test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Very small suggested change to make this game Star Trek instead of Pewpewpew Boosh bish
zkyleach
Member Posts: 21 Arc User
Introduction/premise, skip to suggestion if you don't care to read this:
Let's face it, the crit stacking DPS builds are insane. They have tipped the game so heavily in favor of tactical builds that it's rare you ever see the iconic saucer-and-nacelles of a starfleet design on anyone over rank 60.
A science build is still viable even though it can't hope to match the insane DPS output of a crit build. I can get around 60-80k DPS with my main toon (variability based on enemy type and loadout and resistance to my build). For the most part my science ships (intrepid,multi-mission) look more-or-less like the iconic Starfleet design. Other science ships I use (Intel, etc...) do not.
Unfortunately that still leaves about 85% of the starfleet ships useless. It doesn't matter how much resistance you stack or how much antiproton or torpedo crit you cram into any cruiser build you're going to get toasted against even a mediocre DPS build in PvP. In PvE you're probably not going to have any problems with survivability but that's only because you aren't doing enough DPS to draw all the enemy fire at you. If you could/did you can probably last longer than most escorts but just barely because they have continuous healing from all kinds of things (protomatter, lvl2 reputation traits, genetic engineering traits, etc...) that have NOTHING TO DO WITH STAR TREK.
So 85% of the iconic Star Trek design ships are unable to keep up in DPS, Science or HEALING!! They're just... support ships. Even as support ships they're pathetic though because you have a 10km range (crossed in .5 seconds by vape builds) and you're the slowest thing in space. You also can't heal half so much as the magic woo science modules added to the game.
What to do about this? The player base would riot if you took away their magic toys. Also these are cruisers, not escorts or science ships so they shouldn't be straight weapon DPS or heavy science. They are much bigger and much slower (especially turning) than the other classes so perhaps making use of the crew and space should be the solution.
Suggested change
Therefore I suggest that all T5-U and higher engineering ships be given 3 additional modules depending on their design. For dreadnought-class ships they should also get 2 additional side-mounted broadside weapon bays (bringing their total to 10 weapon slots). These slots should be capable of mounting cannons and dual cannons and have their firing arcs to port and starboard.
The modules should be largely engineering although 1 science slot may not be amiss for some classes. The modules should either be engineering or a mixture of engineering and universal in most cases.
We already know that stacking cool modules isn't going to bring you close to matching a DPS build but it does greatly increase you power and/or survivability and that's exactly what a dreadnought with all it's crew and size should be able to do: lots of different things.
Anyhow, I don't see this being a huge code change but I do see it being a really good way to encourage versatile builds using the cruiser and dreadnought class iconic Star Trek ships.
Thanks for taking the time to read my 0.02$
-SkyLeach
Let's face it, the crit stacking DPS builds are insane. They have tipped the game so heavily in favor of tactical builds that it's rare you ever see the iconic saucer-and-nacelles of a starfleet design on anyone over rank 60.
A science build is still viable even though it can't hope to match the insane DPS output of a crit build. I can get around 60-80k DPS with my main toon (variability based on enemy type and loadout and resistance to my build). For the most part my science ships (intrepid,multi-mission) look more-or-less like the iconic Starfleet design. Other science ships I use (Intel, etc...) do not.
Unfortunately that still leaves about 85% of the starfleet ships useless. It doesn't matter how much resistance you stack or how much antiproton or torpedo crit you cram into any cruiser build you're going to get toasted against even a mediocre DPS build in PvP. In PvE you're probably not going to have any problems with survivability but that's only because you aren't doing enough DPS to draw all the enemy fire at you. If you could/did you can probably last longer than most escorts but just barely because they have continuous healing from all kinds of things (protomatter, lvl2 reputation traits, genetic engineering traits, etc...) that have NOTHING TO DO WITH STAR TREK.
So 85% of the iconic Star Trek design ships are unable to keep up in DPS, Science or HEALING!! They're just... support ships. Even as support ships they're pathetic though because you have a 10km range (crossed in .5 seconds by vape builds) and you're the slowest thing in space. You also can't heal half so much as the magic woo science modules added to the game.
What to do about this? The player base would riot if you took away their magic toys. Also these are cruisers, not escorts or science ships so they shouldn't be straight weapon DPS or heavy science. They are much bigger and much slower (especially turning) than the other classes so perhaps making use of the crew and space should be the solution.
Suggested change
Therefore I suggest that all T5-U and higher engineering ships be given 3 additional modules depending on their design. For dreadnought-class ships they should also get 2 additional side-mounted broadside weapon bays (bringing their total to 10 weapon slots). These slots should be capable of mounting cannons and dual cannons and have their firing arcs to port and starboard.
The modules should be largely engineering although 1 science slot may not be amiss for some classes. The modules should either be engineering or a mixture of engineering and universal in most cases.
We already know that stacking cool modules isn't going to bring you close to matching a DPS build but it does greatly increase you power and/or survivability and that's exactly what a dreadnought with all it's crew and size should be able to do: lots of different things.
Anyhow, I don't see this being a huge code change but I do see it being a really good way to encourage versatile builds using the cruiser and dreadnought class iconic Star Trek ships.
Thanks for taking the time to read my 0.02$
-SkyLeach
0
Comments
On the other hand, this is such a low priority, compared to the rest of the emergency fixes and implementations that it wouldn't make it too far.
You do have a point that critical stacking is the way to do, but all classes and all builds can stack critical buffs and benefit from them.
Escorts, raiders - Experimental weapons.
Cruisers and heavy ships - Command auras.
Science ships - Sensor Analysis and Secondary Deflector.
Guess these are the most you can get out of customization for ship classes up to this point without breaking the game at the actual point.
Thanks for ignoring 90% of what I said to echo your feelings about things that had nothing whatever to do with my post!
I would respond with "if this kind of change requires spaghetti code then these devs aren't doing their jobs right" but since I've been playing the game for nearly a decade I already know these devs have problems solving otherwise run-of-the-mill development issues.
There is nothing run-of-the mill when it comes to Star Trek Online code. Also, they have a small dev team as it is and still hiring some people for positions to help with STO and their other games. Though I do wish there was less strict deadlines and more wait to make sure that the final release is as bug-free as possible.
Yet another example of why reading comprehension metrics show a nearly 40% decline over the past two decades.
I could point out all the ways in which you miss-read my post, but I can't do it without typing which requires reading which you've already demonstrated a lack of proficiency in. Quid-pro-quo, nada y pues nada y pues nada.
I haven't seen the code so I can't comment directly on it. I agree that the content release schedule has got to be a bear.
Why are you trying to create an argument that does not (and has never) existed in this thread? Your ability to read isn't in question, your ability to understand what you read is clearly the problem. I never claimed canon ships were useless since that would include the defiant and intrepid which aren't useless. Your claim that science ships are king in PvP is ludicrous since you can have 100% control immunity with a competition build and stack crith to virtually one-shot a science ship. Even so, that wasn't even a topic of discussion. You took it out of context, added a bunch of personal baggage to it and presented it as a primary premise all of which serves no purpose except to straw man your own soap box.
I'm not complaining about cruisers not being king of DPS. I didn't suggest giving cruisers side-mounted cannons. I never brought up canon at all, you did.
As I've already said, you have entirely missed the point of my post and failed to grasp most of the details as well.
We should not get "extra" consoles because we have it tough in PvP. Cause those consoles would carry over into PvE, why should we get special treatment just because in one small section of the game we have issues keeping up. What about those escort flyers who aren't "vapers" and go a different route. Should they in a sense get "punished" for the actions of a small subset who might fly the same class of starship as them?
Plus you state that "this wont be a huge code change" Let me be blunt, neither yourself, me, cold (sorry needed an example
You don't know me or my experience and yet you presume to know what I am and am not capable of inferring from decades of experience? Most of the changes specified already exist in the game. The one exception is the firing arc, which could have a great deal more code tied around it than could be guessed at from the outside. Ships already have varying numbers of modules so changing the number (at least up to or close to numbers already in-game) would merely use pre-existing, tested and production-ready code. I suppose that it's possible someone hard-coded each ship's modules but given the number of ships in the game and the rapidity that new classes have been added in the past that would seem highly unlikely due to the fact that it would present issue-creep and support nightmare scenarios.
Just because one doesn't know the details of a particular codebase doesn't mean one can't make inferences based on existing functionality and releases. We call these estimates or educated guesses. Could I be wrong? Of course. I made allowances when I said "shouldn't" instead of "certainly" or "guarantee" or anything else with a level of certitude that would be unwarranted.
I'm nearly certain there are parts of the codebase that do strange things and are difficult to maintain. I've never seen an aged project that didn't have TRIBBLE portions. I'm also nearly certain that a regularly re-used chunk of central code isn't going to be too horrifically unmaintainable or else the entire project would have ground to a halt long ago. Therefore: these changes shouldn't require a great deal of effort in code. As much as it bothers a disconcerting number of people to admit: age and experience do yield some advantages when it comes to estimates.
For some reason, perhaps because I'm a parent and can't stand to see a kid fall apart in public, I feel compelled to make one last attempt to help you.
You bypassed my direct points with generalities (cruiser != dreadnought), you couldn't read PvP contrasted against PvE without losing your train of thought and focusing on one, pvp (factually incorrectly, out of context with personal baggage heavily skewing your opinions), rather than the contrast. You can't seem to grasp any of the nuance of a complex argument.
I made one attempt to do a point-by-point rebuttal of your rantings and it failed (predictably) as you completely bypassed each considered point of the argument in order to restate your premise as though there were no points at all. You aren't a media corporation, you aren't pounding a talking point into the public's head and conveniently ignoring points that disprove your candidate's or political affiliation's agenda. You're an individual in a forum meant for considered and open-minded discussion of potential changes and/or improvements to a video game.
Your actions undermine adult conversation and remove any chance of things getting better. If you like the game, you should change your approach because right now you're just hurting the entire community by being a proselytizing fool instead of actually participating in two-way discussions.
Usually lemon-salty PvP people who cry each time they can't buff-decloak-vape due to any game mechanic that counters the patient-twitchy tactic of these bop fliers.
As much as diversity and all kinds of customization add to the flavor, I think it's for the best of the game to let them first polish up the product, then add further branches to it.
We just got this endeavor system - Can't wait to hear the boppers crying here again on how "OP is this because I can't solo vape it"...