test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Open Career Path( Freeform) vs. Defined Career Path( Archtype )

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
After playing Champions Online while I wait for the release of new missions/material on Tribble and Holodeck
I started to wonder if STO would adopt the "FreeForm" and "ArchType" formula that appears to be working on Champions.

I started calling it "Open Career Path" versus "Defined Career Path". But under this system subscribers would not be effected especially if they keep that generalized skill tree for us( which I still have mixed feelings about. )

But I got to thinking what a "Defined Career Path" might be like, and came up with some examples:

Engineers: Can only fly a Crusier or a ship purchased from the C-store,
Can only equip Phaser*, Plasma, and Anti-proton weapons on their ships, unless they buy them from the C-store, Like a permissions purchase.
And has to wear the color Gold on their uniform , unless you buy a uniform pack from the C-store, or if its a fleet created uniform.

Tacticians: Can only fly a Escort or a ship purchased from the C-store,
Can only equip Phaser*, Tetryon, and Anti-proton weapons on their ships, unless they buy them from the C-store, Like a permissions purchase.
And has to wear the color Red on their uniform , unless you buy a uniform pack from the C-store, or if its a fleet created uniform

Sciences: Can only fly a Science Vessels or a ship purchased from the C-store,
Can only equip Phaser*, Polaron, and Anti-proton weapons on their ships, unless they buy them from the C-store, Like a permissions purchase.
And has to wear the color Blue on their uniform , unless you buy a uniform pack from the C-store, or if its a fleet created uniform.

*Federation would get Phasers , KDF would get Disruptors, and when the Romulans are opened up to us they will get their "Plasma Disruptors".


Again "Open Career Path" would be unaffected by this. And there would likely be other restrictions for the "Defined Career Path".

If something like this was pushed subscribers would standout more, and free players might be more inclined to go Gold.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2011
    I don't see any reason to do this here.

    First, I'm pro-swap when it comes to ships, meaning you use cruisers or escorts with sci officers, science or cruisers with tac, etc. Seems more reasonable to me. Besides, for a new player who wants to be "exactly like the shows" he'd probably want to be tactical and command the galaxy cruiser or the intrepid voyager. In the shows only tactical officers command all types of ships - the restriction doesn't make any sense and would drive people off.

    Another problem is with weapons. I can see some sense in Feds using phasers and KDF using distruptors (that's my personal "RP rule"), but why have the other restrictions? and where do quantum torpedos (my favorite) stand here? or chroniton ones?

    As for the uniforms - why cripple the RP game? What if I like the TOS color scheme? what about having meds wear a greenish blue while sci get classic blue? how about the (fan-based) marines green colors? It's not like there is any restriction now concerning the cannon colors, or even concerning a common type of uniforms. I see no reson to have these restrictions at all (besides, you don't have any restriction on your costume in CO).

    By the way, you do have defined career paths in STO. First of all, you have career-specific skills (e.g. sci have doctor and tac have grenades). Then you have career-specific rank abilities (e.g. sensor scan for sci and fire on my mark for tac). The choice of "type III" abilities you can train your BOffs in is also determined by your career. Finally, you have different kits for each career. I can't have any stealth kit-ability with my Sci officer.

    I think crippling so many aspects of the game by these limited paths would just deter F2P newcomers right from the get-go, so they won't stay long enough to actually want the free-form gold member gameplay. If anything, gold members should have an opportunity to change their career somewhere along the way (like Worf transferred from ops to tac in DS9).
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2011
    That concept, Mr Tesla, was my first knee-jerk reaction to hearing about the F2P matrix. I thought to myself that Cryptic ought to do with STO what they did with CO and rigidly lead Silver players through a linear forced progression path for their characters.

    It took me a while to figure out that STO simple doesn't offer too much variety in its gameplay. CO's power-sets are more involved than weapon-types and ship types basically because each power behaves differently and power-synergies on a Freeform character are what makes things interesting but in STO there aren't enough variation in the mix.

    I figure that's the reason why limiting gameplay or content doesn't cut it and why gear has to be what Cryptic will monetize for the F2P matrix. It's sad but the Star Trek IP isn't about Superhero and super-powers and so we're stuck with very minute changes in gameplay between "classes".
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2011
    No skill point cap for Gold = STO Freeform.

    Join the revolution.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2011
    Korhil wrote:
    No skill point cap for Gold = STO Freeform.

    Join the revolution.

    Interesting thought, but I'd be more inclined to ask that they raise the skillcap for Golds by 50% over silvers, not eliminate it. We don't want to be so vastly OP'ed we chase the freebies away. :(

    We'd still have a significant advantage with just that little of an increase.
Sign In or Register to comment.