test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Op and Theory

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited June 2012 in PvP Gameplay
On the op part if all carriers in the game have 40k hull strength and TWO LT commander spots, plus a commander bridge officer spot. They really need to nerf one of those LT commander spots down to LT. This would make that ship a whole lot even to the rest. I mean my word no cruiser no escort, no science ship in the teir 5 even comes close that kind of power. I would have said something earlier but I did not think they would be so ignorant as to place one ship class above all others.

Now that my little rant is gone for the day. I had a thought about a set up for my escort, and wanted to know peoples thoughts on it. I know before transfer shield strength was nerfed awhile back, it was a good shield ability. Now not so much. If I was to take my LT Sci spot and make it science team one, and transfer shield strength two. Then take my LT engineer and make it emg to aux for transfer shield strength, and have eng team two do you think it would work well?
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    Since we're piling on Carriers today, can it be that they are totally overpowered for PvE?

    I fly the Kar'Fi at Elite, and I can blow through enemy ships almost as fast as with my Escort - with a lot more healing resources and a lot less DPS buff investment. The pets more than compensate the 1 weapon slot I'm missing compared to a Cruiser, even when I run my Tetryon Beam build.
    And I don't think the regular Carriers are any weaker, even if they only have 6 weapon slots.

    I find it hard to gauge how much of this potency translates well to PvP, but it could very well be that it's just as bad there. And if it's not the Kar'Fi advantages that translate well having a free Tractor Beam power on an Atrox could be the perk.
    So Carriers are not only the most unfun enemy to engage due to the ridicilious pet spam, they are also overpowered thanks to it.

    And I don't even think the BO seating is that problematic (it is, but not that, at least all Carriers with those BO seatings have sucktastic turn rates). Just the extra DPS and crowd control from the pets.
    And heck, I haven't even tried any flight deck cruisers yet.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    [...]. The pets more than compensate the 1 weapon slot I'm missing compared to a Cruiser, even when I run my Tetryon Beam build.
    [...]

    Actually, they compensate more than that. DPS-wise, I know from measurement that my pets do 2500 dps even when I use a mixed Runabout/Stalker setup on the Tolerance - should be more with two Stalkers or even Peregrines. But that is required, because the pets can be taken out, meaning they will not do that damage all the time.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    sophlogimo wrote:
    Actually, they compensate more than that. DPS-wise, I know from measurement that my pets do 2500 dps even when I use a mixed Runabout/Stalker setup on the Tolerance - should be more with two Stalkers or even Peregrines. But that is required, because the pets can be taken out, meaning they will not do that damage all the time.
    Given how fast my Kar'Fi can recycle its pets... Not a big issue. And I even have suicidal ones!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    Given how fast my Kar'Fi can recycle its pets... Not a big issue. And I even have suicidal ones!

    Yes, that is the only thing that bothers me a bit about carriers, too. The base cooldowns are definitely too low for all the pets.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    sophlogimo wrote:
    Yes, that is the only thing that bothers me a bit about carriers, too. The base cooldowns are definitely too low for all the pets.
    The problem is probably PvP vs PvE. PvE enemies take forever to kill just a single pet usually. In PvP, it's a single Cannon Scatter Volley that will rip your pets apart.

    There seems to be no sensible way to balance these these two extremes.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    The problem is probably PvP vs PvE. PvE enemies take forever to kill just a single pet usually. In PvP, it's a single Cannon Scatter Volley that will rip your pets apart.

    There seems to be no sensible way to balance these these two extremes.

    Buff the pve ships... perhaps its time the NPCs got to use weapon power setting. lol
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    Well, I don't see the problem in PvE. Longer cooldowns would not harm them. And in PvP, we already know that the dps of the pets is taking into account that they might be gone quickly. Balancing the cooldown for PvP according to their dps shouldn't be hard and would not effect PvE at all.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    sophlogimo wrote:
    Well, I don't see the problem in PvE. Longer cooldowns would not harm them. And in PvP, we already know that the dps of the pets is taking into account that they might be gone quickly. Balancing the cooldown for PvP according to their dps shouldn't be hard and would not effect PvE at all.
    The problem is if Carriers are most of the time without their pets thanks to some player keeping Spam Clearance Duty, it can quickly feel like being a Carrier is pointless.

    Maybe it could be blanaced better if pets would be designed to launch a single assault, and then return to refuel and rearm? Then you have decent "burst" capability (possiblity at extended range), but there would be counters in form of "spam clearance" powers. Basically balance the pets damage potential around a very short time they are expected to live, and ensure they are unlikely to inflict damage much longer since they automatically fly home.

    That would mirror "real world" carriers more closely as well, since fighters don't stay in active combat all that long. (They patrol some time, but active engagements means expending lots of fuel for maneuverung and firing missiles and other ammo that they don't have all that much onboard).


    Maybe like this:
    1) Fighters launch
    2) Fighters engage target, fire for up to 30 seconds.
    3) Fighters fly back to Carrier for refuel
    4) Each Fighter that returns back reduces your pet recharge cooldown by a percentage.

    Pet Recharge Cooldowns could be about 3-4 minutes normally, and be reduced to 1/4th if all pets return.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    Hm, that might work, but it would not be Star Trek at all. Even small ship fly around for days or even weeks without refueling.

    You are right, the cooldown needs to be balanced. But an opposing player put on "pet clearance duty" would mean taking out (the equivalent of) one enemy ship out of the dps equation for some time... which is hardly "not contributing".
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    sophlogimo wrote:
    Hm, that might work, but it would not be Star Trek at all. Even small ship fly around for days or even weeks without refueling.

    You are right, the cooldown needs to be balanced. But an opposing player put on "pet clearance duty" would mean taking out (the equivalent of) one enemy ship out of the dps equation for some time... which is hardly "not contributing".

    Well as others have pointed out carriers are not really "trek" anyway... so what the heck. Its an interesting idea. Of course Cryptic doesn't have the tech for that... they just recently got pets to follow properly. lol ;)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    sophlogimo wrote:
    Hm, that might work, but it would not be Star Trek at all. Even small ship fly around for days or even weeks without refueling.

    You are right, the cooldown needs to be balanced. But an opposing player put on "pet clearance duty" would mean taking out (the equivalent of) one enemy ship out of the dps equation for some time... which is hardly "not contributing".

    Well, Carriers aren't Star Trek either, so no surprise. But since we have Carriers, they must work sensibly in context of the game.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    Well, Carriers aren't Star Trek either, so no surprise. But since we have Carriers, they must work sensibly in context of the game.

    But not by throwing out every kind of logic out of the window, no?

    I mean, hey, ships that have an impulse drive that lasts only 30 seconds to a minute and then need refueling?

    No, simply increasing the hangar cooldowns will do.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    sophlogimo wrote:
    But not by throwing out every kind of logic out of the window, no?

    I mean, hey, ships that have an impulse drive that lasts only 30 seconds to a minute and then need refueling?

    No, simply increasing the hangar cooldowns will do.

    hmmm that was the old system and the feds still winded..... it still doesnt' help much anymore now that people can prelaunch ect.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    The other option would be to make all the pets less durable, obviously.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    sophlogimo wrote:
    The other option would be to make all the pets less durable, obviously.

    Or simply reduce the numbers.... the spam swarms honesty need to go... anything that has more then one launch at a time should be changed. perhaps even giving those pets a bit more hull. The real annoyance for everyone is people spamming the lowbie / low cool down / high number deployed spam pets. 2 carriers can completely fill a screen... 4 or 5 carriers can honesty Crash peoples computers.

    It has been a bad design from the start.

    Launching a bop or a higher end delta fighter small escort sure thats cool... one at a time good dmg pretty good durability... never more then 4 out max... those are not a major annoyance to anyone... they provide dmg ect. The swarms of runabouts and toejoes... is just plain dumb. Yes its easy for one ship with scatter to control. However seriously we are at a point where a team NEEDS to have one dedicated spam clearer. Its almost as bad as the old mine swarm days... only these mines move and tractor beam and cron torp ect.

    To be honest I can't think of a good reason to fly any of my carriers other then to be an As*hole... I mean I am kinda mean sometimes... but na my carriers are parked.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    Husanak wrote: »
    Or simply reduce the numbers...[...]
    Launching a bop or a higher end delta fighter small escort sure thats cool... one at a time good dmg pretty good durability... never more then 4 out max...

    That does sound interesting... though that would mean having probably only 2 BoPs max, 4 shuttles or 6 fighers per carrier. Could be achieved by just saying each hangar can just launch once before an existing pet is removed.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    sophlogimo wrote:
    That does sound interesting... though that would mean having probably only 2 BoPs max, 4 shuttles or 6 fighers per carrier. Could be achieved by just saying each hangar can just launch once before an existing pet is removed.

    ya I would leave bops and other high hull pets alone.

    I would change the lowbie shuttles... NOTHING would have more then one out ever. (per launch... meaning max number of pets ever is 4 no matter type)

    Give the low hull pets something interesting to make them worth taking... could be anything what about those lowbie shuttles firing off CPBs... or heck even Gravity well ones... Yes they wouldn't last long but they would cause some havoc. Instead of havoc by lag induced screen shutter.

    I don't want to see 3 carriers coming in to an engagment dragging ... 12 little ships behind each one... its silly... very un trek... and very unplayable more importantly.

    Yes only have 4 out of any ship would mean major changes to the pets... but if the little shuttles had 2x the hull and interesting skills to make them worth taking over the "big" boy toys... it could be lots of fun, instead of what the swarms do now.

    I just finished a match against a klingon team with 1 carrier and 1 flight deck cruiser... and the spam in that match was almost frustration to the level of log out and do something else. We lost like 11 to 15 and I did 1.2 mil in dmg I spent at least 3/4 of my time killing pets. Completely dumb... and a big part of the reason why most of the PvPers I played with a year ago are no longer loggin in.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    I always liked the idea of pet groups as a single targetable object. Sure, visually it's 4 Runabouts, but they always stay in close formation and are only one ship technically.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    I always liked the idea of pet groups as a single targetable object. Sure, visually it's 4 Runabouts, but they always stay in close formation and are only one ship technically.

    Yep that would be a good way to keep everyone happy.

    I mean the insane spam cloud is really no help in PvE... so whats the purpose other then adding a TRIBBLE button. When I used to fly my carrier I would use the bops or the frigates... I would only whip out toejoes or siphns if someone annoyed me and I wanted to annoy them back... they can all go to a single out type toy.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    I always liked the idea of pet groups as a single targetable object. Sure, visually it's 4 Runabouts, but they always stay in close formation and are only one ship technically.

    Please do this!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    wrote:
    Please do this!
    Okay, should I get hired by Cryptic, I'll do it.

    Mustrum "Of course it could only happen if I was captured and send to a Cryptic work camp" Ridcully
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    Sir! Enemy fighters coming at 11 o'clock high!

    What does the captain say?

    SCRAMBLE!

    (Cryptic, I want old scramble back, not because it's balanced but because it will add so much more to my personal enjoyment)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    So from what people are saying here you guys feel its a problem with pet spam thats the problem with carriers, and not there bridge officer set up. Well I am one player it seems people disagree with me on what the problem is with carriers. Fair enough.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    wrote:
    So from what people are saying here you guys feel its a problem with pet spam thats the problem with carriers, and not there bridge officer set up. Well I am one player it seems people disagree with me on what the problem is with carriers. Fair enough.
    The pet spam is definitely the more pressing issue. I don't feel very comfortable with the BO seating either, but I think it may be acceptable with the horrible turn rate and all. I'd prefer if they improve the turn rate to regular Cruiser levels and give them ships a regular BO seating, though.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    mhhhhhhhz nvm
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    AH, well, stop worrying about the Carrier. The new Akira Tier 5 version gets to be a Fleet Escort with an extra Hangar Bay. We can just reclassify Carriers as Tier 5 +1 ships and everything is fine again.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    AH, well, stop worrying about the Carrier. The new Akira Tier 5 version gets to be a Fleet Escort with an extra Hangar Bay. We can just reclassify Carriers as Tier 5 +1 ships and everything is fine again.

    My Mvam loving self just hates cryptic even more when they release ships.

    I didn't do lockboxes because the concept was TRIBBLE. But honestly now... maybe it's time I just own up to the fact that I can't offset the +1 ships anymore by superior CC. Since sci CC right now is so weak and just buy a +1.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited June 2012
    Mavairo wrote:
    My Mvam loving self just hates cryptic even more when they release ships.

    I didn't do lockboxes because the concept was TRIBBLE. But honestly now... maybe it's time I just own up to the fact that I can't offset the +1 ships anymore by superior CC. Since sci CC right now is so weak and just buy a +1.

    Not that all +1s are equal, but if your account is old enough you can some +1 ships (karfi,brel,defiant etc). Also, it seems to me the pets are the new sci CC, so you could try out the Karfi. They are less resisted and depending on doffs, they have much shorter cooldowns and more of them ...
Sign In or Register to comment.