test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Discussion Thread: Space Metagame Changes

2456714

Comments

  • nicha0nicha0 Member Posts: 1,456 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    This whole thread really seems like a waste. Whats the point? It is unstructured

    Debating the EPtX issues again?
    The team powers?
    A2B issues?
    Fight over science abilities that suck, barely work or don't have a purpose?

    Change all the abilities you want, fact is the game is broken.

    The difference between those that don't know and those that do is astronomical.

    Even brand new level 50s don't bother with non-elite content, the game has been dumbed down so badly you can survive elite content immediately.

    You want to fix space combat? Stop the insane power creep, balance the powers and stop ignoring the broken stuff. Stop catering to the tiny minority PvP crowd, its not working, how much more proof do you need? Find another solution for PvP. And most importantly, make the PvE actually fun.. there hasn't been new fun content in a long time. The first time you play elite content you shouldn't walk in and never die, get all the optionals and never want to play it again.. that is the state of the game. Tweaking abilities isn't going to do anything.

    For all the A2B whiners out there. A2B with doffs has been around a long long time, it hasn't been used mainstream until somewhat recently, and there is a big reason for that. The downside of A2B is your healing power, back when elite STFs had some damage output that mattered, now nothing kills you except warp core breaches, so aux2bat is everywhere. The answer isn't to nerf the abilities, its to fix the lame content that is the norm here.

    Then again if you fixed the lame content you'd risk scaring off dumb people with cheque books so... it won't happen
    Delirium Tremens
    Completed Starbase, Embassy, Mine, Spire and No Win Scenario
    Nothing to do anymore.
    http://dtfleet.com/
    Visit our Youtube channel
  • ursusmorologusursusmorologus Member Posts: 5,328 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Hawk you've already said that you have a lot of changes queued up, so why dont you just tell us what you are planning to do instead of leading us to desired consensus
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,217 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    The only chance to balance the game ruined by pve heroes again. ...facepalm.
    Instead of criticizing fellow players, why not give constructive input about the game?

    Why not suggest a way to balance PvE with PvP so that when one is rebalanced, they both effectively are?

    Why not Actually point out how PvP would be effected by some of this input?
  • sarkonissarkonis Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Hi all,

    In our preparation for Delta Rising, we've been taking a hard look at Space powers and abilities that are underperforming, as well as a select few that dominate the choices players make across the board. The purpose of this thread is for the community to come together and discuss what powers they feel meet either of these two categories, and to talk frankly about any problems with the current metagame of Star Trek Online.

    I'm going to largely be lurking in this thread, but may chime in from time to time. Let's see if we can civilly and rationally discuss what we think are problems, and more importantly why we think those powers are problematic. I want to see what you all care about, and see what changes we can make to address things that you care about while making the game a better game, with a more interesting decision-tree structure that defines your "best action to take at any given time" during space combat.

    Firstly I am ecstatic that you guys are coming to the players for ideas now.

    Ok this is going to be a big post. I'll try to dot point it.


    Firstly, Tac officers and powers:
    • Reduce Tactical officers ability to massively overcap on damage and crit severity.
    • Make all tactical abilitys viable. (Fire on my mark cleared by most commonly used ability in the game)
    • Tac Team should not distribute shield power.
    • Give us more options for Tactical Space Boff Powers.

    Secondly, Science officers.
    • Re-balance Subnucleonic Beam so it is as equally useful in PvE as PvP. (As of now it is far more useful in PvP)
    • Science space skills need more variety. Look at the cool stuff people do in the shows/movies
    • Science is the De-buff, Crowd Control (Wizard/Mage) class. And it's captains powers should reflect that.

    Thirdly, Engineers.
    • The class as a whole needs an overhaul.
    • Engineers are 'tanks/healing' class. Their Captains powers should reflect this.
    • Engineers need to be on par with the other classes.
    • Engineering Space Boff abilities are relatively fine as is. As always, more options is always better.
    • Shield distribution should be an Engineering power.
    • Boarding party needs to be a much bigger threat.

    Set powers and Doffing:
    • Set bonus powers need to be a utility to a build, not a major function. (e.g. Excessive damage from Proton Barrage)
    • Doffs are augmentations not crutches (e.g. Aux2 Batt doffs)
    • The variety is getting good. Give us more doffs.
    • Reduce Doff stacking potential, but give us more Active doff slots. (Allows Build flexibility and versatility)


    The game has a mountain to climb when it comes to space combat re-balancing. But if it is done right, STO could well become the best Star Trek game ever made.

    Here is a compiled list made from years of extensive debate with Fleet mates and STO community members in game.
    • Remember the basics, Star Trek simulates tall ship battles in space, not dogfights.
    • Battles between ships should take minutes, not seconds.
    • Battles should be won by the most skilled captain, not the best geared.
    • Combat needs to be more dynamic (Mostly fighting the AI)
    • The AI needs to be just as capable as a play (Ability wise).
    • Ships need to be far more difficulty to destroy, but also require repairs. (More on this below)
    • Full dynamic ship movement is something that would enrich the experience. (Though already stated to be nigh-impossible in the current engine)
    • Allow power synergies if possible. (Viral Matrix + Tachyon Beam has X effect)
    • Ships need to be more roll filling.


    Issues; there are two major issues that need to be addressed first.

    1) Engine Lag. STO's engine is close to 5 years old now, and while visually it is still one of the best looking MMO's out there, the visuals are coming at a cost now. De-rendering objects and culling view distance are some of the side effects of this.

    2) UI lag. This is far more addressable than the above, the UI is causing a 50% frame drop even on the most powerful Computers. Optimizing the UI could even be a long-term fix for the engine issues.


    Three concepts.

    a) Ship Roles:
    For those of you that have played, of seen Eve. This is a good way to keep a ship in its role. Giving it stats boost in specific area's and even for specific classes.
    For example: An Assault Cruiser may have a 5% bonus damage to all beam weapons and 5% bonus to shield resistance. To add to this, ships could have synergies to Captain classes. A tac officer in the Assault Cruiser could garner 5% to projectiles too, while an Engineer may gain 5% reduction to hull damage, or a science officer could get a 5% bonus to science ability cooldowns.

    b) Tactical Combat:
    This is an old idea that has been swimming around our fleet since season 3. Ship combat needs to be far more strategic. Meaning that specific ships need to have more options on how they combat each other, not just in abilities but with weapons in general. (e.g. Allowing us to focus our fire on a ships systems, not just target a subsystem). Where consistent fire focused on a ships engines, will stack damage on that system, damage is eventually repaired. (Current ship damage model would facilitate this perfectly.)
    Example: Critical hit with a torpedo to shields will cause the shield system to suffer stress, resulting in a -0.05% regeneration rate.


    c) Weapon Range:
    This is a simple one, Weapon classes have differing ranges. Torpedo's should be the longest, with ranges from 0-20km (Based on torp)
    Beams with ranges from 0-15km.
    Dual Beams range from 0-10km.
    Cannons range from 0-10km.
    Dual and Dual Heavy cannons 0-7km.


    Sorry for the massive post. Hope you enjoy reading it.:D:D

    -Sarkonis
  • ankokunekoankokuneko Member Posts: 318 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    1. Why have someone cast it, when you can cast it on yourself. Also does not help in single player environments.
    2. Yes I do. It helps. Alot. Its why its standard issue on every PVE build.
    3. Again, you assume this game's players want team work. Nobody in PVE even listens to Team chat anymore. People in STO are after themselves and only themselves. As a result, players have to watch out for themselves.
    4. Its the truth.

    Uhm tac teams main use is too quadruple your shield facings hit points, not do damage. The damage increase is negligible compared to ApB, ApO or ApA
    jFriX.png
  • mandoknight89mandoknight89 Member Posts: 1,687 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Plasmonic Leech is way too good. Name any other console that gives 8 power to all subsystems during combat. That's Plasmonic Leech without skill investment. When the conflict between Plasmonic Leech and the M.A.C.O. shield was introduced, everyone with any investment in Flow Capacitors just switched to Elite Fleet shields instead. Its extreme cost on the Exchange should be a major hint to its value.


    Also, without Aux2Batt or extremely expensive doffs (their rarity driving up the prices as much as their effectiveness), Cruisers play altogether too passively in game, particularly Engineer-captained cruisers. If Aux2Batt + Technicians has to go, then other low-cost alternatives should be introduced to help cruiser players compete in ways other than "survive all the damage"... particularly since without viable damage options, they don't attract as much damage.
  • xparr15xparr15 Member Posts: 283 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    A note first, i rarely do PvP so most of these ideas are based on a PvE environment.

    Tactical Team and Attack Pattern Omega seem too overused. Boarding Party seems underused.

    Tactical Team: It feels like there are too many benefits compared to the other "team" abilities. Engineering and Science each heal and remove debuffs. Tactical team removes debuffs, boosts weapon damage, and redistributes shields. A potential fix to this might be to have redistribute shields be a separate ability. It could potentially fill the 3rd ensign tactical slot that cannon-only ships sometimes have.

    Attack Pattern Omega: Feels like a jack-of-all-trades ability. It improves attack, defense, boosts movement, and makes you immune to movement debuffs. This seems like it has too many benefits for 1 ability.

    It also doesn't make sense to me that Attack Pattern Alpha can stack with other attack patterns. They should all be mutually exclusive.

    Boarding Party: There just doesn't seem to be any use for boarding party. The crew mechanics on it don't make an impact and the benefits just aren't very good. The idea is really good and I'd love to see it reworked but it doesn't feel competitive right now.

    These are all of my ideas right now. I might post some more later if I think of anything.
  • notrealednanotrealedna Member Posts: 1,028
    edited August 2014
    orangeitis wrote: »
    Instead of criticizing fellow players, why not give constructive input about the game?

    Why not suggest a way to balance PvE with PvP so that when one is rebalanced, they both effectively are?

    Why not Actually point out how PvP would be effected by some of this input?

    I already said ....balance the game as if PvE is not in game.

    ok lets say you need TT in pve.Lets say if you dont have it you die....now who said you should not die in pve?If you cant use tt or no one casts it on you ,you can always use evasive and run away to counter.....thats what people in pvp do.Thats what makes the game great...having everything on a ship is not fun .

    PvP is all about team work.You can't make the game to be 1v1 because you will end up with zombie tanks fighting eachother.If you take away teamwork then you get pvp players to QQ as seen with BO and other stuffs that turns the average player in a kirk that needs no team and plays on his own.
  • adjudicatorhawkadjudicatorhawk Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Generally, I'm seeing a lot of strongly held feelings or opinions, but very little reasoning or rationale provided behind posts. Please try to focus more on why you feel what you feel, as it's very difficult to sort through valid and invalid points without explanatory rationale.
    Jeff "Adjudicator Hawk" Hamilton
    Systems Designer - Cryptic Studios
    Twitter: @JeffAHamilton
  • sirboulevardsirboulevard Member Posts: 716 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    I already said ....balance the game as if PvE is not in game.

    ok lets say you need TT in pve.Lets say if you dont have it you die....now who said you should not die in pve?If you cant use tt or no one casts it on you ,you can always use evasive and run away to counter.....thats what people in pvp do.Thats what makes the game great...having everything on a ship is not fun .

    PvP is all about team work.You can't make the game to be 1v1 because you will end up with zombie tanks fighting eachother.If you take away teamwork then you get pvp players to QQ as seen with BO and other stuffs that turns the average player in a kirk that needs no team and plays on his own.

    That doesnt help the majority of STO players who are PVE-oriented. Also there are powers that are only viable in PVE and some that are only viable in PVP. You can't just say "focus on PVP balance only!" and then watch as it fs up PVE. As a PVPer you have to admit, when they balance for PVE-only you guys get screwed over. If you balance for PVP only, PVE will get screwed over and thats alot more people Cryptic risks losing. Better to find a balance.

    Personally I would like powers to work differently in PVE and PVP if that was possible.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    TRIBBLE Hydra! Hail Janeway!
  • zathri83zathri83 Member Posts: 514 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Balance the game as if pvp is not in the game. Please.
  • welcome2earfwelcome2earf Member Posts: 1,737 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Tac Team: Is there any reason to use anything more than Tac Team 1? I am against removing the shield dist component of it. But if you are dead set on it, consider adding it back in for TT2, and perhaps a 3rd, albeit small buff/action for TT3? Could help make builds more interesting.

    Aceton Beam: Needs a serious Buff to be improved.

    Tachyon Beam: Worthless. I mean seriously guys.....even with maxed out flow caps you're barely keeping up with regen.

    Scramble Sensors: Another victim of a PvP-inspired nerf. It needs a buff. Longer duration, make it more sensitive to Aux levels, reduce the immunity.

    Energy Syphon: Lol. Nerfed to nothingness. It needs love.

    Jam Sensors: AKA "The Poor Man's Cloak". Does anyone even use this?

    All Target subsystems: They should be close to 100% guarantee of a shutdown, but with perhaps a limited duration based on various stats on the target.


    Mine Dispersal Patterns:
    This should also reduce threat AND increase HP or defense of deployed mines, simply due to the fact they are nigh-useless without UBER-planning, particularly in a B:faW environment.


    I'm just spit-balling here. I'm at work so I'll post something more detailed downthread. If you'll read it, I'll write it, Hawk. :)
    T93uSC8.jpg
  • sarkonissarkonis Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Generally, I'm seeing a lot of strongly held feelings or opinions, but very little reasoning or rationale provided behind posts. Please try to focus more on why you feel what you feel, as it's very difficult to sort through valid and invalid points without explanatory rationale.

    I made mine as info easy as possible. These are the views of the player base. Try to read between the lines as well.

    While I put some ideas at the bottom. I outlined specific strengths and weaknesses higher up.
  • freenos85freenos85 Member Posts: 434 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Generally, I'm seeing a lot of strongly held feelings or opinions, but very little reasoning or rationale provided behind posts. Please try to focus more on why you feel what you feel, as it's very difficult to sort through valid and invalid points without explanatory rationale.

    Could you pick and choose some points that sound interesting to you/ need further explanations?

    I can edit my post on page 2 even further, but this would make it into a wall of text.
  • notrealednanotrealedna Member Posts: 1,028
    edited August 2014
    Generally, I'm seeing a lot of strongly held feelings or opinions, but very little reasoning or rationale provided behind posts. Please try to focus more on why you feel what you feel, as it's very difficult to sort through valid and invalid points without explanatory rationale.

    you realize that you will get most feedback only from pve people which dont really understand how the game works and only complain about what annoys them not about a real balance problem.I say allow pve people to use voldy ...they already want all in 1 so allow them to use all boff powers in pve and keep the game for pvp.Ive yet to see a npc on the forums crying about power creep or not fair powers.
  • sarkonissarkonis Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    you realize that you will get most feedback only from pve people which dont really understand how the game works and only complain about what annoys them not about a real balance problem.I say allow pve people to use voldy ...they already want all in 1 so allow them to use all boff powers in pve and keep the game for pvp.Ive yet to see a npc on the forums crying about power creep or not fair powers.



    Thats why I gave as much constructive feedback as possible.

    I have a feeling this is 'venting' thread. Something where players are going to vent thinking they can help change something. This has happened before, and it lead to nothing. I am hoping this time is different. It's an opportunity for Hawk and co to prove themselves better then those before.
  • toppa84toppa84 Member Posts: 7 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Generally, I'm seeing a lot of strongly held feelings or opinions, but very little reasoning or rationale provided behind posts. Please try to focus more on why you feel what you feel, as it's very difficult to sort through valid and invalid points without explanatory rationale.


    good point hawk, lets see if i could provide some scenarios

    tac captain powers buffing feed-back pulse

    imagine fighting someone who just tanks up and lets you kill yourself, maybe u can stop firing for abit but often the damage gets done far too quickly

    aux2battery use

    like EVERYONE u know in game uses a2b.....spams 2 of every ability, those who say it comes at cost of healing?? 2 copies of engineering team anyone ??? WHERE IS THE ORIGINALITY IN THE BUILDS????

    1 shotting/vaping

    i dont think this really needs an explanation, or perhaps that battlecloak cooldown is far too short so the 1 shotters just run away and are safe after afew seconds only to come back at you again with impunity

    the ram doff

    when tac captains can buff a ram that can do up to 200k critical hit through shields and take no damage from it, this needs a rebalance

    subnuc

    the top pvp teams in the game run 2x tacs in either vape or speed tank format and 3x mega tanky sci healboats that can throw out subnuc to garantee kills, they have stated that the engineer class is now redundant in pvp

    more to come soon
  • sarkonissarkonis Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Here is a pro-tip.

    http://gaming.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/starfleetcommand3/tc-screenshots/sfc3-17.jpg

    This was the best tactical space combat I have even experienced.

    Be inspired cryptic! An Expansion is a good place for change. And change is good.
  • sarkonissarkonis Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    toppa84 wrote: »
    good point hawk

    It is not a good point. I have seen plenty of people explaining why they think something is how it is, and how it should be.

    I'm going to largely be lurking in this thread, but may chime in from time to time. Let's see if we can civilly and rationally discuss what we think are problems, and more importantly why we think those powers are problematic.


    He basically got exactly this, then said it was peoples opinions... Of cause it is, we were asked what we think about something.
  • amosov78amosov78 Member Posts: 1,486 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    I'd say that Science Team should distribute shields rather than Tactical Team, but that'll just make that ability more useful than it already is.

    Saying that, shield abilities seem unusually split between Engineering and Science already, it'd make more sense for Science to buff shield resistances, and Engineering to supply power to the shields, like EPtS currently does, and increasing the shield power/regeneration levels. I'd say if you're keeping the general idea of it, then the redistribution of shields should probably be added to EPtS instead.

    In STO, at least, gravitons generally fall under science based abilities, so it'd make sense for them to deal with shield resistances, rather than healing also be centered around science abilities.

    Another example of science helping to increase shield resistance can be found in the Voyager episode "Unforgettable", where they used the baryon sensors to diminish the effects of proton beam fire against the shields: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Proton_beam
    U.S.S. Endeavour NCC-71895 - Nebula-class
    Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
    Dedication Plaque: "Nil Intentatum Reliquit"
  • adjudicatorhawkadjudicatorhawk Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Hawk you've already said that you have a lot of changes queued up, so why dont you just tell us what you are planning to do instead of leading us to desired consensus

    It's still useful to me to see what players feel strongly about. Even if I don't necessarily agree with them about what the problem specifically is, or about what the best solution for it is, players are very very good at speaking up when they feel something is "off", for lack of a better word.
    Jeff "Adjudicator Hawk" Hamilton
    Systems Designer - Cryptic Studios
    Twitter: @JeffAHamilton
  • futurepastnowfuturepastnow Member Posts: 3,649 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Space:

    Tactical- It's true that some tac powers "dominate", but truthfully I don't feel many adjustments need to be made here; if anything, I'd try to make the rank II and III versions of Tactical Team more useful choices, and perhaps increase the disable chances of Subsystem Targeting powers.

    Engineering- I saw Aceton Beam mentioned. It needs a shorter CD or a better effect or both. Aux to Dampeners- there's no rank III; perhaps rank II could be made III, and rank I added at the Ensign level? This would address the lack of good Ensign powers. The same could be done to Aux to Battery, though I doubt you'd want to :P

    Science- Shield drain effects of Tachyon Beam and CPB are both really weak on NPCs. And the disable from PSW is very hard to notice, as is the drain of Tyken's. I suspect this is just a player perception issue... but maybe sci powers would benefit from being made much stronger against NPCs than against players? I know you guys don't want to do that, but it may be time to consider it. Photonic Officer also feels like it has a far longer CD than needed, even (or especially) with two copies.

    Ground: With the recent kit revamp, I don't feel there are too many bad modules. But perhaps a few need some help.

    Tactical- Battle Strategies feels a bit lackluster, I'd say. So do the stun powers, like Stun Grenade and Smoke Grenade, at least in PvE. Actually, what I really think there is, any effect that is broken by damage sucks. This is going to be a theme for Science, I suspect.

    Engineering- Quick Fix comes to mind. Who uses it? No one, because it heals fabrications, and fabrications are disposable. And while I am loathe to report things I like, I'll note that Seeker Drone's duration is the same as its CD, giving it 100% uptime. Intended?

    Science- Any hold that is broken by damage sucks. No exceptions. Electrogravitic, Stasis Field, Anesthezine. The Engineer's hold- Fuse Armor- is not broken by damage, so why are sci and tac holds? There's no point in holding an enemy unless you're going to immediately attack it. Other sci powers are all pretty good, I think.
  • bareelbareel Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    *Disclaimer: PvE Perspective

    Singular Options

    Their is only one ability that automatically redistributes shields in the game, Tactical Team. This makes it such a powerful ability that you almost always want to have it. I would suggest allowing Transfer Shield Strength to also have this ability to expand build options and to increase the utility of an ability that, with the recent changes to science team, is no longer all that great.

    Secondly some debuffs can only be reliably removed/mitigated by one boff ability. Boarding parties/assimilate ship is one of those. Currently only tactical team removes it and it is such a crippling debuff that it should have more options for removal. I do not know what would be a good fit for this. Yes their is a doff that gives TSS a chance to remove it but the debuff puts TSS on cooldown making it a bad option.

    Polarize Hull is also lacking at the moment when compared to other options that provide much more utility. I would increase the things it clears, possibly allow it to remove tactical resistance debuffs and/or let it make you immune to gravity wells and the like? Not sure.

    Sub nuke is another one of those debuffs that if you don't have science team is really crippling. Perhaps some engineering defensive ability could be allowed to clear it as well.

    The reason I do not like this is because it makes some boff abilities feel as if they are required for me to use unless I want to become frustrated and annoyed. That limits my options when deciding how to set my ship builds up. I know I don't need those abilities but when they make things so much easier I feel like an idiot not to use them.

    Under Performers
    Aceton Beam does not deal enough damage nor is the debuff strong enough to justify such a high slot on a two minute cool down especially when it only effects a single target. It either needs a much shorter cool down or should be redesigned as a 'boss killer' ability. Perhaps allowing it to deal a % of enemy health damage? Increase bleedthrew damage to target? I dunno. When I use the highest rank boff ability I have on my ship and I cannot even notice it's effect and then it has a long cooldown their is a problem.

    Boarding Parties needs a complete redesign. Or removed. The last time I tried to make build around this the shuttles almost always died to AOE or I couldn't even launch them because of how poorly designed the crew mechanic is.

    Tachyon Beam provides far too little effective 'damage' because of how it scales. I've only said this a few dozen times but please add some % component to allow it to be effective in PvE without making it OP in PvP such as letting it reduce the target's shield resistance.

    Viral Matrix if the NPC is worth using it on, it is most likely immune.
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,217 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    bareel wrote: »
    Boarding Parties needs a complete redesign. Or removed. The last time I tried to make build around this the shuttles almost always died to AOE or I couldn't even launch them because of how poorly designed the crew mechanic is.
    Might be a good time to remind the devs of my super-awesome crewman system suggestions.

    Edit: Link is to a dead thread. Please do not post in it.
    I already said ....balance the game as if PvE is not in game.

    ok lets say you need TT in pve.Lets say if you dont have it you die....now who said you should not die in pve?If you cant use tt or no one casts it on you ,you can always use evasive and run away to counter.....thats what people in pvp do.Thats what makes the game great...having everything on a ship is not fun .

    PvP is all about team work.You can't make the game to be 1v1 because you will end up with zombie tanks fighting eachother.If you take away teamwork then you get pvp players to QQ as seen with BO and other stuffs that turns the average player in a kirk that needs no team and plays on his own.
    I disagree that 'running away' should be encouraged. Though I wouldn't mind TT's shield effect being totally removed.
  • notrealednanotrealedna Member Posts: 1,028
    edited August 2014
    EWP and any other gas particle thing should not exist since the game engine can't display them .

    orangeitis wrote: »
    I disagree that 'running away' should be encouraged. Though I wouldn't mind TT's shield effect being totally removed.

    and everyone disagrees with what you said but they also give reasons .
  • sinn74sinn74 Member Posts: 1,143 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Hi all,

    In our preparation for Delta Rising, we've been taking a hard look at Space powers and abilities that are underperforming, as well as a select few that dominate the choices players make across the board. The purpose of this thread is for the community to come together and discuss what powers they feel meet either of these two categories, and to talk frankly about any problems with the current metagame of Star Trek Online.

    I'm going to largely be lurking in this thread, but may chime in from time to time. Let's see if we can civilly and rationally discuss what we think are problems, and more importantly why we think those powers are problematic. I want to see what you all care about, and see what changes we can make to address things that you care about while making the game a better game, with a more interesting decision-tree structure that defines your "best action to take at any given time" during space combat.

    It's fairly easy to see which powers are largely (over)used and which ones are avoided by looking at any "How is my build" thread. BOFF abilities that are normally "mandatory" to not only use, but double-up on like FAW and TT obviously outperform other options, which leads to a "cookie cutter" or "LOL gimp" attitude. Really, why target subsystems if FAW is obviously better?

    1. I've seen it proposed that cannon/beam buffs like FAW and CSV share a common skill. One slot that gives you an option other than "all cannons" or "beam boat" would be a good thing, no? Choose what you like, without a severe performance penalty.

    2. I'm sure this would be wildly unpopular, but one copy of any given skill slotted maximum. You choose which level you'd like. That way, you can't just lean on a few skills which may or may not be "overpowered." And it not only varies builds, but makes you prioritize more than you do currently. Of course, if now more people may be forced to take other things, make them more useful.

    3. Multiple BOFF stacking is also along those lines. Pick x skill, and buff it to maximum...because it's just easier that way. Why bother with anything else, if you can just take what works best, and buff it even further?

    Mechanically, there are others way more suited to give specific examples. But hearing the same advice and seeing the same builds constantly whilst looking down upon any deviation is a bit much.

    tl/dr: allow build variations without penalizing effectiveness (to an extent) and encourage a more creative attempt to builds than "I copied this from some web site."
  • galacticgoogalacticgoo Member Posts: 30 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    The Fighter AI needs some TLC.

    They act like a moth attracted to the flame (or in this case a Warp Core Breach). The Logic should be

    If Warp Core Breach then get away!

    Here’s my suggestion. On top of the little pet UI, put a slider with 0 to 10 and call it say TMin (target min distance). The AI would never get closer to their target than the distance set on the TMin slider. With the distance from target setting the amount of damage they do, it would allow the Players use different play styles. Send them in close for more damage and risk getting caught in a warp core breach and damaged or destroyed or have them standoff at a safe distance but do less damage.

    Another AI Fighter change would be to allow players to set the launch direction. There have been times when my fighters have launched forward right into a warp core breach and instantly destroyed. With an escort carrier, you’ll be in close 3-4 k out for max damage, so you really don’t want your fighters launching forward and becoming a poor man’s torpedo (which makes it hard to recruit new fighter pilots back at the Recruitment center ;-)

    One last Ai Fighter addition. A “launch all” button with a 10 min cool down. The US Airforce does this (it’s called a Flush) with a Squadron of B-52’s and their support aircraft taking off every 15 seconds. No reason a futuristic starship wouldn’t have the same ability.
  • bareelbareel Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    I just wanted to add something, the chart is slightly dated but still actually accurate for PvE. I would say beam overload might not belong on it. Might.

    http://imgur.com/JO21xlm

    Sadly that is what nearly all my effective builds run. The more effective ones are those that stick closer to that chart and with tactical captains in the big chair.

    I want more options. I want a reason to slot other boff abilities. The auto crit of beam overload, the auto hit of torpedo spread, the EPtX secondary buffs, those all create compelling reasons to use them.

    Aceton beam, tachyon beam, charged particle burst, photonic shockwave, they are all mathematically bad choices in nearly all situations to use for destroying the target when compared to other options. That is why they are bad, I shouldn't be able to make a direct mathematical comparison because when I can one will always win. They need a compelling reason to use.

    Finally NPC immunity/resistance to most boff abilities with long cool downs that are only useful in PvE as a 'boss killer' instead make them useless. Viral Matrix.
  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,217 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Oh and I forgot to mention. Separated ship sections need more functionality and usefulness. As it is now, consoles like the Multi-Vector Assault Module and Saucer Separation are mainly used for better turn rate, ignoring the separated ship sections completely. Good fixes for this problem would be to give the ship sections better AI, give them a more diverse move pool, and/or making them more durable. Also, if possible/plausible, give them a Team-like UI.
    and everyone disagrees with what you said but they also give reasons .
    You could ask politely, you know.
  • hyndisfoxhyndisfox Member Posts: 2 Arc User
    edited August 2014
    Long time player, but never bothered to actually post on the forums.

    I'm just going to address one topic here, and that is Aux2bat. This worries me greatly.

    My concerns, as an engineer captain, is that with all of this talk of Aux2Bat being nerfed I'm going to end up playing an extremely passive role in game. Passive isn't fun. Just sitting there autoattacking? Not fun. Sure, I might be indestructible, but if I'm a boring, indestructible brick that autoattacks all day long this is not a fun or compelling form of gameplay.

    In my view, the reason why Aux2Bat is so popular is that it effectively doubles the numbers of useful abilities a cruiser has. It gives a cruiser options. Options are good and fun. This is the primary reason why Aux2Bat is so common for cruisers. The power overcapping thing from transferring auxiliary power to other systems isn't why people use Aux2Bat.

    A cruiser typically only has 2-3 tactical abilities. 1 of them will always be tactical team due to it being so very useful. This leaves 1-2 other tactical abilities. There isn't much you can do with that. If you want to keep FaW going (BO is still useless in PvE) then you either need two copies of FaW, or you need Aux2Bat. If you go the Aux2Bat route then you have an extra tactical ability free for something else. Torpedo spread? Attack Pattern Beta? You have options, and options are good.

    Same deal with cruisers who have a Lt Com science post. A cruiser only has 1 at most, so it needs to make the most of it. This means the cruiser needs to reduce cooldowns on these abilities. Aux2Bat does it.

    The power transfer bonus of Aux2Bat is, in my opinion, a secondary perk for this ability. Its nice, but its not the entire point of Aux2Bat which is to give cruisers some options.

    Autoattacking is boring. Engineering BOFF abilities are boring. They just buff things or repair things. They don't actually do anything. They don't reach out and hurt something. They don't make anything explode. They don't cripple, stun, or confuse enemies. They just silently buff things.

    Cruisers need some method to do more active stuff. They need more than 1-2 free tactical spots, which is why Aux2Bat is so commonly used. This doubles this number up, so its more like 2-4 free tactical spots. (4-6 if we're counting Tactical Team which is a must-have).

    If Aux2Bat is nerfed to the ground then cruisers are gonna get really, really boring. A mighty Galaxy class ship, the same class as one of the most famous ships in Starfleet, being a boring, dumb brick to fly? No fun at all.

    Rather than nerfing Aux2Bat for cruisers, instead give more options to reduce cooldowns. Maybe have Aux2Sif also perform the same cooldown reduction as Aux2Bat does by modifing the DOFF's so they work off of Aux2Sif as well. Or even switch it up entirely. Make DOFF's give no benefit to Aux2Bat, but instead they give the cooldown reduction to Aux2Sif. That way cooldown reduction and massive power boosts are on separate abilities. But importantly, this still leaves cruisers options and prevents cruisers from being boring.

    A game that is boring is no good at all. You don't want to make the game boring, or to reduce cruisers to autoattacking bricks.

    Furthermore, along these lines of allowing cruisers to do stuff, I also suggest the merging of energy weapon abilities. Let fire at will effect beams and cannons. Let rapid fire effect beams and cannons. This gives a cruiser more options for loadouts.

    Spread volley could be left unique to cannons, and beam overload could be left unique to beams, but beam overload still needs some love. I don't have any suggestions on these abilities.
Sign In or Register to comment.