-20-2013, 08:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer View Post
It's got to be done by ship, though. Ship X isn't going to have the same pros/cons as Ship Y.

Somebody looking at AtB on a Steamrunner is not looking at the same thing as somebody looking to do it on an Excelsior.
Agreed, and it reinforces what I've been saying in this thread.

It is a very good build option for a fairly smaller selection of niche builds.

If it was an across the board huge improvement for any and all ship builds then it would be problematic.


The devs have been quietly addressing the popularity of this build in small but steady was by adding multiple powers, consoles and equipment that are directly linked to Aux.

Some examples from recent development:

CE/CCE Healing contribution
Nukara T5 Rep power
Nukara T4 Rep passive
[AMP] Elite Warp Cores
Special consoles like the new SIC Console.
3 Piece Subspace Set Haywire passive


I think this trend will continue, and what I think it means is that the devs want to create choices between options such as aux to batts or other more traditional layouts without directly nerfing aux to batts.

Mostly likely because of what I've been saying, Aux to batts is a great build option but it is not the be all end all build option so many players seem to think it is, and it also only really works well for a fairly niche class of builds.

It's a guess, but I think it's a pretty good one.

Career Officer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,716
# 53
08-20-2013, 09:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ussultimatum View Post
Agreed, and it reinforces what I've been saying in this thread.

It is a very good build option for a fairly smaller selection of niche builds.

If it was an across the board huge improvement for any and all ship builds then it would be problematic.
Zactly! For example, look at the station lay-out of 'my' Fleet Excelsior (the rest isn't really fully up-to-date any more, btw):

U.S.S. Sulaco

Except it isn't really 'my' station layout, but that of pretty much everyone else (with maybe a small variation on the sci front). And that's because the single Tact station (with no Universal stations at all) makes it so that every sane build will gravitate towards this, or a very similar, A2B setup. Without A2B, you might as well discharge the Fleet Excelsior, as it would be utterly useless.

But on a Vesta, for instance, with a Commander Science station, an A2B build, while technically still possible, would probably be a fail-fit. You're probably already pushing the A2B envelope on a Tal Shiar Adapted Destroyer, with its Lt. Cmdr. Science station.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 127
# 54
08-21-2013, 01:55 PM
Beyond the OP being hilariously naive, I tend to agree with Virus that the drawbacks are ridiculously minimal anymore. However, as also pointed out by say, USS, the minor choice options they've given to balance the need for Aux/promote other builds aren't nearly enough to balance out the gains A2B provides on ships that need it (read: DA BEAM CRUISERS).

So, I guess I'm saying they'd have to come out with another serious option to counter A2B usage for cruisers in PVE, because it's going to take about 5 years of the current little bits to swing the balance. Or, you know, make content that isn't a dps race for once, and then cruisers can look at being healbots or something.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 12,222
# 55
08-21-2013, 02:06 PM
It still comes down to two things for me:

1) That my KDF Eng drop Aux like my Fed Eng does. That the Aux Drop be consistent.
2) That the second AtB drops like the first does, rather than boost. Which is kind of #1.

Both of those, actually come off as bugs that they don't happen...imho.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 193
# 56
08-22-2013, 01:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hasukurobi View Post
Considering that the BUG can speed tank like a demon and use lots of armor consoles and AUX2Bat then it may well be a majorly OP abuser of this. Especially if it is flown by an Engineer.
Bug would be OP in terms of a glass cannon. It would have to speed tank, which is possible with the right setup, but I see the Lt. cmdr. tac as a wasted boff.

I ONLY need a cmdr. tac to be efficient with a strictly cannon build aux2batt...

tac cmdr: APB3, CSV2, CRF1, TT1

I ONLY need 2 lt eng. boffs to pull off aux2batt...

lt eng: EptW1, aux2batt1
lt eng: EptS1, aux2batt1

at this point, I'd be fine with either a lt cmdr eng for DEM2, or a lt cmdr. sci for HE1, TSS2, and RSP2.

To get the most out of DEM, you need to run DHC, because DEM is figured on base weapon damage, not modified damage.

If I could dump the ens. tac for dual lt. cmdr's I'd love it...tho so would most of us...dual DEM, or DEM and a lt. cmdr sci.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,400
# 57
08-22-2013, 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eardianm View Post
Beyond the OP being hilariously naive, I tend to agree with Virus that the drawbacks are ridiculously minimal anymore.
Hi Gwen,

Well keep in mind Virus is also looking (or maybe mostly looking at) PvP.

So when I disagree with I'm (to a degree) on this issue it's really focused on PvP, where the drawbacks to not having some solid heals become more apparent.



Quote:
Originally Posted by eardianm View Post
However, as also pointed out by say, USS, the minor choice options they've given to balance the need for Aux/promote other builds aren't nearly enough to balance out the gains A2B provides on ships that need it (read: DA BEAM CRUISERS).

So, I guess I'm saying they'd have to come out with another serious option to counter A2B usage for cruisers in PVE, because it's going to take about 5 years of the current little bits to swing the balance. Or, you know, make content that isn't a dps race for once, and then cruisers can look at being healbots or something.
It always comes down to the last point.

The game environment really only caters to one playstyle, and one build focus.

So everyone is maximizing for that singular role.




Create role space for other roles, and suddenly the ships that were...actually designed for that, now have a clear space on a team as opposed to turning what should be a tank or a healer into a semi-glass cannon.

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 07:40 PM.