The Phase Shift seems alright on paper, but -12 aux per second... ouch. If you depend on heal skills which require aux to use, and phase shift drains your aux... even in phase shift you won't get much healing done probably. Would have to see how that'd work on Tribble me guesses.
This number is highly subject to more testing both internally and when it appears on Tribble. We've had some people who think the Phase Shift will be useless, others who think it will be overpowered. The amount of Aux drain will affect the ability of the Kar'fi to heal while phased, so that impacts the above considerably.
In other words, if as testing goes on we think Phase Shift is too powerful it means the Aux drain will likely stay at -12/sec, but if it feels too weak, then we will probably drop the Aux drain as appropriate.
Personally i think the klingons have been dealt enouh nerfs in the ship department and this post is an insult. I dont see why you feel the need to take action against klingon ship and comes back to my suspicion the cryptic place more priority on bad feedback from complainers than those who actually play the game. All i can say is im disappointed and will seriously consider not bothering with STO should meaningless stupid changes get pushed through.
Okay, so... fighter spam might be cut down by limiting the fighters able to be launched, but in turn make each individual fighter that is out to be far more effective than fighters currently are.
They're going to address ui/control issues.
The Vo'Quv is being left alone for the moment, at least until they see feedback regarding it and the FaW changes and the rebalancing of fighters.
The Kar'Fi may gain a second hangar bay, a new science console that grants a brand new ability never before seen, and may get a maneuverability buff to the current fighters so they'll kamikaze attack more easily.
I'm not sure where in Heretic's post you're seeing an insulting post that proposes a nerf storm of epic proportions, but it could be that I'm just blind.
Could you point out specifics as to what is actually getting nerfed and is slapping players in the faces? Because after reading his post, I see buffs and improvements. Not nerfs.
I would love to see the carrier become a true carrier. For the Voquv heaver shield and hull (not much but just a little bit more), fewer weapons (two forward and two aft and restrict them to turrets and mines only) more hangers (four total). Increase the target acquisition range from 15 to 20 to give the pets time to engage the target. Keep the pets current stats and numbers. Keep the current Aux tied to hangers and keep the current turn rate. A carrier should be able to deploy a small fleet of ships and use them as its primary attack.
For the Karfi I like the Science console with Phase Shift and increasing the maneuverability of the fighters add in sensor scan to give it more teeth and make it more offensive in nature.
Over all any carrier should be able to launch pets when not in combat and they should stay after combat (just like the MVAM Prometheus pets do now). The pet controls really need an overhaul. They should have some basic commands for them like attack, defend/repair, follow, aggressive, defensive, and passive.
The Battle Carrier is a hybrid of Tac and Science. IMHO It should not have as many hangers as the regular Carrier because hybrids are never meant to be as good as a more specialized ship. If you're going to have a console power, it is best to allow it for both Carriers and not just one. With a lack of a "Science Carrier" at LG, the Carrier remains the only ship for a player who wants to have subsystem targeting and pets in one ship. That's my opinion on the proposed changes.
Oh yea, and the ship itself needs an increase to damage output. Either add more weapon slots or give it Sensor Analysis like the science ships and allow pets to stack the stacks because of really poor turning, because it all I'm hearing is the pets do the majority of the damage. Oh and to that end, the pets should be permanent until killed or unsummoned like other ships with similar features. The fact that you're forcing people who fly this to go into fights basically naked is not good. Or you're going to give the hybrid a second bay, the regular should get a third or even 2 more to compensate.
I'm not sure where in Heretic's post you're seeing an insulting post that proposes a nerf storm of epic proportions, but it could be that I'm just blind.
Could you point out specifics as to what is actually getting nerfed and is slapping players in the faces? Because after reading his post, I see buffs and improvements. Not nerfs.
There are, certainly, not intended to be any nerfs to either the Vo'quv or the Kar'fi in anything that was proposed. The reduction in waves is counterbalanced by an increase in offensive and defensive power for individual ships with the exception of the Kar'fi's frigates, since it would be gaining a second hanger bay.
There are, certainly, not intended to be any nerfs to either the Vo'quv or the Kar'fi in anything that was proposed. The reduction in waves is counterbalanced by an increase in offensive and defensive power for individual ships with the exception of the Kar'fi's frigates, since it would be gaining a second hanger bay.
Yes, for the Voquv you really could just have the dps (4 ships) 1 fighter w/ less shields/armor but faster and more DPS than the BOP).
For the Karfi though, one fighter that does a alot of damage (3X as much) when it shoulder rolls into its victim?
There are, certainly, not intended to be any nerfs to either the Vo'quv or the Kar'fi in anything that was proposed. The reduction in waves is counterbalanced by an increase in offensive and defensive power for individual ships with the exception of the Kar'fi's frigates, since it would be gaining a second hanger bay.
Hrm... one question here:
Why would the Kar'Fi's frigates not improve? I mean isn't the point of having a second hangar to make it an overall buff? And unless I'm mis-understanding, the number of waves will be reduced, so there'd only be 4 frigates out... so the overall buff from a second hangar would be basically 1 ship over where it is now.
Am I misunderstanding that? (Is it just fighters that are having a wave reduction maybe?)
Why would the Kar'Fi's frigates not improve? I mean isn't the point of having a second hangar to make it an overall buff? And unless I'm mis-understanding, the number of waves will be reduced, so there'd only be 4 frigates out... so the overall buff from a second hangar would be basically 1 ship over where it is now.
Am I misunderstanding that? (Is it just fighters that are having a wave reduction maybe?)
A Kar'fi currently with one hanger bay can have out three frigates after a fairly long period of time. With the current proposal, a Kar'fi with two hanger bays both with frigates could have four frigates out, and faster than the existing version could have its three.
Combined with deployables being called outside of combat and not going away after combat, this means that the proposed Kar'fi with frigates actually represents more than a 25% improvement to firepower over the previous version, which is an improvement but probably not an unbalancing one given how relatively fragile the Kar'fi is - we don't want to make the Kar'fi better than the Vo'quv, just a competitive and viable choice.
The Vo'quv, on the other hand, will have less waves, but is not getting an additional hanger, so each deployable will be tougher to make up for that. The Vo'quv should be about the same, possibly a hair better effectively, particularly with improved deployable control.
If, during the course of testing and observing on Tribble and Live any of the above needs further adjustments to bring either into line with these goals, then we will of course do such.
IMO, Carrier starships should be a lot like Carrier naval vessels... They have overwhelming firepower due to their air superiority, but there's a reason why they're normally surrounded by a carrier group that's intended to prevent enemy forces from getting anywhere near them.
The real question is how you simulate that kind of thing in a starship in this game.
A carrier should be severely affected by any enemy that is able to close and outmanuver them. Enemies that do manage to close should be able to interfere with the deployment of "air" (space) power: in other words, fighter craft. The carrier's defense strategy is in deploying fighter craft and in countermeasures.
A carrier's main strength should be in its' fighter craft. You would also expect that it would have exceptional power reserves for extended deployment. They don't really have "main guns". A carrier is generally not going to want to clutter up its' space with friendly fire when that space is occupied by fighter craft.
So what does all of that add up to?
#1: A carrier will not be very manuverable; it has a defense force of fighters and (sea) craft that are supposed to be manuverable instead.
#2: Carriers really aren't designed to solo and don't themselves have a lot of firepower aside from missile launchers. They ought to be part of a team (the carrier group).
#3: Carriers should have really good countermeasures in case the first and second lines of defense (fighters and picket ships) fail.
#4: Carriers under direct fire will have their operations hampered, as launching fighter craft becomes riskier.
How much of that can you really simulate in STO?
Well, limited turn rate is already a factor. Check.
Space superiority would seem to suggest that carriers would be able to field a LOT of fighters... but that adds "fighter spam" and decreases performance from a gameplay perspective. Since one of the goals has to be cutting down on fighter spam, Cryptic has to balance a carrier's offensive capabilities a different way.
That would suggest that the game needs fewer, more effective fighters.
Carriers under fire should theoretically be vulnerable to attacks that limit their ability to successfully launch fighters. Unlike a Naval Carrier, a Starship Carrier's flight deck is probably not exposed so that limits the vulnerability somewhat... but the enemy still knows where those fighter bays are and ought to be targeting them for launch craft.
This is probably overcomplicating things, but it seems that launched fighters should be especially vulnerable to attack immediately after they launch... maybe a 3 second debuff to defense? The enemy would get a short window of opportunity to blow the fighters away, but after that, look out.
If the fighters are vulnerable, then the carrier is also vulnerable. Which is why carriers should have powerful countermeasures. To me, this says strong shields and significant science and engineering capabilities. Little or none of what we think of as tactical abilities in the game, though. Lots of device slots, lots of engineering and science consoles, and more science and engineering stations.
And since we're buffing up countermeasures and relying on fighters for striking power, weapons ought to be more limited than a normal ship. Fewer weapon slots, fewer tactical consoles, and fewer tactical stations. It would be more realistic if we could limit the kinds of weapons that a carrier is able to mount. Carriers should probably tend to mount weapons with a restricted field of fire, so as not to interfere with the flight operations of its' fighters.
Excluding beam arrays and turrets would probably go over like a lead balloon, though. So I would simulate restricted field of fire by putting most of the weapons in the forward slots and leaving only one or two slots aft. I think it might also be worth giving carriers some kind of an intrinsic bonus to torpedoes to encourage players to mount these more limited-arc weapons. Perhaps offset by accuracy debuffs on beam weapons to simulate the extra effort to avoid firing into its' fighters' flight paths.
And now, to avoid being completely lynched by carrier pilots, I might also suggest that carriers could provide extra offensive and defensive buffs to friendly ships in close proximity (including its' own fighters). This would increase carrier effectiveness as part of a team and simulate a carrier's innate ability to direct flight operations and provide countermeasures to its' carrier group.
Just plus ten to Auxiliary unless it was changed again and I'm not aware. Nothing else. Also any idea what having a power level of over 100 really does and is it worth getting 125 in say, weapons, over just having 100? What about shields 100 versus 125? This is effective of course, not base.
[rant=start]
Made the Carrier more sciencey and pets depend on Auxiliary, but called it "not a true science ship" and didn't give it Sensor Analysis like the other Science ships. What next, they planning to take away the subsystem targeting in a future patch? Why am I even typing this possibility? Carriers are the only unique ship in the game and that nerf was a travesty in IMHO. Just continue to neuter the thing, and they might as well just take carriers out of the game at that point. How much you wanna bet there's no new one being developed for level 61? I see it as a low chance. Unless the ships at the max rank would still all be comparable to tier 5 (VA/LG are already called tier 5.1 aren't they?), if they don't make a new Science Carrier at 61 it will basically force all Carrier pilots to either abandon ship, fly an inferior ship statswise, or use Varanus/Battle which are slightly less outdated. Carriers already get one less officer slot. Wasn't that enough?
[/rant]
The EIE is showing up as 3.8 on my KDF who still uses it. She has efficiency skills already and is a Joined Trill so I can't give exact stats, but I'm sure it is less than 3.8 actual. Only Commander 7 currently, so I see it as still worth using until a suitable Mark 10 later regardless.
I wanna give the calculator a whirl on my PC, bit unless you have an apk I honestly haven't tried it on my Android yet, actually.
Basically, I was extremely saddened by that nerf and felt like expressing it. My KDF Science character I basically bred to fly a Carrier from the day I made her when the pets got tweaked that one time, and she's currently 37. Every Carrier nerf since then has been a shot to the heart pretty much.
You guys went ahead and gave the Carrier +10 Auxiliary instead of +5/+5 Weapons/Auxiliary, and tied pets to Auxiliary, making it more like a Fed Science ship and the Varanus which depend on the Auxiliary power, but didn't give it Sensor Analysis, saying it isn't a pure Science ship. I rememer that patch note. But you MADE it more pure, right? And it has six weapon slots like a Science ship, so shouldn't it have deserved the Sensor Analysis at that point when it was made closer to other Science ships? Just let the pets stack the debuffs if you were worried about keeping the debuff on.
I'm grateful that there's no Carrier nerfs on the horizon, but it certainly needs a buff in damage output of the actual ship itself instead of being dependent on the pets. Then there's the fact that ship pets are very simple minded in STO. Why not ask the people next door or down the block at Cryptic CO to borrow the code for their pet UI? There's been many threads about what the pets need. They need a pet command UI besides just shooting what you target. It would be nice to have the pets attack one target while you attack another, assuming the ship ever gets improved DPS on it's own. Or maybe I'd like to have one bay attack one target while the other attacks another? Individual bay commands would be nice.
I'm not asking to be able to keep like a hundred little flies buzzing around waiting to sting something, but it would be nice to have as a "special ability" for a ship that is still very much LG viable (And maybe even Dahar Master viable if there's no new level 61 Carrier with subsystem targeting and 2 bays on the horizon) and so dependent on it's pets to have at least half of the max you can summon per bay to be summonable out of combat and stay until killed. Otherwise it goes into combat naked and has to survive to summon it's fleet because the ship itself (As far as I know) doesn't have a shield boost like "real" Science ships, has had it's base hull count nerfed at least once, and puts out way less DPS on it's own as opposed to the Battle Carrier actually having killing ability on it's own which is why IMHO it doesn't deserve a second bay. Reminds me of how CO Defiance was made to let you keep an amount of stacks based on rank so you weren't as naked out of combat, topping at 3 for rank 3 out of a total of 8 allowed. Could this be done please? Or have the deployables stay out of combat for both ships. It's only fair.
It needs to be able to take care of itself so I'm totally against removing weapon slots or Tac console/officer slots. It's already got less officer slots than other tier 5 ships, and horrible turn rate (Thank you for the 1 additional turn rate a couple months back) which limits it to arrays or turrets. The ship itself doesn't need an offense nerf, but an offense buff.
Also can we get the ability to craft rarer variants of the pets and listing their abilities on the item? This would become even more of a necessity if you have Carriers at lower ranks than BG.
A Kar'fi currently with one hanger bay can have out three frigates after a fairly long period of time. With the current proposal, a Kar'fi with two hanger bays both with frigates could have four frigates out, and faster than the existing version could have its three.
Combined with deployables being called outside of combat and not going away after combat, this means that the proposed Kar'fi with frigates actually represents more than a 25% improvement to firepower over the previous version, which is an improvement but probably not an unbalancing one given how relatively fragile the Kar'fi is - we don't want to make the Kar'fi better than the Vo'quv, just a competitive and viable choice.
The Vo'quv, on the other hand, will have less waves, but is not getting an additional hanger, so each deployable will be tougher to make up for that. The Vo'quv should be about the same, possibly a hair better effectively, particularly with improved deployable control.
If, during the course of testing and observing on Tribble and Live any of the above needs further adjustments to bring either into line with these goals, then we will of course do such.
Now this I can get behind :-) although still not sure about the phase shift for karfi but I do like the direction the voquv is going.
A Kar'fi currently with one hanger bay can have out three frigates after a fairly long period of time. With the current proposal, a Kar'fi with two hanger bays both with frigates could have four frigates out, and faster than the existing version could have its three.
Combined with deployables being called outside of combat and not going away after combat, this means that the proposed Kar'fi with frigates actually represents more than a 25% improvement to firepower over the previous version, which is an improvement but probably not an unbalancing one given how relatively fragile the Kar'fi is - we don't want to make the Kar'fi better than the Vo'quv, just a competitive and viable choice.
The Vo'quv, on the other hand, will have less waves, but is not getting an additional hanger, so each deployable will be tougher to make up for that. The Vo'quv should be about the same, possibly a hair better effectively, particularly with improved deployable control.
If, during the course of testing and observing on Tribble and Live any of the above needs further adjustments to bring either into line with these goals, then we will of course do such.
I see deployables being called outside of combat, not going away after combat, and improved deployable control. Just to clarify, this is for both ships?
Less waves for the Carrier? Is this a nerf? I thought you said it would be left alone as far as nerfs were concerned?
Oh yea, before I forget. Would you mind letting the Shield Repair deployable also repair hulls? Call it Repair instead of Shield Repair. Would make for a more complete support Carrier for those who wanna do that.
Less waves for the Carrier? Is this a nerf? I thought you said it would be left alone as far as nerfs were concerned?
It's not a nerf, it's to reduce spam since FAW was nerfed, so there isn't a viable way to counter massive clouds of fighters. In return, everything the Carriers have (with exceptions to BoPs and Frigates) buffed stats.
However if you considered Carrier spam as an ability, then yes, that's been nerfed.
Would you mind letting the Shield Repair deployable also repair hulls? Call it Repair instead of Shield Repair. Would make for a more complete support Carrier for those who wanna do that.
Wouldn't this make the Varanus redundant, and less viable as a ship?
Well considering people already gotta run at max and even higher Auxiliary to have decent "spam" speed as you put it, I don't see the justification in nerfing the deploy speed. You can't go much higher than 115 counting consoles, but with the ship power buff it goes to 125. If the deploy speed sucks even then, that's just unfair. What's the point of having such high power? Just skills really. Remember Battle Carrier pets aren't Auxiliary based and Carrier ones are. Carrier pilots need high Auxiliary to get them out at a decent, viable rate, and Battle Carrier pilots don't. A hybrid should NEVER be as good as the one that specializes. Jack of all trades, master of none. Or well jack of two trades, DPS and support.
As for making the Varanus redundant, nope. It still gets the full Science treatment with officer and console slots while Carrier is missing Sensor Analysis and has less of slots, and Varanus can launch multiple platforms IIRC, which should still heal considerably more. Though I heard the platform is just bad, so how about let the Drones repair both, and make the platform heal more hull than these and not suck. Fair? I think so.
Was just an idea, since the Dkyr pet can heal both.
-snip-
just a competitive and viable choice.
-snip-
I appreciate that you mentioned Cryptic still caring about ship balance. Yes it sounds like a blah statement, but honestly after months of the B'rel still being broken, the carriers suffering nerf after nerf, and the feds getting more and more powerful ships for pvp, I do appreciate a dev coming on here and talking about balance.
Please realize, Cryptic, that contrary to what the weekend warriors, alexanders, and PvE only crowd tell you, it is NOT spam that kills in pvp.
There is a reason why science ships are feared in pvp, and sci captains are numerous among pvp fleets.
I would rather take 5 intrepids than 5 carriers in an arena match. Carriers, even the "overpowered" voquv, are easily popped these days and it's NOT due to the opposing fleet's pets.
It's not a nerf, it's to reduce spam since FAW was nerfed, so there isn't a viable way to counter massive clouds of fighters. In return, everything the Carriers have (with exceptions to BoPs and Frigates) buffed stats.
However if you considered Carrier spam as an ability, then yes, that's been nerfed.
Wouldn't this make the Varanus redundant, and less viable as a ship?
Actually, BoP's are getting buffed. The only thing that isn't getting buffed to compensate for reduced waves is the Kar'fi frigate, since the Kar'fi is getting an extra hanger bay meaning the overall number of frigates out is actually higher.
As for the Varanus, we just did a massive overhaul of its special ability. It's much, much better now on the internal builds. It won't be going out just yet, but it is coming.
I see deployables being called outside of combat, not going away after combat, and improved deployable control. Just to clarify, this is for both ships?
Well considering people already gotta run at max and even higher Auxiliary to have decent "spam" speed as you put it, I don't see the justification in nerfing the deploy speed. You can't go much higher than 115 counting consoles, but with the ship power buff it goes to 125. If the deploy speed sucks even then, that's just unfair. What's the point of having such high power? Just skills really. Remember Battle Carrier pets aren't Auxiliary based and Carrier ones are. Carrier pilots need high Auxiliary to get them out at a decent, viable rate, and Battle Carrier pilots don't. A hybrid should NEVER be as good as the one that specializes. Jack of all trades, master of none. Or well jack of two trades, DPS and support.
As for making the Varanus redundant, nope. It still gets the full Science treatment with officer and console slots while Carrier is missing Sensor Analysis and less slots, and Varanus can launch multiple platforms IIRC, which should still heal considerably more. Was just an idea, since the Dkyr pet can heal both.
Not sure if this is commenting on something I posted or not, but if it is, the deployable speed is going to be as good or faster in all cases. Duty officers will also be able to improve this even more when that system is rolled out.
As for carrier pets and what affects them, as far as I can tell from digging through the data or Geko can recall offhand, Auxiliary only affects recharge for launching ships from your bays, and that is the same for both types of carriers. The actual deployables do not benefit in damage capability or resistance from energy levels.
I appreciate that you mentioned Cryptic still caring about ship balance. Yes it sounds like a blah statement, but honestly after months of the B'rel still being broken, the carriers suffering nerf after nerf, and the feds getting more and more powerful ships for pvp, I do appreciate a dev coming on here and talking about balance.
The B'rel is being fixed; I'm not sure which build or exactly when it's going out. Juggling that sort of thing is dependent on a lot of factors outside my immediate control.
There are a lot of new things - both adjustments and brand new things - coming down the pike. The vast majority should probably hit Tribble and Holodeck about the same time, though there will probably be some exceptions for reasons having to do with schedule and other considerations. When all the dust settles over the course of the next half a year or so, though, I think changes and additions benefiting the KDF will be well in evidence, assuming everything goes as it currently looks like it will.
There are a lot of new things - both adjustments and brand new things - coming down the pike. The vast majority should probably hit Tribble and Holodeck about the same time, though there will probably be some exceptions for reasons having to do with schedule and other considerations. When all the dust settles over the course of the next half a year or so, though, I think changes and additions benefiting the KDF will be well in evidence, assuming everything goes as it currently looks like it will.
Out of curiosity, are you saying that all the kdf ships will be updated or are you saying that the entire faction will be updated over the next 6 months.
Was there suppose to be a carriage return after "considerations."?
Out of curiosity, are you saying that all the kdf ships will be updated or are you saying that the entire faction will be updated over the next 6 months.
We've already talked about a number of things under review in the KDF's fleet - the Kar'fi, Varanus, Vo'quv, UI controls for fighters, B'rel, and the Guramba. There are, as well, additional ships being planned for both the Federation and the KDF. As well, we are reviewing damage types, mines and skills as well.
But no, not every ship is going to be touched, but many are and will be.
We've already talked about a number of thinigs under review in the KDF's fleet - the Kar'fi, Varanus, Vo'quv, UI controls for fighters, B'rel, and the Guramba. There are, as well, additional ships being planned for both the Federation and the KDF. As well, we are reviewing damage types, mines and skills as well.
But no, not every ship is going to be touched, but many are and will be.
ok. so you were talking about kdf ships, not kdf the faction being fixed over the next 6 months. Just wanted to make that clear. My heart fluttered, or it may have been the tacos i had for supper.
The B'rel is being fixed; I'm not sure which build or exactly when it's going out. Juggling that sort of thing is dependent on a lot of factors outside my immediate control.[/QUOTE
Phase Shift only applies to other ships, not planetary objects.
So it's not a phase "cloak" like the Pegasus', but an actual shifting the phase of the ship slightly out of...dimensional focus to avoid incoming damage?
So it's not a phase "cloak" like the Pegasus', but an actual shifting the phase of the ship slightly out of...dimensional focus to avoid incoming damage?
Correct. It also provides some stealth functionality, albeit not as good as a regular cloak. Note as well that friendly ships other than yourself can also not target you.
ok. so you were talking about kdf ships, not kdf the faction being fixed over the next 6 months. Just wanted to make that clear. My heart fluttered, or it may have been the tacos i had for supper.
General faction improvements are something we really want to do, but there's a lot up in the air at the moment in regards to scoping and timing, so right now is a bad time for us to write promises in stone.
General faction improvements are something we really want to do, but there's a lot up in the air at the moment in regards to scoping and timing, so right now is a bad time for us to write promises in stone.
if nobody gives firm dates, nobody should take them as firm dates.
if you give vague dates, people should take them as vague dates.
If you say "probably six months from now", you know there is progress and at some point in the future it will be done but not exactly 6 months to the day from now. There is light at the end of the rainbow.
But when you say "in a year from now all the old missions will be remastered" people expect that they will all be done by the year from that date.
Now, I am not an idiot and i know all the old missions will not be remastered by that date, nor do I care if they are.
Correct. It also provides some stealth functionality, albeit not as good as a regular cloak. Note as well that friendly ships other than yourself can also not target you.
The Vo'quv, on the other hand, will have less waves, but is not getting an additional hanger, so each deployable will be tougher to make up for that. The Vo'quv should be about the same, possibly a hair better effectively, particularly with improved deployable control.
Is it possible to make each deployable LOOK like multiple deployables, even though it's just one? So instead of one fighter looking like one fighter, it actually LOOKS like three fighters flying in tight formation, while still being just a single entity? Perhaps have three firing points (one per fighter) on the entity so it looks like they're all three firing on the same target? That would at least let us feel like our Vo'quv is still launching a full spread of fighters, instead of just a handful.
The B'rel is being fixed; I'm not sure which build or exactly when it's going out. Juggling that sort of thing is dependent on a lot of factors outside my immediate control.
There are a lot of new things - both adjustments and brand new things - coming down the pike. The vast majority should probably hit Tribble and Holodeck about the same time, though there will probably be some exceptions for reasons having to do with schedule and other considerations. When all the dust settles over the course of the next half a year or so, though, I think changes and additions benefiting the KDF will be well in evidence, assuming everything goes as it currently looks like it will.
Just a request to Cryptic:
Please don't give the Feddies more ships without giving a Klingon ship AT THE SAME TIME the fed ship's released. I can't stress this enough, because you guys don't seem to get that there's another faction that will be adversely affected when you give the favored son something that can be used in PvP.
I don't care about Starfleet Academy, or Klingon Academy. PvE'ers and RP'ers yeah they'll appreciate it, and it's a fine work. But when you release something that can be used in PvP for only ONE faction, and that item tips the balance of power more to that faction, you get less and less players in the *******-stepchild faction.
Not 2 months later, not 6 months later, etc. When you release another fed ship, release its klingon equivalent.
Don't make the Enterprise F become Har'peng 2.0. Only fed side and seriously outclassing any other cruiser in game, fed or kling side
Is it possible to make each deployable LOOK like multiple deployables, even though it's just one? So instead of one fighter looking like one fighter, it actually LOOKS like three fighters flying in tight formation, while still being just a single entity? Perhaps have three firing points (one per fighter) on the entity so it looks like they're all three firing on the same target? That would at least let us feel like our Vo'quv is still launching a full spread of fighters, instead of just a handful.
It was in fact brought up, but to say it would be non-trivial to implement this would be an understatement. It would require new animations, new bones, new VFX, new code, new data. It's just not practical at this time, and there's some question as to how much benefit it would really confer compared to the amount of other things we could do with those resources in that time.
Is it possible to make each deployable LOOK like multiple deployables, even though it's just one? So instead of one fighter looking like one fighter, it actually LOOKS like three fighters flying in tight formation, while still being just a single entity? Perhaps have three firing points (one per fighter) on the entity so it looks like they're all three firing on the same target? That would at least let us feel like our Vo'quv is still launching a full spread of fighters, instead of just a handful.
Just a thought. :-)
I hate that idea. Part of the appeal of a carrier is having a swarm of fighter craft; and barring a truly *enormous* amount of work, it would look very, very fake.
Comments
This number is highly subject to more testing both internally and when it appears on Tribble. We've had some people who think the Phase Shift will be useless, others who think it will be overpowered. The amount of Aux drain will affect the ability of the Kar'fi to heal while phased, so that impacts the above considerably.
In other words, if as testing goes on we think Phase Shift is too powerful it means the Aux drain will likely stay at -12/sec, but if it feels too weak, then we will probably drop the Aux drain as appropriate.
Other tweaks as well are certainly conceivable.
heh, the joys of finding balance in pvp.
Okay, so... fighter spam might be cut down by limiting the fighters able to be launched, but in turn make each individual fighter that is out to be far more effective than fighters currently are.
They're going to address ui/control issues.
The Vo'Quv is being left alone for the moment, at least until they see feedback regarding it and the FaW changes and the rebalancing of fighters.
The Kar'Fi may gain a second hangar bay, a new science console that grants a brand new ability never before seen, and may get a maneuverability buff to the current fighters so they'll kamikaze attack more easily.
I'm not sure where in Heretic's post you're seeing an insulting post that proposes a nerf storm of epic proportions, but it could be that I'm just blind.
Could you point out specifics as to what is actually getting nerfed and is slapping players in the faces? Because after reading his post, I see buffs and improvements. Not nerfs.
For the Karfi I like the Science console with Phase Shift and increasing the maneuverability of the fighters add in sensor scan to give it more teeth and make it more offensive in nature.
Over all any carrier should be able to launch pets when not in combat and they should stay after combat (just like the MVAM Prometheus pets do now). The pet controls really need an overhaul. They should have some basic commands for them like attack, defend/repair, follow, aggressive, defensive, and passive.
Oh yea, and the ship itself needs an increase to damage output. Either add more weapon slots or give it Sensor Analysis like the science ships and allow pets to stack the stacks because of really poor turning, because it all I'm hearing is the pets do the majority of the damage. Oh and to that end, the pets should be permanent until killed or unsummoned like other ships with similar features. The fact that you're forcing people who fly this to go into fights basically naked is not good. Or you're going to give the hybrid a second bay, the regular should get a third or even 2 more to compensate.
More incoming if I can find my old post.
There are, certainly, not intended to be any nerfs to either the Vo'quv or the Kar'fi in anything that was proposed. The reduction in waves is counterbalanced by an increase in offensive and defensive power for individual ships with the exception of the Kar'fi's frigates, since it would be gaining a second hanger bay.
Yes, for the Voquv you really could just have the dps (4 ships) 1 fighter w/ less shields/armor but faster and more DPS than the BOP).
For the Karfi though, one fighter that does a alot of damage (3X as much) when it shoulder rolls into its victim?
Hrm... one question here:
Why would the Kar'Fi's frigates not improve? I mean isn't the point of having a second hangar to make it an overall buff? And unless I'm mis-understanding, the number of waves will be reduced, so there'd only be 4 frigates out... so the overall buff from a second hangar would be basically 1 ship over where it is now.
Am I misunderstanding that? (Is it just fighters that are having a wave reduction maybe?)
A Kar'fi currently with one hanger bay can have out three frigates after a fairly long period of time. With the current proposal, a Kar'fi with two hanger bays both with frigates could have four frigates out, and faster than the existing version could have its three.
Combined with deployables being called outside of combat and not going away after combat, this means that the proposed Kar'fi with frigates actually represents more than a 25% improvement to firepower over the previous version, which is an improvement but probably not an unbalancing one given how relatively fragile the Kar'fi is - we don't want to make the Kar'fi better than the Vo'quv, just a competitive and viable choice.
The Vo'quv, on the other hand, will have less waves, but is not getting an additional hanger, so each deployable will be tougher to make up for that. The Vo'quv should be about the same, possibly a hair better effectively, particularly with improved deployable control.
If, during the course of testing and observing on Tribble and Live any of the above needs further adjustments to bring either into line with these goals, then we will of course do such.
I guess I'll just have to see it on tribble to see how the Kar'fi changes work out.
Btw, has there been any decision on allowing them to launch To'Duj or not? (Please say yes...)
The real question is how you simulate that kind of thing in a starship in this game.
A carrier should be severely affected by any enemy that is able to close and outmanuver them. Enemies that do manage to close should be able to interfere with the deployment of "air" (space) power: in other words, fighter craft. The carrier's defense strategy is in deploying fighter craft and in countermeasures.
A carrier's main strength should be in its' fighter craft. You would also expect that it would have exceptional power reserves for extended deployment. They don't really have "main guns". A carrier is generally not going to want to clutter up its' space with friendly fire when that space is occupied by fighter craft.
So what does all of that add up to?
#1: A carrier will not be very manuverable; it has a defense force of fighters and (sea) craft that are supposed to be manuverable instead.
#2: Carriers really aren't designed to solo and don't themselves have a lot of firepower aside from missile launchers. They ought to be part of a team (the carrier group).
#3: Carriers should have really good countermeasures in case the first and second lines of defense (fighters and picket ships) fail.
#4: Carriers under direct fire will have their operations hampered, as launching fighter craft becomes riskier.
How much of that can you really simulate in STO?
Well, limited turn rate is already a factor. Check.
Space superiority would seem to suggest that carriers would be able to field a LOT of fighters... but that adds "fighter spam" and decreases performance from a gameplay perspective. Since one of the goals has to be cutting down on fighter spam, Cryptic has to balance a carrier's offensive capabilities a different way.
That would suggest that the game needs fewer, more effective fighters.
Carriers under fire should theoretically be vulnerable to attacks that limit their ability to successfully launch fighters. Unlike a Naval Carrier, a Starship Carrier's flight deck is probably not exposed so that limits the vulnerability somewhat... but the enemy still knows where those fighter bays are and ought to be targeting them for launch craft.
This is probably overcomplicating things, but it seems that launched fighters should be especially vulnerable to attack immediately after they launch... maybe a 3 second debuff to defense? The enemy would get a short window of opportunity to blow the fighters away, but after that, look out.
If the fighters are vulnerable, then the carrier is also vulnerable. Which is why carriers should have powerful countermeasures. To me, this says strong shields and significant science and engineering capabilities. Little or none of what we think of as tactical abilities in the game, though. Lots of device slots, lots of engineering and science consoles, and more science and engineering stations.
And since we're buffing up countermeasures and relying on fighters for striking power, weapons ought to be more limited than a normal ship. Fewer weapon slots, fewer tactical consoles, and fewer tactical stations. It would be more realistic if we could limit the kinds of weapons that a carrier is able to mount. Carriers should probably tend to mount weapons with a restricted field of fire, so as not to interfere with the flight operations of its' fighters.
Excluding beam arrays and turrets would probably go over like a lead balloon, though. So I would simulate restricted field of fire by putting most of the weapons in the forward slots and leaving only one or two slots aft. I think it might also be worth giving carriers some kind of an intrinsic bonus to torpedoes to encourage players to mount these more limited-arc weapons. Perhaps offset by accuracy debuffs on beam weapons to simulate the extra effort to avoid firing into its' fighters' flight paths.
And now, to avoid being completely lynched by carrier pilots, I might also suggest that carriers could provide extra offensive and defensive buffs to friendly ships in close proximity (including its' own fighters). This would increase carrier effectiveness as part of a team and simulate a carrier's innate ability to direct flight operations and provide countermeasures to its' carrier group.
You guys went ahead and gave the Carrier +10 Auxiliary instead of +5/+5 Weapons/Auxiliary, and tied pets to Auxiliary, making it more like a Fed Science ship and the Varanus which depend on the Auxiliary power, but didn't give it Sensor Analysis, saying it isn't a pure Science ship. I rememer that patch note. But you MADE it more pure, right? And it has six weapon slots like a Science ship, so shouldn't it have deserved the Sensor Analysis at that point when it was made closer to other Science ships? Just let the pets stack the debuffs if you were worried about keeping the debuff on.
I'm grateful that there's no Carrier nerfs on the horizon, but it certainly needs a buff in damage output of the actual ship itself instead of being dependent on the pets. Then there's the fact that ship pets are very simple minded in STO. Why not ask the people next door or down the block at Cryptic CO to borrow the code for their pet UI? There's been many threads about what the pets need. They need a pet command UI besides just shooting what you target. It would be nice to have the pets attack one target while you attack another, assuming the ship ever gets improved DPS on it's own. Or maybe I'd like to have one bay attack one target while the other attacks another? Individual bay commands would be nice.
I'm not asking to be able to keep like a hundred little flies buzzing around waiting to sting something, but it would be nice to have as a "special ability" for a ship that is still very much LG viable (And maybe even Dahar Master viable if there's no new level 61 Carrier with subsystem targeting and 2 bays on the horizon) and so dependent on it's pets to have at least half of the max you can summon per bay to be summonable out of combat and stay until killed. Otherwise it goes into combat naked and has to survive to summon it's fleet because the ship itself (As far as I know) doesn't have a shield boost like "real" Science ships, has had it's base hull count nerfed at least once, and puts out way less DPS on it's own as opposed to the Battle Carrier actually having killing ability on it's own which is why IMHO it doesn't deserve a second bay. Reminds me of how CO Defiance was made to let you keep an amount of stacks based on rank so you weren't as naked out of combat, topping at 3 for rank 3 out of a total of 8 allowed. Could this be done please? Or have the deployables stay out of combat for both ships. It's only fair.
It needs to be able to take care of itself so I'm totally against removing weapon slots or Tac console/officer slots. It's already got less officer slots than other tier 5 ships, and horrible turn rate (Thank you for the 1 additional turn rate a couple months back) which limits it to arrays or turrets. The ship itself doesn't need an offense nerf, but an offense buff.
Also can we get the ability to craft rarer variants of the pets and listing their abilities on the item? This would become even more of a necessity if you have Carriers at lower ranks than BG.
Now this I can get behind :-) although still not sure about the phase shift for karfi but I do like the direction the voquv is going.
Less waves for the Carrier? Is this a nerf? I thought you said it would be left alone as far as nerfs were concerned?
Oh yea, before I forget. Would you mind letting the Shield Repair deployable also repair hulls? Call it Repair instead of Shield Repair. Would make for a more complete support Carrier for those who wanna do that.
It's not a nerf, it's to reduce spam since FAW was nerfed, so there isn't a viable way to counter massive clouds of fighters. In return, everything the Carriers have (with exceptions to BoPs and Frigates) buffed stats.
However if you considered Carrier spam as an ability, then yes, that's been nerfed.
Wouldn't this make the Varanus redundant, and less viable as a ship?
As for making the Varanus redundant, nope. It still gets the full Science treatment with officer and console slots while Carrier is missing Sensor Analysis and has less of slots, and Varanus can launch multiple platforms IIRC, which should still heal considerably more. Though I heard the platform is just bad, so how about let the Drones repair both, and make the platform heal more hull than these and not suck. Fair? I think so.
Was just an idea, since the Dkyr pet can heal both.
I appreciate that you mentioned Cryptic still caring about ship balance. Yes it sounds like a blah statement, but honestly after months of the B'rel still being broken, the carriers suffering nerf after nerf, and the feds getting more and more powerful ships for pvp, I do appreciate a dev coming on here and talking about balance.
Please realize, Cryptic, that contrary to what the weekend warriors, alexanders, and PvE only crowd tell you, it is NOT spam that kills in pvp.
There is a reason why science ships are feared in pvp, and sci captains are numerous among pvp fleets.
I would rather take 5 intrepids than 5 carriers in an arena match. Carriers, even the "overpowered" voquv, are easily popped these days and it's NOT due to the opposing fleet's pets.
Or the Space Station in the C&H map?
Actually, BoP's are getting buffed. The only thing that isn't getting buffed to compensate for reduced waves is the Kar'fi frigate, since the Kar'fi is getting an extra hanger bay meaning the overall number of frigates out is actually higher.
As for the Varanus, we just did a massive overhaul of its special ability. It's much, much better now on the internal builds. It won't be going out just yet, but it is coming.
This is for all carriers, yes.
Not sure if this is commenting on something I posted or not, but if it is, the deployable speed is going to be as good or faster in all cases. Duty officers will also be able to improve this even more when that system is rolled out.
As for carrier pets and what affects them, as far as I can tell from digging through the data or Geko can recall offhand, Auxiliary only affects recharge for launching ships from your bays, and that is the same for both types of carriers. The actual deployables do not benefit in damage capability or resistance from energy levels.
The B'rel is being fixed; I'm not sure which build or exactly when it's going out. Juggling that sort of thing is dependent on a lot of factors outside my immediate control.
There are a lot of new things - both adjustments and brand new things - coming down the pike. The vast majority should probably hit Tribble and Holodeck about the same time, though there will probably be some exceptions for reasons having to do with schedule and other considerations. When all the dust settles over the course of the next half a year or so, though, I think changes and additions benefiting the KDF will be well in evidence, assuming everything goes as it currently looks like it will.
Phase Shift only applies to other ships, not planetary objects.
Was there suppose to be a carriage return after "considerations."?
We've already talked about a number of things under review in the KDF's fleet - the Kar'fi, Varanus, Vo'quv, UI controls for fighters, B'rel, and the Guramba. There are, as well, additional ships being planned for both the Federation and the KDF. As well, we are reviewing damage types, mines and skills as well.
But no, not every ship is going to be touched, but many are and will be.
ok. so you were talking about kdf ships, not kdf the faction being fixed over the next 6 months. Just wanted to make that clear. My heart fluttered, or it may have been the tacos i had for supper.
Correct. It also provides some stealth functionality, albeit not as good as a regular cloak. Note as well that friendly ships other than yourself can also not target you.
General faction improvements are something we really want to do, but there's a lot up in the air at the moment in regards to scoping and timing, so right now is a bad time for us to write promises in stone.
if nobody gives firm dates, nobody should take them as firm dates.
if you give vague dates, people should take them as vague dates.
If you say "probably six months from now", you know there is progress and at some point in the future it will be done but not exactly 6 months to the day from now. There is light at the end of the rainbow.
But when you say "in a year from now all the old missions will be remastered" people expect that they will all be done by the year from that date.
Now, I am not an idiot and i know all the old missions will not be remastered by that date, nor do I care if they are.
All in the way you say it
Good to know, thanks for the reply.
Is it possible to make each deployable LOOK like multiple deployables, even though it's just one? So instead of one fighter looking like one fighter, it actually LOOKS like three fighters flying in tight formation, while still being just a single entity? Perhaps have three firing points (one per fighter) on the entity so it looks like they're all three firing on the same target? That would at least let us feel like our Vo'quv is still launching a full spread of fighters, instead of just a handful.
Just a thought. :-)
Just a request to Cryptic:
Please don't give the Feddies more ships without giving a Klingon ship AT THE SAME TIME the fed ship's released. I can't stress this enough, because you guys don't seem to get that there's another faction that will be adversely affected when you give the favored son something that can be used in PvP.
I don't care about Starfleet Academy, or Klingon Academy. PvE'ers and RP'ers yeah they'll appreciate it, and it's a fine work. But when you release something that can be used in PvP for only ONE faction, and that item tips the balance of power more to that faction, you get less and less players in the *******-stepchild faction.
Not 2 months later, not 6 months later, etc. When you release another fed ship, release its klingon equivalent.
Don't make the Enterprise F become Har'peng 2.0. Only fed side and seriously outclassing any other cruiser in game, fed or kling side
It was in fact brought up, but to say it would be non-trivial to implement this would be an understatement. It would require new animations, new bones, new VFX, new code, new data. It's just not practical at this time, and there's some question as to how much benefit it would really confer compared to the amount of other things we could do with those resources in that time.
I hate that idea. Part of the appeal of a carrier is having a swarm of fighter craft; and barring a truly *enormous* amount of work, it would look very, very fake.