Well I guess my future with sto is determined by tomorrow then.
Only Cryptic can take something so good and TRIBBLE it straight to hell.
amazingly enough, it turned out the mirror vorcha is just a vorcha with a sci ENS instead of a tac ENS. there wasn't any crazy power creep in this case. i almost feel hope? the tholian ships stats have my brain in a fog though.
the mirror assault and star cruisers have their same stats as always, only they swamped costumes with the stats, so the assault is now the star and the star is now the assault. so, mirrored i guess.
amazingly enough, it turned out the mirror vorcha is just a vorcha with a sci ENS instead of a tac ENS. there wasn't any crazy power creep in this case. i almost feel hope? the tholian ships stats have my brain in a fog though.
the mirror assault and star cruisers have their same stats as always, only they swamped costumes with the stats, so the assault is now the star and the star is now the assault. so, mirrored i guess.
Their stats are all subject to change. So my guess is that they'll turn around and make them OP at the last minute, unless Gecko really is so stupid that he is actually not capable of telling what should and should not go on a ship.
Their stats are all subject to change. So my guess is that they'll turn around and make them OP at the last minute, unless Gecko really is so stupid that he is actually not capable of telling what should and should not go on a ship.
at the very least, the mirror vorcha will be a starcruiser. so not necessarily more desirable then what we already use, even if it had a 10th console added at the last minute or something
Their stats are all subject to change. So my guess is that they'll turn around and make them OP at the last minute, unless Gecko really is so stupid that he is actually not capable of telling what should and should not go on a ship.
i had the same thought, something about S7 bringing new ships, so the tholian ships need to stay comepetitive, the mirror ships as well
You have not even seen that build in battle and are already full of opinion.
All I can say is that I blew up a lot of ships in PvP Arena yesterday, more than usual, and quicker, while my ship's survivability was as good as ever, even though I now was using a mostly useless EPTS1 for reasons that lie in the evolution of that build.
How on Earth do you expect people to just randomly know how your build "perform in battle"? The whole point of posting your build on the boards is so people can tell you how it'll likely perform before you've tried it out, or to get help with a build that's suboptimal.
If you like I'll gladly give you a run on Cracked, afterwards I'll tell you exactly what I did and why the carrier isn't... flexible, certainly not enough for dual cannons. I'll take an escort and to make it easier on you I'll put a Tac captain in it, in theory with just the two of us I should be the first to die every time. It's your call.
I shall recommend it to my executive officer immediately.
"No, there is no real problem with P2W in STO. Obviously, if you fight against someone with an equal level of skill in the game, better equipment will give you an edge. But usually, it is the skill level that determines the outcome, not the P2W." -Logimo
I don't. But I expect people who don't know that not to laugh at it.
The sheer arrogance you have gives me huge amounts of amusement. You're the very definition of narcissism.
Do you not realize that most of what you now "experiment" with has been experimented on? how everyone thinks every idea is their own, and that they actually invented the lightbulb.
This is why ppl tend to laugh when they hear certain things, like tac / fat carriers, or dual cannons on a fat carrier.
"No, there is no real problem with P2W in STO. Obviously, if you fight against someone with an equal level of skill in the game, better equipment will give you an edge. But usually, it is the skill level that determines the outcome, not the P2W." -Logimo
They are right.
I couldn't think of a more fail weapon to use on a Carrier than Dual Cannons.
Dual Heavy Cannons are already bad cause they would be very hard to line up with your abysmal turn rate.
But at least they would fire off instantly when you finally do get them in arc.
With Dual Cannons you're just gonna fire a few small bolts at them before they get our of arc again wasting the whole firing cycle and doing pathetic damage.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] Vornek@oberlerchner123 - Join Date: July 2008
They are right.
I couldn't think of a more fail weapon to use on a Carrier than Dual Cannons.
Dual Heavy Cannons are already bad cause they would be very hard to line up with your abysmal turn rate.
But at least they would fire off instantly when you finally do get them in arc.
With Dual Cannons you're just gonna fire a few small bolts at them before they get our of arc again wasting the whole firing cycle and doing pathetic damage.
Shhhhhh let's just share this popcorn bucket. This is better than any show on TV.
"No, there is no real problem with P2W in STO. Obviously, if you fight against someone with an equal level of skill in the game, better equipment will give you an edge. But usually, it is the skill level that determines the outcome, not the P2W." -Logimo
I have heard that before about my builds. Not all of them can possibly be "the worst", right?
Most critique spawned from them being 90 degree arc weapons facing in opposite directions on a slow turning ship.
Now you're using a 45 degree arc weapon that also has to stay in arc to do it's damage.
You know what? Since you only seam to 1vs1 with the intention to frustrate your enemy, by them not being able to kill or shoot at you.
Why not go with Beam Arrays aft, and turrets in the front. That way you get max DPS when running away.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] Vornek@oberlerchner123 - Join Date: July 2008
Why not go with Beam Arrays aft, and turrets in the front. That way you get max DPS when running away.
That is an interesting Idea.. No one wants to be on the front end of a science ship..because of the Front Arc annoyance some Science abilities are. Finding a way to do enough Rear DPS To force them to have to decide between Fore or Aft is actually an interesting route.
How ever that still leaves the Side Arcs, but Turret/Beams should hit those arcs also. Nice suggesting.
You think that your beta test was bad?
Think about this: American Football has been in open beta for 144 years. ~Kotaku
The lulz from this build is screaming for you to die at the hands of shuttle with 1 Dual beam bank and 1 trico torp mounted.
However i believe this thread is for lulz anyway and not to be taken seriously.
agreed. This thread is just for him to draw as much attention to himself as possible. He said it on the very first page that he's not looking for advice in a thread labeled "lets talk about my tactical carrier"...lol
As far as screaming, that is not required any longer. He's picked on every match I happen to see him in anymore.
Soph, I get the feeling that people would have a lot less of a problem if you simply flat-out said that you're playing a build that's most fun for you, rather than the most optimal one.
The problem is that if you post your build or ideas asking for thoughts and suggestions, people naturally assume you're looking for advice on how to make it optimal. We can't help anyone who only wants to fly a given setup for fun, efficiency be damned, because fun is (clearly) subjective. You've defended your builds on the basis that they're "fun to fly", which is totally a-okay, but we can't help you at that point because there's no common grounds for us to work from.
Shimmer, I get the feeling that this wouldn't help. And you know where I get that feeling? From my earlier posts in this thread that said exactly that.
And yet in the very first post you were asking for "comments", and you even went on to stress again in another post that those were what you wanted... you also continually posted bits and pieces of other "updated" builds, I distinctly remember having this problem with you when I was still under the impression that you were flying the original ship.
As I said, no one other than yourself can help you with a build that you fly for fun. Since message boards are intended for social activity and discussion, it's only polite to save posting something that's inviolate for comment.
Sure, but people tend to lose their patience when long, generous posts (of which there are enough in this thread to compile a small gem of an FAQ) full of advice and knowledge are scoffed at, ignored or discarded.
When I told you about EPtS and its advantages, your only response was a one-liner about TSS3 (lol) having, with a full-buffed aux, a stronger resist than EPtS1. Why would you feel the need to defend yourself like that if the build just appeals to you on a fun level? Even if you did, why toss out everything else I said just to single out a without-context spot where you might be technically correct? Does that not come across as spiteful or grasping at straws to you?
Tell me if you think your response to this astounding post (where the author explicitly says he respects your wishes to try something different) was appropriate or not at all insulting: "[...] okay, so the general belief is obviously that this build is not good at what it was designed for, despite me providing proof that it does quite well in PvP. So, anyone willing to test it in about ten hours and proving me how wrong I am? For example, any confident BoP captain for a 1v1?"
People who know what they are doing, but don't mind sacrifice of some performance for the sake of personal fun/look/whatever
The min-maxed ones
People who know exactly what they are doing, and wan't to have their build at peak performance at all cost.
---
Min-maxers will never understand the fun builds. Same as it is pointless to present a fun build as the best one. Some people here think that PvP is only about being best, and having best build. So there is no point to argue with them about it.
For example I dislike the look of dual banks (the hard points, edges of saucers and other monstrosities). So even tho I know my beam overload would do few Ks more with dual bank...I will still equip beam array. Look > Performance for me. But there is hundreds (or rather dozen lol) people who would argue about that with me, how I'm gimping my builds.
Because you can kill off people with horrible builds in your fun build, it doesn't mean it's great build. It just mean the bad players are just that, bad.
But we can all agree that PvP is about fun, and everyone should have their fun as they like.
P.S. I also think DC/DHC on that carrier atrocity is horrible idea.
"Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
Comments
amazingly enough, it turned out the mirror vorcha is just a vorcha with a sci ENS instead of a tac ENS. there wasn't any crazy power creep in this case. i almost feel hope? the tholian ships stats have my brain in a fog though.
the mirror assault and star cruisers have their same stats as always, only they swamped costumes with the stats, so the assault is now the star and the star is now the assault. so, mirrored i guess.
Their stats are all subject to change. So my guess is that they'll turn around and make them OP at the last minute, unless Gecko really is so stupid that he is actually not capable of telling what should and should not go on a ship.
at the very least, the mirror vorcha will be a starcruiser. so not necessarily more desirable then what we already use, even if it had a 10th console added at the last minute or something
i had the same thought, something about S7 bringing new ships, so the tholian ships need to stay comepetitive, the mirror ships as well
a history of sto pvp: 2010 - 2011
a history of sto pvp: 2012 - 2013
How on Earth do you expect people to just randomly know how your build "perform in battle"? The whole point of posting your build on the boards is so people can tell you how it'll likely perform before you've tried it out, or to get help with a build that's suboptimal.
If you like I'll gladly give you a run on Cracked, afterwards I'll tell you exactly what I did and why the carrier isn't... flexible, certainly not enough for dual cannons. I'll take an escort and to make it easier on you I'll put a Tac captain in it, in theory with just the two of us I should be the first to die every time. It's your call.
vids and guides and stuff
[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
I shall recommend it to my executive officer immediately.
The sheer arrogance you have gives me huge amounts of amusement. You're the very definition of narcissism.
Do you not realize that most of what you now "experiment" with has been experimented on?
This is why ppl tend to laugh when they hear certain things, like tac / fat carriers, or dual cannons on a fat carrier.
I couldn't think of a more fail weapon to use on a Carrier than Dual Cannons.
Dual Heavy Cannons are already bad cause they would be very hard to line up with your abysmal turn rate.
But at least they would fire off instantly when you finally do get them in arc.
With Dual Cannons you're just gonna fire a few small bolts at them before they get our of arc again wasting the whole firing cycle and doing pathetic damage.
Vornek@oberlerchner123 - Join Date: July 2008
Shhhhhh let's just share this popcorn bucket. This is better than any show on TV.
Most critique spawned from them being 90 degree arc weapons facing in opposite directions on a slow turning ship.
Now you're using a 45 degree arc weapon that also has to stay in arc to do it's damage.
You know what? Since you only seam to 1vs1 with the intention to frustrate your enemy, by them not being able to kill or shoot at you.
Why not go with Beam Arrays aft, and turrets in the front. That way you get max DPS when running away.
Vornek@oberlerchner123 - Join Date: July 2008
That is an interesting Idea.. No one wants to be on the front end of a science ship..because of the Front Arc annoyance some Science abilities are. Finding a way to do enough Rear DPS To force them to have to decide between Fore or Aft is actually an interesting route.
How ever that still leaves the Side Arcs, but Turret/Beams should hit those arcs also. Nice suggesting.
Think about this:
American Football has been in open beta for 144 years. ~Kotaku
Quote of the week:
Please do it so when your in the que i can find you and kill your carrier easily.
The lulz from this build is screaming for you to die at the hands of shuttle with 1 Dual beam bank and 1 trico torp mounted.
However i believe this thread is for lulz anyway and not to be taken seriously.
agreed. This thread is just for him to draw as much attention to himself as possible. He said it on the very first page that he's not looking for advice in a thread labeled "lets talk about my tactical carrier"...lol
As far as screaming, that is not required any longer. He's picked on every match I happen to see him in anymore.
The problem is that if you post your build or ideas asking for thoughts and suggestions, people naturally assume you're looking for advice on how to make it optimal. We can't help anyone who only wants to fly a given setup for fun, efficiency be damned, because fun is (clearly) subjective. You've defended your builds on the basis that they're "fun to fly", which is totally a-okay, but we can't help you at that point because there's no common grounds for us to work from.
vids and guides and stuff
[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
And yet in the very first post you were asking for "comments", and you even went on to stress again in another post that those were what you wanted... you also continually posted bits and pieces of other "updated" builds, I distinctly remember having this problem with you when I was still under the impression that you were flying the original ship.
As I said, no one other than yourself can help you with a build that you fly for fun. Since message boards are intended for social activity and discussion, it's only polite to save posting something that's inviolate for comment.
vids and guides and stuff
[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
When I told you about EPtS and its advantages, your only response was a one-liner about TSS3 (lol) having, with a full-buffed aux, a stronger resist than EPtS1. Why would you feel the need to defend yourself like that if the build just appeals to you on a fun level? Even if you did, why toss out everything else I said just to single out a without-context spot where you might be technically correct? Does that not come across as spiteful or grasping at straws to you?
Tell me if you think your response to this astounding post (where the author explicitly says he respects your wishes to try something different) was appropriate or not at all insulting: "[...] okay, so the general belief is obviously that this build is not good at what it was designed for, despite me providing proof that it does quite well in PvP. So, anyone willing to test it in about ten hours and proving me how wrong I am? For example, any confident BoP captain for a 1v1?"
vids and guides and stuff
[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
The horrible ones
People who have no idea what they are doing
The fun ones
People who know what they are doing, but don't mind sacrifice of some performance for the sake of personal fun/look/whatever
The min-maxed ones
People who know exactly what they are doing, and wan't to have their build at peak performance at all cost.
---
Min-maxers will never understand the fun builds. Same as it is pointless to present a fun build as the best one. Some people here think that PvP is only about being best, and having best build. So there is no point to argue with them about it.
For example I dislike the look of dual banks (the hard points, edges of saucers and other monstrosities). So even tho I know my beam overload would do few Ks more with dual bank...I will still equip beam array. Look > Performance for me. But there is hundreds (or rather dozen lol) people who would argue about that with me, how I'm gimping my builds.
Because you can kill off people with horrible builds in your fun build, it doesn't mean it's great build. It just mean the bad players are just that, bad.
But we can all agree that PvP is about fun, and everyone should have their fun as they like.
P.S. I also think DC/DHC on that carrier atrocity is horrible idea.