Not really, mostly because I don't have 25 million ECs across all my characters.
Perhaps I should mention that I'm not overly concerned about min-maxing my characters, being the most efficient, or anything. I do what works for me, and, in STO, RP is also something I consider. That's my playstyle. It's just as valid as any other.
If you disagree with it, you disagree with it. Which is fine. Chances are you'll never see me outside these boards. You fly your way, I'll fly mine, and we'll agree to disagree like adults on this.
Granted, but not the point I'm trying to make. Rather you spent considerable time noting how our observations are mistaken. I simply felt as a practical response, it can be openly tested. I am confident in my PvP ship performing well in PvE because... well, I got my full MACO set somehow after all, and that wasn't from PvP (unfortunately).
Trying to debate a ship's use by noting its PvE worth is a silly point to start with. ANY ship, with ANY weapon loadout and BOFF assignment, in the hands of even low skill and mediocre players, can perform adequately enough in PvE.
If built to survive and win in PvP, the ship's design becomes vastly more than capable of tackling any PvE scenario thrown at it, while still having that added versatility should you decide to take advantage of that extra gameplay mechanic in between content.
That considered, ship balancing is first done on the PvP side by developers, which by default filters to PvE in most cases as a human opponent is going to be vastly more difficult than any AI.
That is the point many of the PvPers make. Since that is their past-time, they know what it takes to make a ship work in PvP. By default in this knowledge, they know what mechanics will work in their favor in PvE automatically.
If noted that the ship would either perform, or not perform, at given roles by said people, it is generally wise to address this with genuine consideration, rather than blowing it off as irrelevant.
...That is the point many of the PvPers make. Since that is their past-time, they know what it takes to make a ship work in PvP. By default in this knowledge, they know what mechanics will work in their favor in PvE automatically.
If noted that the ship would either perform, or not perform, at given roles by said people, it is generally wise to address this with genuine consideration, rather than blowing it off as irrelevant.
I don't think I was blowing it off as irrelevant. If that was the impression I gave, I do apologize.
At the same time, most of what I'm saying comes from the fact that, when I see people talking about how this and that works in PVP, the impression is that PVP is the "ultimate worth" of a ship, and PVP specs are the "right way" to play. Which I disagree with, vehemently. To be fair, this may well not be the intent, but it is the impression. And thus you get my reaction. (Said reaction may be a knee-jerk response from my EVE Online days, when I argued, unsuccessfully, that forcing people to bring particular ships fit particular ways, and excluding the participation of those who could not - not "would not," "could not," - was an inane way to fight. And it basically ended with me telling my alliance leadership that if they wanted to tell me how to play my game, they could damn well pay my $15 a month. I was expelled shortly thereafter. :rolleyes: )
And I suppose that part of what I said and why I said it was the impression I had that PVE setups didn't work well in PVP, and vice versa. And to a certian extent, I still feel that way, but more because the perceived focus that DPS is the be-all-end-all of PVP leads to a certain inflexibility that, especially when dealing with PUGs, tends to lead to some amount of difficulty.
For example, you queue for an STF group. You could end up on a pure-cruiser team, a pure-escort team, in a group of four carriers... you never know. So I feel like you have to have some flexibility to what you do, instead of just raw DPS.
I guess what it boils down to was I kept reading things as basically "if it's not optimized for PVP it's no good at all." That's what I was arguing against, more than anything else.
(Snip)
I guess what it boils down to was I kept reading things as basically "if it's not optimized for PVP it's no good at all." That's what I was arguing against, more than anything else.
Well, on some level, it's true.
If you casually do B'Tran, Eta Eridani and saving those ******* whining Deferi dailies, then yes, any old PVE build will work without much more than basic forethought.
However...
I believe it is also fair to say that if you wish to have a ship that can capably do everything this game can offer, from PVP right through to Elite STFs (with the chance of actually finishing the Optional objective) then PVP does write the rulebook, and the rulebook says "DPS is God."
Survival in Elite STFs - the very pinnacle of this game's PVE content - should not be expected. You will die, and there is no use fighting it and staving off that inevitable with notions of one or two versions of transfer shields, hazards, polarize hull, or whatever other Roleplaying skills might factor in to your design decisions. There is still a Tactical Cube that can one-shot you for 80,000 hit points, and doesn't really give a damn. The best recourse? Accept you will explode once or twice, and kill it quickly, because it doesn't care if you're a Dreadnought or a Defiant.
If you even think about attempting Elite STFs in a riff-raff of Science ships and tank-designed Cruisers, you will - I guarantee you - fail the optional, and in some situations, the mission as well.
So, while it might not be as 'fluffy' (as tabletop wargamers like to put it...) but the best, all-round builds that can actually do everything in the game on the level of the bleeding-edge, PVP has it.
Having said all that, if you have no inclination to do the game's hardest PVE or PVP content, and wish to play casually in other areas - that is entirely your prerogative, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that decision.
Am I the only one to think that the whole potential healboat aspect of the Odyssey-class is really awkward because you'll be stuck - unlike other cruisers - with making a more significant investment into auxliary power? (especially considering you have +10 there by default)
Like... W25 S75 E25 A75?
No other cruiser build that I know has to work with that constraint. It looks pretty cumbersome to me. With the universal stations used for either Tactical or Engineering, you'd only need to distribute power between 3 systems rather than 4.
Although I can see the dip in Aux being useful for "Auxiliary to..." engineer powers too.
Am I the only one to think that the whole potential healboat aspect of the Odyssey-class is really awkward because you'll be stuck - unlike other cruisers - with making a more significant investment into auxliary power? (especially considering you have +10 there by default)
No other cruiser build that I know has to work with that constraint. It looks pretty cumbersome to me. With the universal stations used for either Tactical or Engineering, you'd only need to distribute power between 3 systems rather than 4.
Although I can see the dip in Aux being useful for "Auxiliary to..." engineer powers too.
Batteries, my man, batteries.
Invest in the Batteries skill, and keep the Aux variety on you at all times, and you should be able to keep your power levels under control.
Granted, but not the point I'm trying to make. Rather you spent considerable time noting how our observations are mistaken. I simply felt as a practical response, it can be openly tested. I am confident in my PvP ship performing well in PvE because... well, I got my full MACO set somehow after all, and that wasn't from PvP (unfortunately).
Trying to debate a ship's use by noting its PvE worth is a silly point to start with. ANY ship, with ANY weapon loadout and BOFF assignment, in the hands of even low skill and mediocre players, can perform adequately enough in PvE.
Mostly true. I am always surprised by how poorly a person can do in PvE when given all the tools.
If built to survive and win in PvP, the ship's design becomes vastly more than capable of tackling any PvE scenario thrown at it, while still having that added versatility should you decide to take advantage of that extra gameplay mechanic in between content.
100% true. And contrary to popular belief there are many in the PvP community (such as yourself) who generously share the information to make great ships.
That considered, ship balancing is first done on the PvP side by developers, which by default filters to PvE in most cases as a human opponent is going to be vastly more difficult than any AI.
Again very true.
That is the point many of the PvPers make. Since that is their past-time, they know what it takes to make a ship work in PvP. By default in this knowledge, they know what mechanics will work in their favor in PvE automatically.
If noted that the ship would either perform, or not perform, at given roles by said people, it is generally wise to address this with genuine consideration, rather than blowing it off as irrelevant.
If only cryptic would give some of the PvP fleets some test time (compensated with C-points or dilithium!) on some of the new ships. Maybe a healthly legal non-disclosure agreement to keep it all quiet.
Hakaishin, sometimes it seems like you're reading my mind. However, I must disagree with your assertion that escorts are okay as is. Cruisers for the longest time have been the favored son (or daughter). Followed by Science ships. Now I'll be the first to say this is my opinion, but part of the problem is that the Star Trek IP has a lot more of those "iconic" ship classes than escorts.
I have to sort of (begrudgingly) agree with the OP that we could seriously use some new escorts. Don't get me wrong II love that we got the MVAE, the San Paulo, and the Defiant. Yet how long can we just keep recycling the same models over and over? Let's see something new from Cryptic! They obviously have the talent! We see it every patch.
Once again, I am dissappointed in the Devs. I have been with the game since Beta and Launch, and I stick with it today, despite numerous previous dissappointments. Some people, including my friends, even urged me to cancel my sub, which I was not going to do. But this is not about me, this is about the fact that for the billionth time since launch, the Devs have proved that unless the community gets down on it's knees and begs, it's perfectly fine never touching the Escort and Science Vessel classes again.
"But Spartan, there are so many advanced Sci vessels and Escorts, and THEY were made by the devs!"
You're half-right. The newer Sci-vessels were made for 2 reasons: 1, people wanted historic ship classes that weren't in the game, and 2, Fed players wanted a ship that could more easily counter Klingon cloaking.
But on the Escort side of things, the Devs have NEVER made ANY updates to the ship class, or added new ships in general, unless we BEGGED for it. The Retrofit Defiant was a kick in the pants at best. And the Multi-Vector Assault Escort would never had existed, had there not been a massive argument over a Federation battleship-type vessel to counter Klingon Dreds that was threatning to rip the community to shreds.
Case in point, I think that the Devs have been BLATANTLY NEGLECTING the Science Vessel and Escort class ships, and as of yet, there seems to be no remedy. The current Fed flagship-class vessel is firmly in the Cruiser Class, rather than being the first fully or half universal ship in the Federation classes that was NOT a Shuttle. This leaves Escort and Sci Vessel captains by the wayside with no means of catching up to Cruiser captains.
SUMMATION: IT IS MY BELIEF THAT THE DEVELOPERS OF THE GAME, HENCEFORTH KNOWN AS "STAR TREK ONLINE", SHOULD EITHER MODIFY THE ODDESSY CLASS TO BE MORE EASILY UTILIZED BY NON-CRUISER CAPTAINS, OR SHOULD IMMEDIATLY BEFORE THE RELEASE OF ANY OTHER CONTENT, DEVELOP A SIMILARLY RANKED ESCORT AND SCI VESSEL.
Comments most certainly welcome.
have you LOOKED at the stats? with a lcdr uni slot you are going to be hard pressed to find a va flying anything BUT Odyssey's, except teh hardcore tac and sci purists who stick to thier classes regardless. the excelsior -r was the best cruiser in game until now. Odyssey will easily be the most versatile fed ship in the game. I'm actually shocked they are giving the critter away.
I believe it is also fair to say that if you wish to have a ship that can capably do everything this game can offer, from PVP right through to Elite STFs (with the chance of actually finishing the Optional objective) then PVP does write the rulebook, and the rulebook says "DPS is God."
I guess that right there is what my problem is. I dislike games where it's just a race to out-DPS each other. That's why I never tried to get back into nullsec warfare in EVE - it's degraded to simply be a matter of who can drop more capital ships than the other guy(s). And thus why I never got into PVP in STO - or Champions, for that matter.
"DPS is God" may well be true, but I would rather see a game where it's possible, albeit not guaranteed, for someone to be *le gasp!* creative and come up with strategies and tactics to overcome pure DPS. Granted, it's probably a pipe dream, and STO may well never be that game. Doesn't stop me from wishing.
Anyway, for all the arguments against it, I'm still intrigued by the possibilities of the Odyssey-class. Perhaps if I could put a ship's motto on the dedication plaque for her, it'd be "haters gonna hate."
And maybe this will mean that, after the first week or so, it won't look like the entire Starfleet switched to the new ship; having something that not everybody flies is something that appeals to my twisted little mind.
"DPS is God" may well be true, but I would rather see a game where it's possible, albeit not guaranteed, for someone to be *le gasp!* creative and come up with strategies and tactics to overcome pure DPS. Granted, it's probably a pipe dream, and STO may well never be that game. Doesn't stop me from wishing.
.
Yeah, thats pretty well the crux of the issue. I too, would like to see a system of play which rewards creativity over damage... But I don't think we'll find that in STO at this juncture.
All said and done, I don't see much changing for me. My main is a Tactical, and after nearly 9 months in it, I've gotten very comfortable with the Sovereign. It is far from clear to me at this point that the Odyssey can do the same things my Sovereign can (An even split between damage, support and speed) and I suspect I will be staying right where I am until I see what 'reality' has in store for the academics.
Will I get the ship? Absolutely. On every character, and probably characters I'm likely to create this weekend just so I can have more of the suckers(!)
But realistically, for most of the time, I'll probably stick with the Sovereign if only so I am not "one of the sheep."
...In any serious play I'm involved with, be it PVP or Elite STFs... I'll probably do exactly as I am now, and switch out to the trusty fleet escort.
Nothing changes, except that space is filled with more bloated whales.
I like how people complain that science ships need love when they easily have the most neat little perks..1.3x shield mod, built-in subsystem targeting, built-in sensor analysis..
Yes, escorts need more hulls. An endgame Akira escort/cruiser hybrid would be amazing, or maybe give us the Steamrunner that people have been asking for since the game went live. Surely the Steamrunner would be just as easily modeled as the 2(!) Nebula and Excelsior variants already in the game. Steamrunner as a hybrid Escort/Sci would be awesome.
So there you go.
Tier 5 Akira (Using the Akira's model, plz) Tac/Cruiser hybrid
Tier 3 or 4 Steamrunner Sci/Tac hybrid. Or hell, even BoP-style with 4-5 universal slots, make it the ultimate in flexibility..
They could've made the Rhode Island a hybrid Tac/Sci too, but that didn't happen.
Hm, we got nice shiny new flagship we been waiting for, and its pretty epic, and the OP is complaining there isn't enough escort/sv love. Hm...
Rearrange these words to form a popular and applicable saying...
Pleasing people some no there is.
You old schoolers need to be careful, that your list of 'wants' that aren't implemented yet, don't unbalance the game if/when they are implemented. This is what killed WoW for a lot of hardcore players, myself included. Blizzard lost their direction, started pandering to the fragile wants of the community, changed classes, changed them back, unbalanced them, balanced them again. There comes a point where one final unnecessary brushstroke ruins the entire canvas. Be careful what you wish for.
Hm, we got nice shiny new flagship we been waiting for, and its pretty epic, and the OP is complaining there isn't enough escort/sv love. Hm...
Rearrange these words to form a popular and applicable saying...
Pleasing people some no there is.
You old schoolers need to be careful, that your list of 'wants' that aren't implemented yet, don't unbalance the game if/when they are implemented. This is what killed WoW for a lot of hardcore players, myself included. Blizzard lost their direction, started pandering to the fragile wants of the community, changed classes, changed them back, unbalanced them, balanced them again. There comes a point where one final unnecessary brushstroke ruins the entire canvas. Be careful what you wish for.
yes.. because making games fun for everyone but YOU is bad. we know.
Wow lost its steam because its been around so long and people more or less have done what was to be done. Once they realized WoW was a fancy chat room for them, they bailed and went for FUN games.
Escorts are fine as they are. I have little trouble tanking damage in mine on my sci toon, tac toon and of course me eng toon.
If anything they need to be rebalanced downwards.
As for federation cruisers, the only thing they're good for is tanking, not much else. The universal station on the Odyssey allows for some leeway in making a cruiser more tactical orientated, but even then it's still going to be limited.
Again, nobody's complaining about the escort performance. It's the hulls. It seems that every new hull that comes out is a cruiser or science ship, while escorts just get a remodel that shares virtually the same stats. Cruiser and Sci got two fantastic looking canon ships (Nebula, a non-canon Nebula, and 2 beautiful Excelsiors) with added capability and a good difference of variety from their tiers (Cloak detect stuff, transwarp, the ships being arguably some of the best at their tier..) and Escorts get a fugly tier 3 skin with a near-useless point-defense system. Yay? Escorts didn't get anything to match the tier 5 Excelsior or Nebula, which is where the tier 5 Akira (using the same model) and a tier 3 Steamrunner would come in handy.
Would be awesome. It'd be a hybrid cruiser/escort. Push come to shove, you could remove the ability for it to carry dual cannons, and it'd be a beam boater's dream ship. It'd turn a little slower then the Heavy Escort, and it has a slightly lower impulse modifier, but it makes up for that with better shielding and a stronger hull then the other escorts at tier 5. The extra engineering capabilities as well as the universal crew slot would also make up for the lack of cannons, while keeping the +15 weapons power and the lean toward the "tactical ship" side of things with the bias toward tactical crew slots and consoles.
Again you get a Tactical-leaning beam boat with untold amounts of flexibility with the Bird of Prey-style universal crew slots. It'll be less maneuverable then the tier 3 heavy escorts, but would have better shielding and hull, while still having less shielding and hull then a cruiser and none of the nifty gadgets of a sci hull.
That's what I'd personally like to see anyway. It's not an increase in performance a LOT of escort players are looking for, it's a switch-up in variety. Both Sci and Cruisers have gotten ships (And cruisers get a lot more then anyone..) that mix it up to keep it interesting. Escorts haven't. And it's about time we did.
Well we can hope to see the Jem'Hadar Attack Ship hit the c-store, or better yet be dropped on players as a freebie(hint-hint devs) (possibly fed eclusive. since the klingons have so much tac love already) so that tac players have more variety. There isn't a lack of ships that could be adopted in to science and tac, it just takes time to develop them for the game, so you know they don't break balance.... Either way the OP needs to stop crying that we got a new cruiser, and figure out how to use it to an advantage... There are some of skills hovering around out there that can make DPS bite the attacking ship right in the butt.
I don't have any intention of telling anyone how to play the game, build their ship, etc. I will offer advice, constructive criticism, tactical knowledge, etc to help them as best I can, but I will never (even in my own 12th Fleet PvP parties, the people I am most critical of because they represent me as well) cross the line of offering advice, and calling you stupid for not doing something my way.
I will tell you what I do, why I do it, and how it works for me. If it doesn't for you, fine. I may not like it, but you won't hear a word of it from me.
I dare you instead to prove me wrong and build something BETTER than me, because that is what drives innovation, and is how the best PvP builds in the game are created.
"DPS is God" is a relative term however. Rather, I'd go so far as to say "CC is God". After all, if you're locked down (unable to move/act) you're as good as dead, whereas raw DPS you can defend against.
Nothing you can do to stop your death if you can't react to it.
That's one of the reasons my shark tactics are so successful. My enemies can't move and have no time to react to my burst. Nor do they require a premade to be effective (I can PuG and have the same effect on my enemies).
Hell, last night the fleet and I thought it would be incredibly funny if we took all Dreadnoughts into PvP. We ended up against Sad Pandas (one of the better Fed PvP fleets in the game).
Sad Panda's normal tactic, that you can expect them to pull EVERY time you fight them?
Always a premade. 3-4 Gravity Well III's. 5 up to sometimes 10 consecutive Photonic Shockwaves. Multi-shield strips followed closely by Spread III Quantums.
Usually an instant wipe for the opposing party who isn't expecting to fight it beforehand.
Our survivability pushed past that first wave however, and after that, there wasn't a damn thing they could do to that many Lances.
We won 15-1. Match lasted all of 9 minutes.
Moral of the story, and one I've tried to make for a very, VERY long time:
The ship does NOT win the fight. The captain/team does.
We took the most laughable PvP ship in the game by most standards, took not 1, not 2... but a whole group of them. Took on one of the game's best and most notoriously cheap groups.
We won. We won so lopsidedly that I couldn't stop laughing for a good hour.
It was great fun and a nice joke.
I thought I had it recorded too... it was going to be my next PvP ROFL video, but my FRAPS messed up mid-match and I only got segments of it, so I had to scrap it.
Didnt realise 12th resorted to calling other fleets "cheap"
Always a premade. 3-4 Gravity Well III's. 5 up to sometimes 10 consecutive Photonic Shockwaves. Multi-shield strips followed closely by Spread III Quantums.
We also need to keep in mind that STO is a Star Trek emulation game. It's not Eve where you can just throw in any ship you want. Most of the classic Trek ships are Cruisers and that's what the Trek fans want to see and fly. The Intrepid, Defiant, Prometheus, Defiant, and Akira are in the game - basically most the canon non-cruiser ships. There's still tons of canon cruisers that haven't made it into the game yet.
But there are a lot of people who play this game that aren't huge Star trek fans but love this game that want more variety. In order to please both sides, it is tricky for the devs and I feel for them.
But there are a lot of people who play this game that aren't huge Star trek fans but love this game that want more variety. In order to please both sides, it is tricky for the devs and I feel for them.
Cryptic doesn't have the option of pleasing everyone. Cryptic can only add to the game what CBS approves. The Jem'hadar ship, for example, was approved by CBS only because it would be in a very limited release and there would not be thousands of them flying around in the game. CBS is very particular about the image of their IP and Cryptic has to abide by those decisions.
Listen: I'm not saying that the Escorts need an OP supplament with the biggest guns in the Fleet.
I'm not saying that the new Flagship should have been purely an escort.
I'm not even saying that Escorts and Sci Vessels haven't gotten stuff that wasn't worthwile
My point is, that if Cryptic is going to introduce a "flagship", type vessel for both sides, the least they could do is offer a bit of variety in it.
The way I see it, there could be three varieties: The one that already exists, as the Eng. variant, one with slightly increased speed and shields, and reduced hull, and more Commander level Sci slots instead of Eng slots for Sci captains, and a variant with reduced hull and shields in exchange for better speed and turn rate and a Tactical lean for Tac captains.
You still have the Oddessey as a mainly Cruiser, but with a few tweaks so that everyone can be happy.
Again, nobody's complaining about the escort performance. It's the hulls. It seems that every new hull that comes out is a cruiser or science ship, while escorts just get a remodel that shares virtually the same stats. Cruiser and Sci got two fantastic looking canon ships (Nebula, a non-canon Nebula, and 2 beautiful Excelsiors) with added capability and a good difference of variety from their tiers (Cloak detect stuff, transwarp, the ships being arguably some of the best at their tier..) and Escorts get a fugly tier 3 skin with a near-useless point-defense system. Yay? Escorts didn't get anything to match the tier 5 Excelsior or Nebula, which is where the tier 5 Akira (using the same model) and a tier 3 Steamrunner would come in handy.
Would be awesome. It'd be a hybrid cruiser/escort. Push come to shove, you could remove the ability for it to carry dual cannons, and it'd be a beam boater's dream ship. It'd turn a little slower then the Heavy Escort, and it has a slightly lower impulse modifier, but it makes up for that with better shielding and a stronger hull then the other escorts at tier 5. The extra engineering capabilities as well as the universal crew slot would also make up for the lack of cannons, while keeping the +15 weapons power and the lean toward the "tactical ship" side of things with the bias toward tactical crew slots and consoles.
And an escort with Commander Tac, Lt Commander Tac, and a Lt Commander Engineering, with no draw backs, is not OP how? What you have there is never going to happen, not at least until T6 comes out for all classes.
A T5 Akira would be awesome, but I dont see it, nor do I want it to be, OP.
On another similar note, I'm hoping to get a T5 Vesta Sci Ship (Sci Com/Tac Lt Com) someday soon (per http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=252033). That would at least up diversity for Science ships, and make sense if you read the books
Cryptic doesn't have the option of pleasing everyone. Cryptic can only add to the game what CBS approves. The Jem'hadar ship, for example, was approved by CBS only because it would be in a very limited release and there would not be thousands of them flying around in the game. CBS is very particular about the image of their IP and Cryptic has to abide by those decisions.
I wonder if CBS will ever or has caused us players any grief?
You just got the Jem'Hadar ship. You have the MVAE (arguably the most "flavored" ship in game). Fleet Escort. Defiant Retro (though not an end-game exclusive skin).
I think the thread about people who don't like what cruisers are saying they want to use cruisers pretty well establishes that if there's one new ship to be added, it should be a cruiser.
Cruisers are big, impressive, iconic. People simply don't get jolly about gunboats the way they do a bigass cruiser. That's just human nature.
And an escort with Commander Tac, Lt Commander Tac, and a Lt Commander Engineering, with no draw backs, is not OP how? What you have there is never going to happen, not at least until T6 comes out for all classes.
Drawbacks are weaker shields and hull then standard Cruisers and no dual cannons. Made up for by greater firepower (Due to more tac consoles) and more mobility.
It'd still be an escort at heart, but with more cruiser-centric features. Slower and less mobile then most of the escorts, but still faster and more maneuverable then cruisers. A Panzerschiffe, if you will.
Comments
Granted, but not the point I'm trying to make. Rather you spent considerable time noting how our observations are mistaken. I simply felt as a practical response, it can be openly tested. I am confident in my PvP ship performing well in PvE because... well, I got my full MACO set somehow after all, and that wasn't from PvP (unfortunately).
Trying to debate a ship's use by noting its PvE worth is a silly point to start with. ANY ship, with ANY weapon loadout and BOFF assignment, in the hands of even low skill and mediocre players, can perform adequately enough in PvE.
If built to survive and win in PvP, the ship's design becomes vastly more than capable of tackling any PvE scenario thrown at it, while still having that added versatility should you decide to take advantage of that extra gameplay mechanic in between content.
That considered, ship balancing is first done on the PvP side by developers, which by default filters to PvE in most cases as a human opponent is going to be vastly more difficult than any AI.
That is the point many of the PvPers make. Since that is their past-time, they know what it takes to make a ship work in PvP. By default in this knowledge, they know what mechanics will work in their favor in PvE automatically.
If noted that the ship would either perform, or not perform, at given roles by said people, it is generally wise to address this with genuine consideration, rather than blowing it off as irrelevant.
I don't think I was blowing it off as irrelevant. If that was the impression I gave, I do apologize.
At the same time, most of what I'm saying comes from the fact that, when I see people talking about how this and that works in PVP, the impression is that PVP is the "ultimate worth" of a ship, and PVP specs are the "right way" to play. Which I disagree with, vehemently. To be fair, this may well not be the intent, but it is the impression. And thus you get my reaction. (Said reaction may be a knee-jerk response from my EVE Online days, when I argued, unsuccessfully, that forcing people to bring particular ships fit particular ways, and excluding the participation of those who could not - not "would not," "could not," - was an inane way to fight. And it basically ended with me telling my alliance leadership that if they wanted to tell me how to play my game, they could damn well pay my $15 a month. I was expelled shortly thereafter. :rolleyes: )
And I suppose that part of what I said and why I said it was the impression I had that PVE setups didn't work well in PVP, and vice versa. And to a certian extent, I still feel that way, but more because the perceived focus that DPS is the be-all-end-all of PVP leads to a certain inflexibility that, especially when dealing with PUGs, tends to lead to some amount of difficulty.
For example, you queue for an STF group. You could end up on a pure-cruiser team, a pure-escort team, in a group of four carriers... you never know. So I feel like you have to have some flexibility to what you do, instead of just raw DPS.
I guess what it boils down to was I kept reading things as basically "if it's not optimized for PVP it's no good at all." That's what I was arguing against, more than anything else.
Well, on some level, it's true.
If you casually do B'Tran, Eta Eridani and saving those ******* whining Deferi dailies, then yes, any old PVE build will work without much more than basic forethought.
However...
I believe it is also fair to say that if you wish to have a ship that can capably do everything this game can offer, from PVP right through to Elite STFs (with the chance of actually finishing the Optional objective) then PVP does write the rulebook, and the rulebook says "DPS is God."
Survival in Elite STFs - the very pinnacle of this game's PVE content - should not be expected. You will die, and there is no use fighting it and staving off that inevitable with notions of one or two versions of transfer shields, hazards, polarize hull, or whatever other Roleplaying skills might factor in to your design decisions. There is still a Tactical Cube that can one-shot you for 80,000 hit points, and doesn't really give a damn. The best recourse? Accept you will explode once or twice, and kill it quickly, because it doesn't care if you're a Dreadnought or a Defiant.
If you even think about attempting Elite STFs in a riff-raff of Science ships and tank-designed Cruisers, you will - I guarantee you - fail the optional, and in some situations, the mission as well.
So, while it might not be as 'fluffy' (as tabletop wargamers like to put it...) but the best, all-round builds that can actually do everything in the game on the level of the bleeding-edge, PVP has it.
Having said all that, if you have no inclination to do the game's hardest PVE or PVP content, and wish to play casually in other areas - that is entirely your prerogative, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that decision.
Like... W25 S75 E25 A75?
No other cruiser build that I know has to work with that constraint. It looks pretty cumbersome to me. With the universal stations used for either Tactical or Engineering, you'd only need to distribute power between 3 systems rather than 4.
Although I can see the dip in Aux being useful for "Auxiliary to..." engineer powers too.
Batteries, my man, batteries.
Invest in the Batteries skill, and keep the Aux variety on you at all times, and you should be able to keep your power levels under control.
Dang it, at least the two former were reusable. >_>
Hakaishin, sometimes it seems like you're reading my mind. However, I must disagree with your assertion that escorts are okay as is. Cruisers for the longest time have been the favored son (or daughter). Followed by Science ships. Now I'll be the first to say this is my opinion, but part of the problem is that the Star Trek IP has a lot more of those "iconic" ship classes than escorts.
I have to sort of (begrudgingly) agree with the OP that we could seriously use some new escorts. Don't get me wrong II love that we got the MVAE, the San Paulo, and the Defiant. Yet how long can we just keep recycling the same models over and over? Let's see something new from Cryptic! They obviously have the talent! We see it every patch.
have you LOOKED at the stats? with a lcdr uni slot you are going to be hard pressed to find a va flying anything BUT Odyssey's, except teh hardcore tac and sci purists who stick to thier classes regardless. the excelsior -r was the best cruiser in game until now. Odyssey will easily be the most versatile fed ship in the game. I'm actually shocked they are giving the critter away.
I guess that right there is what my problem is. I dislike games where it's just a race to out-DPS each other. That's why I never tried to get back into nullsec warfare in EVE - it's degraded to simply be a matter of who can drop more capital ships than the other guy(s). And thus why I never got into PVP in STO - or Champions, for that matter.
"DPS is God" may well be true, but I would rather see a game where it's possible, albeit not guaranteed, for someone to be *le gasp!* creative and come up with strategies and tactics to overcome pure DPS. Granted, it's probably a pipe dream, and STO may well never be that game. Doesn't stop me from wishing.
Anyway, for all the arguments against it, I'm still intrigued by the possibilities of the Odyssey-class. Perhaps if I could put a ship's motto on the dedication plaque for her, it'd be "haters gonna hate."
And maybe this will mean that, after the first week or so, it won't look like the entire Starfleet switched to the new ship; having something that not everybody flies is something that appeals to my twisted little mind.
Yeah, thats pretty well the crux of the issue. I too, would like to see a system of play which rewards creativity over damage... But I don't think we'll find that in STO at this juncture.
All said and done, I don't see much changing for me. My main is a Tactical, and after nearly 9 months in it, I've gotten very comfortable with the Sovereign. It is far from clear to me at this point that the Odyssey can do the same things my Sovereign can (An even split between damage, support and speed) and I suspect I will be staying right where I am until I see what 'reality' has in store for the academics.
Will I get the ship? Absolutely. On every character, and probably characters I'm likely to create this weekend just so I can have more of the suckers(!)
But realistically, for most of the time, I'll probably stick with the Sovereign if only so I am not "one of the sheep."
...In any serious play I'm involved with, be it PVP or Elite STFs... I'll probably do exactly as I am now, and switch out to the trusty fleet escort.
Nothing changes, except that space is filled with more bloated whales.
Yes, escorts need more hulls. An endgame Akira escort/cruiser hybrid would be amazing, or maybe give us the Steamrunner that people have been asking for since the game went live. Surely the Steamrunner would be just as easily modeled as the 2(!) Nebula and Excelsior variants already in the game. Steamrunner as a hybrid Escort/Sci would be awesome.
So there you go.
Tier 5 Akira (Using the Akira's model, plz) Tac/Cruiser hybrid
Tier 3 or 4 Steamrunner Sci/Tac hybrid. Or hell, even BoP-style with 4-5 universal slots, make it the ultimate in flexibility..
They could've made the Rhode Island a hybrid Tac/Sci too, but that didn't happen.
Rearrange these words to form a popular and applicable saying...
Pleasing people some no there is.
You old schoolers need to be careful, that your list of 'wants' that aren't implemented yet, don't unbalance the game if/when they are implemented. This is what killed WoW for a lot of hardcore players, myself included. Blizzard lost their direction, started pandering to the fragile wants of the community, changed classes, changed them back, unbalanced them, balanced them again. There comes a point where one final unnecessary brushstroke ruins the entire canvas. Be careful what you wish for.
yes.. because making games fun for everyone but YOU is bad. we know.
Wow lost its steam because its been around so long and people more or less have done what was to be done. Once they realized WoW was a fancy chat room for them, they bailed and went for FUN games.
Huh? Nicholas Cage's hair is a bird.
If anything they need to be rebalanced downwards.
As for federation cruisers, the only thing they're good for is tanking, not much else. The universal station on the Odyssey allows for some leeway in making a cruiser more tactical orientated, but even then it's still going to be limited.
A tier 5 Akira with:
32,000 hull
1.2x shield modifier
4 fore, 3 aft weapons slots
450 crew
Cmdr tac, Lt.Cmdr tac, Lt. Sci, Lt. Cmdr Eng, Lt. Uni spots
3 device slots
4 Tac, 3 Eng, 2 Sci consoles
12 turn
.18 Impulse Modifier
60 Inertia
+15 weapons power
Would be awesome. It'd be a hybrid cruiser/escort. Push come to shove, you could remove the ability for it to carry dual cannons, and it'd be a beam boater's dream ship. It'd turn a little slower then the Heavy Escort, and it has a slightly lower impulse modifier, but it makes up for that with better shielding and a stronger hull then the other escorts at tier 5. The extra engineering capabilities as well as the universal crew slot would also make up for the lack of cannons, while keeping the +15 weapons power and the lean toward the "tactical ship" side of things with the bias toward tactical crew slots and consoles.
For the tier 3 Steamrunner, you could do..
22,000 hull
1.2x shield modifier
3 fore 2 aft weapons slots (Without dual cannons)
350 crew
1 Lt.Cmdr Uni, 2 Lt. Uni, 1 Ens. Uni.
2 tac, 2 Eng, 2 Sci consoles
12 turn
.18 impulse mod
60 inertia
+15 weapons
Again you get a Tactical-leaning beam boat with untold amounts of flexibility with the Bird of Prey-style universal crew slots. It'll be less maneuverable then the tier 3 heavy escorts, but would have better shielding and hull, while still having less shielding and hull then a cruiser and none of the nifty gadgets of a sci hull.
That's what I'd personally like to see anyway. It's not an increase in performance a LOT of escort players are looking for, it's a switch-up in variety. Both Sci and Cruisers have gotten ships (And cruisers get a lot more then anyone..) that mix it up to keep it interesting. Escorts haven't. And it's about time we did.
I don't have any intention of telling anyone how to play the game, build their ship, etc. I will offer advice, constructive criticism, tactical knowledge, etc to help them as best I can, but I will never (even in my own 12th Fleet PvP parties, the people I am most critical of because they represent me as well) cross the line of offering advice, and calling you stupid for not doing something my way.
I will tell you what I do, why I do it, and how it works for me. If it doesn't for you, fine. I may not like it, but you won't hear a word of it from me.
I dare you instead to prove me wrong and build something BETTER than me, because that is what drives innovation, and is how the best PvP builds in the game are created.
"DPS is God" is a relative term however. Rather, I'd go so far as to say "CC is God". After all, if you're locked down (unable to move/act) you're as good as dead, whereas raw DPS you can defend against.
Nothing you can do to stop your death if you can't react to it.
That's one of the reasons my shark tactics are so successful. My enemies can't move and have no time to react to my burst. Nor do they require a premade to be effective (I can PuG and have the same effect on my enemies).
Hell, last night the fleet and I thought it would be incredibly funny if we took all Dreadnoughts into PvP. We ended up against Sad Pandas (one of the better Fed PvP fleets in the game).
Sad Panda's normal tactic, that you can expect them to pull EVERY time you fight them?
Always a premade. 3-4 Gravity Well III's. 5 up to sometimes 10 consecutive Photonic Shockwaves. Multi-shield strips followed closely by Spread III Quantums.
Usually an instant wipe for the opposing party who isn't expecting to fight it beforehand.
Our survivability pushed past that first wave however, and after that, there wasn't a damn thing they could do to that many Lances.
We won 15-1. Match lasted all of 9 minutes.
Moral of the story, and one I've tried to make for a very, VERY long time:
We took the most laughable PvP ship in the game by most standards, took not 1, not 2... but a whole group of them. Took on one of the game's best and most notoriously cheap groups.
We won. We won so lopsidedly that I couldn't stop laughing for a good hour.
It was great fun and a nice joke.
I thought I had it recorded too... it was going to be my next PvP ROFL video, but my FRAPS messed up mid-match and I only got segments of it, so I had to scrap it.
Aw well... next time.
What?
But there are a lot of people who play this game that aren't huge Star trek fans but love this game that want more variety. In order to please both sides, it is tricky for the devs and I feel for them.
Oh, if you saw their chat log against us, you'd find I have absolutely no problem insulting children like that.
I got a minimum of 12 PMs following that match for no other reason than to insult and mock us.
So yeah... while I normally wouldn't discriminate, they bring the title on themselves.
http://trekmovie.com/2011/04/07/first-look-at-new-star-trek-battlestations-slot-machine/
I'm not saying that the new Flagship should have been purely an escort.
I'm not even saying that Escorts and Sci Vessels haven't gotten stuff that wasn't worthwile
My point is, that if Cryptic is going to introduce a "flagship", type vessel for both sides, the least they could do is offer a bit of variety in it.
The way I see it, there could be three varieties: The one that already exists, as the Eng. variant, one with slightly increased speed and shields, and reduced hull, and more Commander level Sci slots instead of Eng slots for Sci captains, and a variant with reduced hull and shields in exchange for better speed and turn rate and a Tactical lean for Tac captains.
You still have the Oddessey as a mainly Cruiser, but with a few tweaks so that everyone can be happy.
And an escort with Commander Tac, Lt Commander Tac, and a Lt Commander Engineering, with no draw backs, is not OP how? What you have there is never going to happen, not at least until T6 comes out for all classes.
A T5 Akira would be awesome, but I dont see it, nor do I want it to be, OP.
On another similar note, I'm hoping to get a T5 Vesta Sci Ship (Sci Com/Tac Lt Com) someday soon (per http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=252033). That would at least up diversity for Science ships, and make sense if you read the books
I wonder if CBS will ever or has caused us players any grief?
I never got a Jem'Hadar ship!
Cruisers are big, impressive, iconic. People simply don't get jolly about gunboats the way they do a bigass cruiser. That's just human nature.
Well, I dunno, the Defiant has plenty of fans...
Drawbacks are weaker shields and hull then standard Cruisers and no dual cannons. Made up for by greater firepower (Due to more tac consoles) and more mobility.
It'd still be an escort at heart, but with more cruiser-centric features. Slower and less mobile then most of the escorts, but still faster and more maneuverable then cruisers. A Panzerschiffe, if you will.