Because while You are not being targeted some other poor devil is getting creamed AND trying to avoid your arc so you don't get torp spreaded into oblivion in some cases
you are forcing the cruiser to regard you as a stationary helpless target to be protected AND avoided
Wait, you think our own torp spreads can actually hurt our own teammates? It's officials guys, he doesn't even have this game installed much less played even a minute of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
Tanking
Suicidal activity to attract fire and attempt to soak it
honorable activity best undertaken by one with thicker defenses to obtain the enemies attention to keep focus off the weaker allies.
So best done by a heavily armed tac cruiser
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
Flying cover
Destroying incoming vessels (or immobilising them) one at a time while providing close protection (shield and hull repair included) to principle
applying suppressive techniques to draw attention of the enemy or to distract the enemy to keep them from hurting allies.
healing: providing shield and hull repairs to allies when needed.
the principle (the Kang) is priorty
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
not if there are two other escorts running behind you
you down the shields they take the kills
YOU get the flak
again fleet actions and STF are team effort, you want to ensure kills, go solo play. otherwise, work with your team. they probably follow you into a strike because if you wound it and they kill it, it is no longer a threat to the team. its call, team work.
its called being dishonoured
or robbed in some cases
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
but 15 seconds (average time guns on target with cannons) vrs 1 full minute
the beams outdo the cannons Every time
oh and i don't fly in a circle
I mostly fly in an "aquire , line up , obliterate , repeat" pattern
engines cut, not moving, sitting as a turret as you say, how is the target only in firing arc for 15sec?
and if you are running beams for and aft, your hurting yourself by not keeping all of them in arc to fire. therefore, your dps is even lower. beam boats do not now nor will never out dps escorts with cannons, especially DHCs
actually we will over time
We DPH you DPS
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
Escort captains mash keys
you tell me I just watch them do it
if your sitting in a room with someone mashing keys, educate them. if you arent in the room with someone, don't assume they are button mashing.
Internet cafe was sat next to two other people in the same mission as me
and the escort was mashing like fury
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollvax
Mercenary is considered an AUTOMATIC warcrime actually
when not if they are caught they usually hang
But Terrorists are criminals (not combatants) Rebels are usually "militia"
its all in the regs and conventions
in what country or under what regulation is being a merc a warcrime? there are several mercs working in the middle east right now, openly, supporting the local governments or corporate interests.
all of them
to serve as a mercenary is to break the law this is why the USA has prosecuted a number of its own citizens for fighting for the government of a foriegn power
(blackwater for example get round this by claiming to be security contractors but when caught ARE hung by the resistance)
if
terrorists are criminals, why are they not dealt with by police instead of a military?
they are
the military has no interest in terrorists in most nations
Homeland security is not the military nor is the FBI , special branch or the SDCE
matridunadan1
Ensign
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 21# 92
Today, 03:40 PM
sollvax is very determined to make everyone play the game his way, isn't he?
quite the opposite
play entirely your own way
do as you please
but don't ask anyone else to until they have made their own choices
I was willing to stay out of this entire thing and give you the benefit of the doubt sollvax. You like playing the way that you do and dont like being told that you have to play a specific way, and that's commendable.
However, this line here has made me realize that you really do not know what you're talking about when it comes to the roles, classes, and abilities of each ship and the classes. A heavily armed tac cruiser is no different then a heavily armed eng cruiser. The difference lies in the abilities of the engineering and tactical classes. The engineering class is BUILT for tanking, for resisting damage, healing itself and it's shields. The tactical class is NOT built for anything but damage power.
Tanking is not best done by any tactical in anything. It is BEST done by an engineering class in a cruiser. This is a fact, which cannot be disputed.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
[Unrepentant] Lapo@overlapo: the problem with space STF
is that you can't properly teabag your defeated opponent
Unrepentant: Home of the Rainbow Warrior and the Rainbow Brigade.
I was willing to stay out of this entire thing and give you the benefit of the doubt sollvax. You like playing the way that you do and dont like being told that you have to play a specific way, and that's commendable.
However, this line here has made me realize that you really do not know what you're talking about when it comes to the roles, classes, and abilities of each ship and the classes. A heavily armed tac cruiser is no different then a heavily armed eng cruiser. The difference lies in the abilities of the engineering and tactical classes. The engineering class is BUILT for tanking, for resisting damage, healing itself and it's shields. The tactical class is NOT built for anything but damage power.
Tanking is not best done by any tactical in anything. It is BEST done by an engineering class in a cruiser. This is a fact, which cannot be disputed.
I think a Sci-Oddy can also tank fairly well, and the Nebula is a beast, but no they aren't the best tanks. Most of this argument is semantics, pure and simple. The fact is that cruisers as defined in the game have the following:
- More Hitpoints
- Larger Crews
- More Engineering Slots (Thus by extension the capability to armor themselves further)
- Engineer Bridge Officer Slots of a higher tier
All these things mean that the Cruiser is the best suited Ship Type in Game (With the exception of KDF Carriers, and maybe the Atrox I don't own one so I can't say) to take heavy or sustained damage from an enemy. In other words: Tank. The Problem is that in STO Threat seems to be generated based off of who is dealing the most damage.
Now Escorts as they are in the game, with an ability to equip Dual (Heavy) Cannons and a higher number of Tactical Bridge Officer Slots are well suited to a damage dealing role. They have less hitpoints than a cruiser, less shields, and less engineering slots to equip armor pieces. However due to their ability to dish out damage, they often become the target due to the way threat is generated.
The Threat Skill does not seem to be able to keep up with an Escorts ability to pump out damage in a lot of cases, reducing the Cruiser to a secondary role in providing fire-support and healing for the Escort if they wish for a group to maintain a consistent amount of DPS. If it were made possible for Cruisers to able to take on more threat than an Escort, then the Cruiser could effectively use its inherit traits to their full potential, which would also allow the Escorts to better do their jobs without having to worry about getting blown to pieces, or wonder why the Cruiser Pilot isn't healing them when the Cruiser is taking no damage. It would reduce some stress currently felt in end-game scenarios, and also help alleviate the notion that Cruisers are completely useless. Most End-Game scenarios are a DPS race to the top still, but if the Escorts are getting destroyed, your DPS is zero. Having a Cruiser come along that can actually soak up that damage gives it more a role in end-game scenarios, especially against targets like a Tactical Cube which themselves display a proficiency in using their ability to tank to ward off an escorts assault until the escort is dead.
Escorts: Deals the most damage, and has the lowest survivability Cruisers: Deals moderate damage, highest survivability Science: Deals moderate damage, with moderate survivability
An Engineer Captain flying an Escort, may have higher survivability than a Tactical Captain flying the same Escort. However, the Engineer Captain would also lack the same amount of firepower, that a Tactical Captain could dish out.
Likewise, a Tactical Captain flying a Cruiser, may have higher damage output capabilities than an Engineer Captain, but would also lack the same amount of survivability, that an Engineer Captain would have.
TL;DR: Sollvax, nobody forces you (An Engineer Captain), into the tanking role. Threat Control can be done with any career path (Science, Engineer, Tactical). But what everyone who disagrees with you are saying, is that Engineers are "best suited" for the tanking role. You said it yourself, Tacticals are the "best trained for combat". Doesn't that somehow imply that they are best in the damage dealing role?
To moderators: Please shut this thread down, and issue appropriate reprimand to Mr Sollvax, for taking the entire forum out on a wild tirade of misinformation. He seems to be on a bender of soiling every thread with his "I hate tanking" rants.
Tanking is not best done by any tactical in anything. It is BEST done by an engineering class in a cruiser. This is a fact, which cannot be disputed.
The Threat Skill does not seem to be able to keep up with an Escorts ability to pump out damage in a lot of cases, reducing the Cruiser to a secondary role in providing fire-support and healing for the Escort if they wish for a group to maintain a consistent amount of DPS. If it were made possible for Cruisers to able to take on more threat than an Escort, then the Cruiser could effectively use its inherit traits to their full potential, which would also allow the Escorts to better do their jobs without having to worry about getting blown to pieces, or wonder why the Cruiser Pilot isn't healing them when the Cruiser is taking no damage.
Pretty much this.
If an Engineering Captain can generate enough hate to tank, then they are the "best" tank on paper. If they can't, then a Tactical Captain is the better choice.
The reason for this is that the amount of damage you can survive is irrelevant if you're not being shot at.
That said, it's perfectly viable to build a Cruiser with an Engineering Captain which can hold hate over an Escort. But you need to strike a balance between Damage output and Survivability in order to do this, you can't just go "All out survivability" and expect the Escorts to constantly hold the bulk of their firepower back in order to let you take hate.
HOWEVER, given the difference in raw damage, given the same levels of equipment it can be very difficult for a Cruiser to hold hate constantly over an Escort even with a decent level of damage output and considerable investment into the Threat Control skill... so it's perfectly OK for the Escorts to occasionally "pull hate" if they use all their spike damage abilities at once. Even the squishiest Escort can survive being shot at for a few seconds, and a well-built Cruiser will be specced with ALLIED heals and damage resistance buffs - "tanks" in STO therefore primarilly play a hybrid role of support and meatshield, plus sustained DPS as a byproduct of trying to keep hate.
But all this is purely theoretical.
In practice, you'll never need the extra survivability of a Engineer over a Tac.
A Tac in a Cruiser (or even a Tac in an Escort, with the right equipment and BOFF power choices) can currently hold the attention of and weather the damage from the most powerful enemies in the game. I know, because I've done it personally. And whilst my equipment is pretty decent, it's not "perfect"; And whilst I'm pretty well practiced, I'm not the best pilot out there.
Escorts: Deals the most damage, and has the lowest survivability Cruisers: Deals moderate damage, highest survivability Science: Deals moderate damage, with moderate survivability
Correct for Tactical Captains, Engineering Captains and Cruisers.
Science Captains have better DPS than Engineering Captains and better survivability than Tactical Captains, Sensor Scan and Holographic Fleet are examples of DPS enhancing abilities, and they have multiple Allied Survivability buffs. They've actually got little in the way of "odd"/CC abilities other than Subnucleonic Beam.
Escorts have by far the highest SPIKE damage potential, but their SUSTAINED damage potential isn't that far below Cruisers and Sci Vessels. Technically Sci Vessels have the highest Survivability (Shield Capacity and CC) whereas Cruisers have the Highest Survivability (Hull Capacity and Damage Resistance). Cruisers are the natural choice for tanking because the damage output they can produce is weighted towards sustained (constant) damage, meaning if they manage to grab hate they will hold it fairly reliably; and the damage output they can weather is also fairly constant due to their resistance buffs, meaning it's difficult to kill them with an Alpha Strike, and any damage they DO take will be lower and easier to heal back.
Then you've got the odd combinations like the Carriers (Kar'fi in particular) which can be built for pretty much anything... :P
All very well and good, but I'll give you the real reason why you don't want Threat Control:
The incoming aggro will make your Chef's souffles go flat, thus ruining your Shipboard Morale stat and giving you a -15% to defense.
Note, this is mostly detrimental Fed side. KDF side can clear the defense loss by jettisoning the Chef via a Doff assignment.
(Note: This is for Starship Threat Control. Ground Threat Control is only useful if you like the taste of dirt.)
See I got around this fed side by just ordering my chef to make pizza. And i also dont keep soda around just incase the extra shaking makes it go flat too.
As a time traveller, Am I supposed to pack underwear or underwhen?
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
i recommend for every ship and every build 6 points into threat control, and 3 points into hull plating, you get a decent amount of energy damage resist and a bit of kinetic resist. its more efficient then just putting 9 into hull plating for energy resist.
you won't find me in pvp queues
I only PVP on special occasions (usually to help a particular friend of mine test out his latest bird of prey rig outs)
we play hide and seek for a few minutes as he tries to get close enough to "tag" me
without detection
THEN we go toe to toe so he can test his weapons rigs
His latest set up was so effective I had to actually hit the fleet support to take him down
we have not yet discussed what the hell he is usong for hull plating
but he took the full fire of my Galaxy for over 3 minutes before going down (his previous record was 2 mins 14 seconds)
oh and for the record he has NEVER complained about my Galaxy
you won't find me in pvp queues
I only PVP on special occasions (usually to help a particular friend of mine test out his latest bird of prey rig outs)
we play hide and seek for a few minutes as he tries to get close enough to "tag" me
without detection
THEN we go toe to toe so he can test his weapons rigs
His latest set up was so effective I had to actually hit the fleet support to take him down
we have not yet discussed what the hell he is usong for hull plating
but he took the full fire of my Galaxy for over 3 minutes before going down (his previous record was 2 mins 14 seconds)
oh and for the record he has NEVER complained about my Galaxy
he doesn't have to complain because you can't tank. you don't know how to, as backed up by your belief that no one is capable of weathering enemy blows for the rest of their team. after all, you claim that such an action is "suicidal".
i recommend for every ship and every build 6 points into threat control, and 3 points into hull plating, you get a decent amount of energy damage resist and a bit of kinetic resist. its more efficient then just putting 9 into hull plating for energy resist.
Why was I not made aware of this spreadsheet before?
Mustrum "Someone's head gonna roll for that" Ridcully
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
i recommend for every ship and every build 6 points into threat control, and 3 points into hull plating, you get a decent amount of energy damage resist and a bit of kinetic resist. its more efficient then just putting 9 into hull plating for energy resist.
From a purely Resistance POV, this is good advice.
I'd be a little wary of taking Threat Control if you're on an Escort and intend to do much PVE though. I'm not saying don't do it, but such an Escort would need to be prepared to withstand more damage output than an average Escort, given that they'll likely attract and hold the attention of whatever they're firing at.
In terms of aggro holding potential:
Cruiser with Threat Control > Escort without Threat Control.
Escort with Threat Control > Cruiser with Threat Control.
It can be fun to pull aggro off uppity Cruiser captains who think they can be a total aggro sponge and never lose hate though. I have an Engineering Captain who flies both a Cruiser and an Escort and is specced into 6/9 Threat Control - he's not intended to be a complete aggro magnet, but to have sufficent hate holding capabilities (and buffs) to keep most of the team alive whenever he's flying his Cruiser. However, I've had PUG teammates ragequit STFs before whenever their Cruisers couldn't pull aggro off his Escort...
i recommend for every ship and every build 6 points into threat control, and 3 points into hull plating, you get a decent amount of energy damage resist and a bit of kinetic resist. its more efficient then just putting 9 into hull plating for energy resist.
Bookmarked that as a great link.
Thank you.
If you are a pickle in a pickle jar you know every pickle's different, sort of, but really they're all just pickles...
Why was I not made aware of this spreadsheet before?
Mustrum "Someone's head gonna roll for that" Ridcully
It's one of those extremely handy reference sources that've been floating about on the forums for several months, but never stickied. We should really get around to stickying things again...
( Posted these before the forum swap, but besides the Wiki, I've found myself using some other threads: )
So if you all think IM a Troll i must have the biggest mirror in the cosmos on my head
And its you who are lucky to have Found someone to tank and carry YOU in STF's
because if someone is tanking and taking all the hits (as there is never a healer in 99% of pugs ) you are dead weight
Not the cruiser
I respect your right to do things your way
but let the new people READ the descriptions First
and decide if they WANT to tank or if they want to be actual people with an equal say in their mission
so how about you respect peoples right NOT to die for your world view
I think your issue is you think that Tanking = Dying. Hint: it doesn't. Hint: A tank IS a healer, of himself. Tanking = having 2 copies of EPtS (pref III), Aux2SIF III, hazard emitters, transfer shield strength, engie team x2, polarize hull, and more and more. Those are mostly engie skills, but some sci skills.
And when i do have to Tank I do it with a Tactical character in a Carrier
LOL!
that's all
Meh, it's doable. My Sci in a Kar'fi does it all the time.
(Not really by choice, moreso as a result of doing loads more damage than everyone else in PUG ESTF teams, devising creative ways to stay alive without negatively impacting your damage output can be good fun though...)
Those are mostly engie skills, but some sci skills.
No Tac Team...? :eek:
Assuming a reasonably smart player, TT1x2, EPTS1x2, Aux2SIF1, HE1, TSS2 and a decent Resilient Shield will let you handle virtually anything in the game (including an Elite Tac Cube, providing that you're willing to play "dodge-the-torpedo-arc"...) Higher ranks of those powers and things like Armor Consoles and special DOFFs are a bonus, but not a necessity.
All that said, I'm convinced the OP just wants to roleplay, and all the replies are treating him as dumb for not wanting to follow all the standard "powergamer" conventions. STO is an easy game to play and win at, we deal with Rainbowskittle Failboats all the time in STFs, a few Roleplayers not running the highest-end optimised setups aren't going to overly upset things: Play game, have fun!
All that said, I'm convinced the OP just wants to roleplay, and all the replies are treating him as dumb for not wanting to follow all the standard "powergamer" conventions. STO is an easy game to play and win at, we deal with Rainbowskittle Failboats all the time in STFs, a few Roleplayers not running the highest-end optimised setups aren't going to overly upset things: Play game, have fun!
I don't think he's dumb, I just think he's very misinformed, and stubborn to be honest, but not dumb. And it's not about the overly optimized builds versus what he says its mainly about the fact that he will post four or five times in a row drawing frankly ridiculous comparisons and play word games in order to get people to accept his viewpoint. I accept his viewpoint, but he does not seem to accept any other.
Assuming a reasonably smart player, TT1x2, EPTS1x2, Aux2SIF1, HE1, TSS2 and a decent Resilient Shield will let you handle virtually anything in the game (including an Elite Tac Cube, providing that you're willing to play "dodge-the-torpedo-arc"...) Higher ranks of those powers and things like Armor Consoles and special DOFFs are a bonus, but not a necessity.
Personally only run 1 copy of TT1, I mainly play a few STF's casually and I've never found to be a big enough issue to need two. It's true though, you don't need to invest a lot of brain thinkin' to soak up damage.
If an Engineering Captain can generate enough hate to tank, then they are the "best" tank on paper. If they can't, then a Tactical Captain is the better choice.
The reason for this is that the amount of damage you can survive is irrelevant if you're not being shot at.
That said, it's perfectly viable to build a Cruiser with an Engineering Captain which can hold hate over an Escort. But you need to strike a balance between Damage output and Survivability in order to do this, you can't just go "All out survivability" and expect the Escorts to constantly hold the bulk of their firepower back in order to let you take hate.
HOWEVER, given the difference in raw damage, given the same levels of equipment it can be very difficult for a Cruiser to hold hate constantly over an Escort even with a decent level of damage output and considerable investment into the Threat Control skill... so it's perfectly OK for the Escorts to occasionally "pull hate" if they use all their spike damage abilities at once. Even the squishiest Escort can survive being shot at for a few seconds, and a well-built Cruiser will be specced with ALLIED heals and damage resistance buffs - "tanks" in STO therefore primarilly play a hybrid role of support and meatshield, plus sustained DPS as a byproduct of trying to keep hate.
But all this is purely theoretical.
In practice, you'll never need the extra survivability of a Engineer over a Tac.
A Tac in a Cruiser (or even a Tac in an Escort, with the right equipment and BOFF power choices) can currently hold the attention of and weather the damage from the most powerful enemies in the game. I know, because I've done it personally. And whilst my equipment is pretty decent, it's not "perfect"; And whilst I'm pretty well practiced, I'm not the best pilot out there.
True, but Threat Generation the whole seems to be an underdeveloped concept in STO, and it would be nice to get more tools in order to better control it, and by extension the battlefield. For example give Sci Boffs abilities that will allow them to lower a friendly targets threat, give Eng Boffs an ability to generate more threat. It probably doesn't work as matter of practice, but I'm just trying to say that more abilities that relate to threat on the whole would be a welcome addition.
All that said, I'm convinced the OP just wants to roleplay, and all the replies are treating him as dumb for not wanting to follow all the standard "powergamer" conventions. STO is an easy game to play and win at, we deal with Rainbowskittle Failboats all the time in STFs, a few Roleplayers not running the highest-end optimised setups aren't going to overly upset things: Play game, have fun!
I don't think the OP is dumb. I also don't think he wants to roleplay and is being assaulted for his inefficient build.
I think (know) he wants to troll the forums and is being very successful at it. It's not his first shot, before that he used to rant about the economy. It was as (deliberatly) confused and contradictory as this latest trollbait.
In a month, he'll have found something else. Let me give him an idea, could be lulzy for a while: "people not using Phasers (FED) or Disruptors (KDF) are ruining the game!"
True, but Threat Generation the whole seems to be an underdeveloped concept in STO, and it would be nice to get more tools in order to better control it, and by extension the battlefield. For example give Sci Boffs abilities that will allow them to lower a friendly targets threat, give Eng Boffs an ability to generate more threat. It probably doesn't work as matter of practice, but I'm just trying to say that more abilities that relate to threat on the whole would be a welcome addition.
There are a few powers on the ground that generate and shed threat, but none in space aside from that Threat Control Skill. Realistically I don't think there'd be any problem with giving Escorts an Inherent Threat Shed power, and Cruisers an Inherent Threat Grab power. Science vessels after all already get the inherent Subsystem Targetting abilities... or even if they could REVERSE threat control's additional threat generation portion so that it becomes Positive when flying a Cruiser and Negative when flying an Escort.
However I get the general impression that the Devs have purposely stayed away from more threat manipulation powers because they don't want the game to go down the lines of needing the "holy trinity" of Tank/DPS/Healer. Once you start pushing people that way you have to balance the game around it, and it turns into a spiral of elitism where any non-optimal builds are shunned. Less fun, plus it makes sense for a starship to be fairly self contained and standalone.
I don't think the OP is dumb. I also don't think he wants to roleplay and is being assaulted for his inefficient build.
I think (know) he wants to troll the forums and is being very successful at it. It's not his first shot, before that he used to rant about the economy. It was as (deliberatly) confused and contradictory as this latest trollbait.
In a month, he'll have found something else. Let me give him an idea, could be lulzy for a while: "people not using Phasers (FED) or Disruptors (KDF) are ruining the game!"
Hmm. I'm usually willing to give folks the benefit of the doubt, but looking back over the multiple quote-filled back-and-forth slanging matches in this thread and others I'm beginning to wonder if Starfleet have been running another Pakled recruitment drive...
(my own views on the benefits of all-disruptor builds notwithstanding!!) :P
Where as I assumed the same for our "who watches the watchman" and a couple of others before realising they Really DON'T understand that economics are different in startrek and that some people really aren't as greedy as they are
Yes I argued for price caps in the exchange and ill tell you why
I today saw someone selling (for 2000 EC) a CATFISH SANDWICH
you can replicate that for 1% of the price
also people who are new might be too daft to try the vendors and wind up paying a fortune for a snackfood
Greed is NOT good guys
As to respecting other peoples views I do
If you Want to Tank , Tank
But don't ask anyone else to against their will
If you like to fly escorts , Fly them
but please Not right on my six and not while trying to tell everyone else what to do
If you love your ship thats Great (could not be happier than to see some love for a ship )
But remember we love ours as well
Its as bad to call "buff" as "nerf"
But there are those who think im trying to cause trouble
Fine
make you a deal
Let me know thats how you feel and i will avoid any thread you start ENTIRELY as long as you do not mention me on it
in return you stay off of mine
then people can see both views
But be honest , open and direct not sneaking round the houses
I can be contacted in game at Sollvax@sollvax
Feel free to tell me you want me off your thread
It's not a matter of wanting you off of threads, Sollvax. It's not even a matter that you play how you do. Nobody cares how you play, nobody cares how anyone plays. So long as **** gets blown up (and its not us), we're all happy.
However, what some of us have a problem with is when you speak about game mechanics and are incorrect. People such as myself would prefer that if you are going to speak about the actual mechanics of the game, that you get it right so that others that look through this forum and are looking for say, something about threat generation, they do not get the wrong idea that a tactical captain is what should be the class to use if you want to spec into threat control and be a great tank. This is incorrect and should not be thrown out haphazardly. Sure a tactical can spec into threat control and tank, but engineers do it better.
That's really what it everyone's point boils down to. If you're going to talk about the mechanics of the actual game itself, please do not get it wrong and spread it around as if you're right and everyone else is wrong. Feel free to throw out your opinion and ideas, that is all fine and dandy, everyone does this. But if you want to state a fact, you need to be ready to back it up with hard proof, which stuff like I just gave as an example, cannot be done.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
[Unrepentant] Lapo@overlapo: the problem with space STF
is that you can't properly teabag your defeated opponent
Unrepentant: Home of the Rainbow Warrior and the Rainbow Brigade.
Comments
Wait, you think our own torp spreads can actually hurt our own teammates? It's officials guys, he doesn't even have this game installed much less played even a minute of it.
So best done by a heavily armed tac cruiser
the principle (the Kang) is priorty
its called being dishonoured
or robbed in some cases
actually we will over time
We DPH you DPS
Internet cafe was sat next to two other people in the same mission as me
and the escort was mashing like fury
all of them
to serve as a mercenary is to break the law this is why the USA has prosecuted a number of its own citizens for fighting for the government of a foriegn power
(blackwater for example get round this by claiming to be security contractors but when caught ARE hung by the resistance)
if
they are
the military has no interest in terrorists in most nations
Homeland security is not the military nor is the FBI , special branch or the SDCE
quite the opposite
play entirely your own way
do as you please
but don't ask anyone else to until they have made their own choices
funny, i dont recall america spending well over a decade sending policemen to the middle east to fight terrorists.
I was willing to stay out of this entire thing and give you the benefit of the doubt sollvax. You like playing the way that you do and dont like being told that you have to play a specific way, and that's commendable.
However, this line here has made me realize that you really do not know what you're talking about when it comes to the roles, classes, and abilities of each ship and the classes. A heavily armed tac cruiser is no different then a heavily armed eng cruiser. The difference lies in the abilities of the engineering and tactical classes. The engineering class is BUILT for tanking, for resisting damage, healing itself and it's shields. The tactical class is NOT built for anything but damage power.
Tanking is not best done by any tactical in anything. It is BEST done by an engineering class in a cruiser. This is a fact, which cannot be disputed.
[Unrepentant] Lapo@overlapo: the problem with space STF
is that you can't properly teabag your defeated opponent
Unrepentant: Home of the Rainbow Warrior and the Rainbow Brigade.
I think a Sci-Oddy can also tank fairly well, and the Nebula is a beast, but no they aren't the best tanks. Most of this argument is semantics, pure and simple. The fact is that cruisers as defined in the game have the following:
- More Hitpoints
- Larger Crews
- More Engineering Slots (Thus by extension the capability to armor themselves further)
- Engineer Bridge Officer Slots of a higher tier
All these things mean that the Cruiser is the best suited Ship Type in Game (With the exception of KDF Carriers, and maybe the Atrox I don't own one so I can't say) to take heavy or sustained damage from an enemy. In other words: Tank. The Problem is that in STO Threat seems to be generated based off of who is dealing the most damage.
Now Escorts as they are in the game, with an ability to equip Dual (Heavy) Cannons and a higher number of Tactical Bridge Officer Slots are well suited to a damage dealing role. They have less hitpoints than a cruiser, less shields, and less engineering slots to equip armor pieces. However due to their ability to dish out damage, they often become the target due to the way threat is generated.
The Threat Skill does not seem to be able to keep up with an Escorts ability to pump out damage in a lot of cases, reducing the Cruiser to a secondary role in providing fire-support and healing for the Escort if they wish for a group to maintain a consistent amount of DPS. If it were made possible for Cruisers to able to take on more threat than an Escort, then the Cruiser could effectively use its inherit traits to their full potential, which would also allow the Escorts to better do their jobs without having to worry about getting blown to pieces, or wonder why the Cruiser Pilot isn't healing them when the Cruiser is taking no damage. It would reduce some stress currently felt in end-game scenarios, and also help alleviate the notion that Cruisers are completely useless. Most End-Game scenarios are a DPS race to the top still, but if the Escorts are getting destroyed, your DPS is zero. Having a Cruiser come along that can actually soak up that damage gives it more a role in end-game scenarios, especially against targets like a Tactical Cube which themselves display a proficiency in using their ability to tank to ward off an escorts assault until the escort is dead.
Sollvax is DEAD WRONG.
In space, the following is TRUE for Star Trek Online:
Tactical Captains: DPS Enhancing abilities
Engineer Captains: Survivability Enhancing abilities
Science Captains: Support/Debuff enhancing abilities
Escorts: Deals the most damage, and has the lowest survivability
Cruisers: Deals moderate damage, highest survivability
Science: Deals moderate damage, with moderate survivability
An Engineer Captain flying an Escort, may have higher survivability than a Tactical Captain flying the same Escort. However, the Engineer Captain would also lack the same amount of firepower, that a Tactical Captain could dish out.
Likewise, a Tactical Captain flying a Cruiser, may have higher damage output capabilities than an Engineer Captain, but would also lack the same amount of survivability, that an Engineer Captain would have.
TL;DR: Sollvax, nobody forces you (An Engineer Captain), into the tanking role. Threat Control can be done with any career path (Science, Engineer, Tactical). But what everyone who disagrees with you are saying, is that Engineers are "best suited" for the tanking role. You said it yourself, Tacticals are the "best trained for combat". Doesn't that somehow imply that they are best in the damage dealing role?
To moderators: Please shut this thread down, and issue appropriate reprimand to Mr Sollvax, for taking the entire forum out on a wild tirade of misinformation. He seems to be on a bender of soiling every thread with his "I hate tanking" rants.
And when i do have to Tank I do it with a Tactical character in a Carrier
Because he is best suited to it
my view
only ever MY view
I do not say everyone should use my systems or methods
but the worship of Damage for 15 seconds and then 45 seconds turning round does not have to be the only view
Well this explains why there's so many squishies in pvp O.o... I've found the source.
Chillax. No Ego. No Drama.
Like my alien? Watch THE VIDEO
Need custom graphics for you or your fleet? Click HERE
Pretty much this.
If an Engineering Captain can generate enough hate to tank, then they are the "best" tank on paper. If they can't, then a Tactical Captain is the better choice.
The reason for this is that the amount of damage you can survive is irrelevant if you're not being shot at.
That said, it's perfectly viable to build a Cruiser with an Engineering Captain which can hold hate over an Escort. But you need to strike a balance between Damage output and Survivability in order to do this, you can't just go "All out survivability" and expect the Escorts to constantly hold the bulk of their firepower back in order to let you take hate.
HOWEVER, given the difference in raw damage, given the same levels of equipment it can be very difficult for a Cruiser to hold hate constantly over an Escort even with a decent level of damage output and considerable investment into the Threat Control skill... so it's perfectly OK for the Escorts to occasionally "pull hate" if they use all their spike damage abilities at once. Even the squishiest Escort can survive being shot at for a few seconds, and a well-built Cruiser will be specced with ALLIED heals and damage resistance buffs - "tanks" in STO therefore primarilly play a hybrid role of support and meatshield, plus sustained DPS as a byproduct of trying to keep hate.
But all this is purely theoretical.
In practice, you'll never need the extra survivability of a Engineer over a Tac.
A Tac in a Cruiser (or even a Tac in an Escort, with the right equipment and BOFF power choices) can currently hold the attention of and weather the damage from the most powerful enemies in the game. I know, because I've done it personally. And whilst my equipment is pretty decent, it's not "perfect"; And whilst I'm pretty well practiced, I'm not the best pilot out there.
Correct for Tactical Captains, Engineering Captains and Cruisers.
Science Captains have better DPS than Engineering Captains and better survivability than Tactical Captains, Sensor Scan and Holographic Fleet are examples of DPS enhancing abilities, and they have multiple Allied Survivability buffs. They've actually got little in the way of "odd"/CC abilities other than Subnucleonic Beam.
Escorts have by far the highest SPIKE damage potential, but their SUSTAINED damage potential isn't that far below Cruisers and Sci Vessels. Technically Sci Vessels have the highest Survivability (Shield Capacity and CC) whereas Cruisers have the Highest Survivability (Hull Capacity and Damage Resistance). Cruisers are the natural choice for tanking because the damage output they can produce is weighted towards sustained (constant) damage, meaning if they manage to grab hate they will hold it fairly reliably; and the damage output they can weather is also fairly constant due to their resistance buffs, meaning it's difficult to kill them with an Alpha Strike, and any damage they DO take will be lower and easier to heal back.
Then you've got the odd combinations like the Carriers (Kar'fi in particular) which can be built for pretty much anything... :P
See I got around this fed side by just ordering my chef to make pizza. And i also dont keep soda around just incase the extra shaking makes it go flat too.
Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
Occidere populo et effercio confractus
exactly how much can bee seen here http://home.comcast.net/~amicus/Skill%20Point%20Effects.htm
i recommend for every ship and every build 6 points into threat control, and 3 points into hull plating, you get a decent amount of energy damage resist and a bit of kinetic resist. its more efficient then just putting 9 into hull plating for energy resist.
I only PVP on special occasions (usually to help a particular friend of mine test out his latest bird of prey rig outs)
we play hide and seek for a few minutes as he tries to get close enough to "tag" me
without detection
THEN we go toe to toe so he can test his weapons rigs
His latest set up was so effective I had to actually hit the fleet support to take him down
we have not yet discussed what the hell he is usong for hull plating
but he took the full fire of my Galaxy for over 3 minutes before going down (his previous record was 2 mins 14 seconds)
oh and for the record he has NEVER complained about my Galaxy
he doesn't have to complain because you can't tank. you don't know how to, as backed up by your belief that no one is capable of weathering enemy blows for the rest of their team. after all, you claim that such an action is "suicidal".
Why was I not made aware of this spreadsheet before?
Mustrum "Someone's head gonna roll for that" Ridcully
From a purely Resistance POV, this is good advice.
I'd be a little wary of taking Threat Control if you're on an Escort and intend to do much PVE though. I'm not saying don't do it, but such an Escort would need to be prepared to withstand more damage output than an average Escort, given that they'll likely attract and hold the attention of whatever they're firing at.
In terms of aggro holding potential:
Cruiser with Threat Control > Escort without Threat Control.
Escort with Threat Control > Cruiser with Threat Control.
It can be fun to pull aggro off uppity Cruiser captains who think they can be a total aggro sponge and never lose hate though. I have an Engineering Captain who flies both a Cruiser and an Escort and is specced into 6/9 Threat Control - he's not intended to be a complete aggro magnet, but to have sufficent hate holding capabilities (and buffs) to keep most of the team alive whenever he's flying his Cruiser. However, I've had PUG teammates ragequit STFs before whenever their Cruisers couldn't pull aggro off his Escort...
Bookmarked that as a great link.
Thank you.
It's one of those extremely handy reference sources that've been floating about on the forums for several months, but never stickied. We should really get around to stickying things again...
( Posted these before the forum swap, but besides the Wiki, I've found myself using some other threads: )
Ship Power Level Calculator
Weapon Power Calculations
Skillpoint Effects 1
Skillpoint Effects 2
Aux Power Effects
Tests on Projectile DOFFs
Math on extra Energy Weapons versus Photon Launchers
Torpedo Spread versus Torpedo High Yield
CSV3 oddities
I'm sure there's more, but those are all the ones I've bothered to refer back to in the past fortnight or so.
you really haven't seen that? thats been posted 10 different places in the pvp forum alone. the perfect guide when ever you feel the urge to respec.
if you like that, all you would be damage dealers would love this.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Asu87Jb5VCBgdHFKbmdpZjlEMHk3YUhfNGRTbllNY0E&output=html
LOL!
that's all
I think your issue is you think that Tanking = Dying. Hint: it doesn't. Hint: A tank IS a healer, of himself. Tanking = having 2 copies of EPtS (pref III), Aux2SIF III, hazard emitters, transfer shield strength, engie team x2, polarize hull, and more and more. Those are mostly engie skills, but some sci skills.
- Demosthenes01101, from the REAL Star Trek Online forums!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
"You have been, and always shall be, my friend."
- Pointy-eared, green blooded, hobgoblin
"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
- Sherlock Holmes
Meh, it's doable. My Sci in a Kar'fi does it all the time.
(Not really by choice, moreso as a result of doing loads more damage than everyone else in PUG ESTF teams, devising creative ways to stay alive without negatively impacting your damage output can be good fun though...)
No Tac Team...? :eek:
Assuming a reasonably smart player, TT1x2, EPTS1x2, Aux2SIF1, HE1, TSS2 and a decent Resilient Shield will let you handle virtually anything in the game (including an Elite Tac Cube, providing that you're willing to play "dodge-the-torpedo-arc"...) Higher ranks of those powers and things like Armor Consoles and special DOFFs are a bonus, but not a necessity.
All that said, I'm convinced the OP just wants to roleplay, and all the replies are treating him as dumb for not wanting to follow all the standard "powergamer" conventions. STO is an easy game to play and win at, we deal with Rainbowskittle Failboats all the time in STFs, a few Roleplayers not running the highest-end optimised setups aren't going to overly upset things: Play game, have fun!
I don't think he's dumb, I just think he's very misinformed, and stubborn to be honest, but not dumb. And it's not about the overly optimized builds versus what he says its mainly about the fact that he will post four or five times in a row drawing frankly ridiculous comparisons and play word games in order to get people to accept his viewpoint. I accept his viewpoint, but he does not seem to accept any other.
Personally only run 1 copy of TT1, I mainly play a few STF's casually and I've never found to be a big enough issue to need two. It's true though, you don't need to invest a lot of brain thinkin' to soak up damage.
True, but Threat Generation the whole seems to be an underdeveloped concept in STO, and it would be nice to get more tools in order to better control it, and by extension the battlefield. For example give Sci Boffs abilities that will allow them to lower a friendly targets threat, give Eng Boffs an ability to generate more threat. It probably doesn't work as matter of practice, but I'm just trying to say that more abilities that relate to threat on the whole would be a welcome addition.
I don't think the OP is dumb. I also don't think he wants to roleplay and is being assaulted for his inefficient build.
I think (know) he wants to troll the forums and is being very successful at it. It's not his first shot, before that he used to rant about the economy. It was as (deliberatly) confused and contradictory as this latest trollbait.
In a month, he'll have found something else. Let me give him an idea, could be lulzy for a while: "people not using Phasers (FED) or Disruptors (KDF) are ruining the game!"
There are a few powers on the ground that generate and shed threat, but none in space aside from that Threat Control Skill. Realistically I don't think there'd be any problem with giving Escorts an Inherent Threat Shed power, and Cruisers an Inherent Threat Grab power. Science vessels after all already get the inherent Subsystem Targetting abilities... or even if they could REVERSE threat control's additional threat generation portion so that it becomes Positive when flying a Cruiser and Negative when flying an Escort.
However I get the general impression that the Devs have purposely stayed away from more threat manipulation powers because they don't want the game to go down the lines of needing the "holy trinity" of Tank/DPS/Healer. Once you start pushing people that way you have to balance the game around it, and it turns into a spiral of elitism where any non-optimal builds are shunned. Less fun, plus it makes sense for a starship to be fairly self contained and standalone.
Hmm. I'm usually willing to give folks the benefit of the doubt, but looking back over the multiple quote-filled back-and-forth slanging matches in this thread and others I'm beginning to wonder if Starfleet have been running another Pakled recruitment drive...
(my own views on the benefits of all-disruptor builds notwithstanding!!) :P
Yes I argued for price caps in the exchange and ill tell you why
I today saw someone selling (for 2000 EC) a CATFISH SANDWICH
you can replicate that for 1% of the price
also people who are new might be too daft to try the vendors and wind up paying a fortune for a snackfood
Greed is NOT good guys
As to respecting other peoples views I do
If you Want to Tank , Tank
But don't ask anyone else to against their will
If you like to fly escorts , Fly them
but please Not right on my six and not while trying to tell everyone else what to do
If you love your ship thats Great (could not be happier than to see some love for a ship )
But remember we love ours as well
Its as bad to call "buff" as "nerf"
But there are those who think im trying to cause trouble
Fine
make you a deal
Let me know thats how you feel and i will avoid any thread you start ENTIRELY as long as you do not mention me on it
in return you stay off of mine
then people can see both views
But be honest , open and direct not sneaking round the houses
I can be contacted in game at Sollvax@sollvax
Feel free to tell me you want me off your thread
but don't come and mess with mine if you do
However, what some of us have a problem with is when you speak about game mechanics and are incorrect. People such as myself would prefer that if you are going to speak about the actual mechanics of the game, that you get it right so that others that look through this forum and are looking for say, something about threat generation, they do not get the wrong idea that a tactical captain is what should be the class to use if you want to spec into threat control and be a great tank. This is incorrect and should not be thrown out haphazardly. Sure a tactical can spec into threat control and tank, but engineers do it better.
That's really what it everyone's point boils down to. If you're going to talk about the mechanics of the actual game itself, please do not get it wrong and spread it around as if you're right and everyone else is wrong. Feel free to throw out your opinion and ideas, that is all fine and dandy, everyone does this. But if you want to state a fact, you need to be ready to back it up with hard proof, which stuff like I just gave as an example, cannot be done.
[Unrepentant] Lapo@overlapo: the problem with space STF
is that you can't properly teabag your defeated opponent
Unrepentant: Home of the Rainbow Warrior and the Rainbow Brigade.
read the descriptions
Read the wiki
and that everything I say is my opinion (and ONLY my opinion)
also the only one I tank on is Tactical (and he does pretty well)
but then he is level 50 and has a fully armed carrier
set largely for multiple target threat generation
This was done for experimental purposes so I could learn about tanking
(actually it still seems a waste of resources to me)