Having gone back and read this thread, I have to say all evidence to the contrary mate. I've seen a few things in here where someone was nasty to you, and I hope they got reported, but for the most part your trying to tell others that their view is flat out wrong and then you slap something on about choice at the end like a bumper sticker. I've seen a lot of people correcting what are very obvious inaccuracies on your part as to how established in-game mechanics work. It's not about the opinion, it's about information that is inaccurate, pure and simple.
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.
He's right actually, his initial post was based more on pseudo-mechanics, but primarily on star trek lore an canon... which is fine, unfortunately not always the best info game wise, because let's face it... sto isn't star trek.
However, and not to detract from his thread, if anyone is interested in the more 'numbers and mechanics' of the game (as well as other neato tidbits of information made by the player community at large), just head on over to here
Meh, it's doable. My Sci in a Kar'fi does it all the time.
sure, it can be done... it's just the least efficient captain class to tank with. Both other captain classes have multiple self-heal/resists. Tac captains has absolutely no tanking skills. It's like saying "when I need to go to the other end of the world, I walk!". Sure, it can be done, it's just so many other ways that are much better.
He's right actually, his initial post was based more on pseudo-mechanics, but primarily on star trek lore an canon... which is fine, unfortunately not always the best info game wise, because let's face it... sto isn't star trek.
However, and not to detract from his thread, if anyone is interested in the more 'numbers and mechanics' of the game (as well as other neato tidbits of information made by the player community at large), just head on over to here
but the intrepid can't tank effectively
its just not built for it
Which, is as untrue as a tactical captain being the best for tanking in a cruiser. His opinions, while he has every right to them, are spread around this entire forum in such ways. This is what a lot of us have a problem with.
[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 have not mentioned Mechanics at all
I have spoken about tactics
military systems
and star fleet
No offense mate, but this is what you've been doing, you've been doing it really, really, really badly. Posting a topic in the Character Builds and Powers section about a an in-game skill kinda suggests the topic is about the workings (i.e mechanics) of the game. The fact that about 90% of the posts in this topic are also talking about the Threat Control Skill also seem to point in the direction that this is a discussion about the mechanics surrounding threat control and tanking in general.
discussion boards are for discussion not preaching mechanics
True, but if you're trying to relate to some sort of of half-baked attempt to role-play you might wanna say so beforehand.
sure, it can be done... it's just the least efficient captain class to tank with. Both other captain classes have multiple self-heal/resists. Tac captains has absolutely no tanking skills. It's like saying "when I need to go to the other end of the world, I walk!". Sure, it can be done, it's just so many other ways that are much better.
Well I don't think it's quite that extreme since your Bridge Officer Abilities play a large role. But it can't be denied that an Engineer Captain in a Cruiser is going to in the best position for straight up tanking. I think a Science Vessel, especially the DSSV and the Nebula can also tank quite effectively, but the DSSV would be a more shield focused tank. I'm working on getting a Heavy Escort Carrier right now, I think of all the Escort Ship Types it seems to be the tank-iest but I can't really say until I get it. Obviously it's never to compete with the Cruiser types but an Escort that offers more survivability with so few drawbacks would make an ideal platform to use in my opinion. Does Threat Control do anything to the fighter pets?
sure, it can be done... it's just the least efficient captain class to tank with. Both other captain classes have multiple self-heal/resists. Tac captains has absolutely no tanking skills. It's like saying "when I need to go to the other end of the world, I walk!". Sure, it can be done, it's just so many other ways that are much better.
It's the least efficient for survivability, but not for holding aggro.
If you're a Tac Captain then you have a bit of extra damage potential. Holding aggro is part of tanking. A big part, if you happen to be a non-escort, and you're trying to tank (and thus both hold aggro AND weather damage) with an Escort or two on your team.
So I suppose you could technically make the argument that since survivability itself is so easy to come by in the game (given that a few BOFF powers can handle most of what the game can throw at you), then the most efficient method of increasing your tanking ability would be to cover the basics of survivability and then increase your potential for holding aggro any way you can - more DPS, more threat control, etc.
Basically: once you have sufficient armor, sharpen your sword.
Tacs have a better sword than Engineers, Engineers have better armor than Tacs.
Which do you need more of? Depends on your ship, your build, and your skill.
Personally, given that I've found myself able to regularly tank things in Escorts, I'd lean more heavilly towards Swords than Armor...
little bits of intrepid debris tends to disagree that it can tank
OK, this is my first time actually calling you out... but seriously?
That's a troll post right there.
Please Stop.
Why should an Intrepid be debris? (in the game, not in Star Trek Voyager... that series was downright ridiculous when it came to space combat, Voyager basically ended up as a toothless carrier with infinite shuttlecraft due to the Chakotay effect...)
In STO the Intrepid is one of the hardier Science Vessels.
Back when Shuttlecraft were allowed in the STF queues, you had teams of them completing Elite runs. An Intrepid if specced properly can solo anything in the game (read: weather the damage from it and not die - actually "tanking" things would require that it be able to reliably hold aggro over allied ships with higher DPS, which is probably doable in certain situations, especially with a Torpedo boat build, but will be trickier than on a Cruiser/Escort.)
No offense mate, but this is what you've been doing, you've been doing it really, really, really badly. Posting a topic in the Character Builds and Powers section about a an in-game skill kinda suggests the topic is about the workings (i.e mechanics) of the game. The fact that about 90% of the posts in this topic are also talking about the Threat Control Skill also seem to point in the direction that this is a discussion about the mechanics surrounding threat control and tanking in general.
So you didn't read the first post
At all??
Quote:
discussion boards are for discussion not preaching mechanics
True, but if you're trying to relate to some sort of of half-baked attempt to role-play you might wanna say so beforehand.
Yes I did, you seemed to be saying how you shouldn't be taking threat control if you didn't WANT to tank, and how you should read the description of the skill, and you also mentioned something about how you only used it with your tactical officer which is how the entire thing got started.
Did several times#
When? I saw you were trying to draw parallels to in universe examples, but you never mentioned the fact that this discussion was meant as such, or that what you write should be viewed through a more RP lens.
can someone shut this thread down please
Because its now doing the opposite of intended and making people NOT read the descriptions
Why don't I just post it, saving them some trouble?
This is in the little blue box on the side of the page, and is also in the details section
Starship Threat Control
Captain (Tier 4)
This skill increases the Threat generated by all your Starship's damage dealing abilities. The increase in Threat is always active and cannot be deactivated, so you must be prepared for the additional incoming damage as enemies focus on you. This skill also grants you a small passive Damage Resistance bonus, to help compensate for the additional incoming damage. Note that Threat generation from this skill will have no effect against another player (PvP), however the bonus damage resistance still applies.
This is under Special Notes on the Page
An explanation of the mechanic known as 'Threat' or 'Aggro'
Threat is a widely used term in multiplayer games. Put simply, it refers to the degree to which an enemy Non Player Character wishes to kill one player over another. By default, all Starship attacks do a fixed amount of threat per point of damage dealt and enemies will subsequently attack the player who is dealing the most damage to the NPC. By increasing your threat generation, you are increasing the amount of threat you generate on a target per unit of damage dealt.
The idea is that one or more players in the group will be outfitted and talented with specific items/abilities/skills which allow them to take very large amounts of focused incoming damage, at the expense of raw damage output. These player characters are often called 'Tanks'. Their job is to generate as much threat as possible so that enemies attack only them, and not other players in the team, who would be unable to survive the same amount of incoming damage.
Due to the reduced damage output that a survivability specced player generates over a player who has invested all their resources in producing as much as damage as possible, a mechanism is required to increase their threat generation to match and exceed that of the damage dealers. Therefore the use of this skill is limited to players wishing to play a tanking role, protecting other party members from attack.
This is the latter half of the Details section, the first part was the same as the in-game description as seen above.
Speculation: It is rumored that this skill is either bugged or insufficient for the purpose intended. i.e. A defensively specced Cruiser Captain with full ranks in this skill may still find it difficult, if not impossible, to generate enough threat to prevent the enemy from attacking the less defensively specced Escorts and Science Vessels. Many players claim that due to the ability of any ship to 'tank' for short periods of time, this is not a problem, and therefore that spending any points in this skill is a waste, preferring instead to focus on skills that will allow the party to kill the enemy before the enemy kills a player.
the other held station and used science powers it survived
That's the player, not the ship.
It's easy to point the finger at a certain ship class, but it's more difficult to cure the age-old root cause of the problem: a combination of ignorance and stupidity that transcends captain type, ship class, and even the game itself... (besides, if anything, it's Odysseys that have a reputation for being completely bloody useless!)
Because its now doing the opposite of intended and making people NOT read the descriptions
which will lead to more newbies getting blown to hell and back
Unfortunately the kind of people who need simple game mechanics pointed out to them are usually precisely the kind of people that think they know it all already, and aren't prepared to listen.
Please everyone knows flying an Intrepid is just like this. Threat Control actually probably helps an Intrepid since odds are you're grav wells are grabbing the attention of everything anyway.
Comments
Having gone back and read this thread, I have to say all evidence to the contrary mate. I've seen a few things in here where someone was nasty to you, and I hope they got reported, but for the most part your trying to tell others that their view is flat out wrong and then you slap something on about choice at the end like a bumper sticker. I've seen a lot of people correcting what are very obvious inaccuracies on your part as to how established in-game mechanics work. It's not about the opinion, it's about information that is inaccurate, pure and simple.
I think this sums it up pretty well.
I have spoken about tactics
military systems
and star fleet
none of which have any relationship to mechanics
and the very first post says for people to draw their own views from the information
discussion boards are for discussion not preaching mechanics
However, and not to detract from his thread, if anyone is interested in the more 'numbers and mechanics' of the game (as well as other neato tidbits of information made by the player community at large), just head on over to here
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=288961
Chillax. No Ego. No Drama.
Like my alien? Watch THE VIDEO
Need custom graphics for you or your fleet? Click HERE
If you want to hop galaxys like Kirk and picard Ask me
sure, it can be done... it's just the least efficient captain class to tank with. Both other captain classes have multiple self-heal/resists. Tac captains has absolutely no tanking skills. It's like saying "when I need to go to the other end of the world, I walk!". Sure, it can be done, it's just so many other ways that are much better.
Sollvax unfortunately also puts his opinion as though they are truth in other threads. Such as http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=288061, where he flat out says...
Which, is as untrue as a tactical captain being the best for tanking in a cruiser. His opinions, while he has every right to them, are spread around this entire forum in such ways. This is what a lot of us have a problem with.
[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.
No offense mate, but this is what you've been doing, you've been doing it really, really, really badly. Posting a topic in the Character Builds and Powers section about a an in-game skill kinda suggests the topic is about the workings (i.e mechanics) of the game. The fact that about 90% of the posts in this topic are also talking about the Threat Control Skill also seem to point in the direction that this is a discussion about the mechanics surrounding threat control and tanking in general.
True, but if you're trying to relate to some sort of of half-baked attempt to role-play you might wanna say so beforehand.
Well I don't think it's quite that extreme since your Bridge Officer Abilities play a large role. But it can't be denied that an Engineer Captain in a Cruiser is going to in the best position for straight up tanking. I think a Science Vessel, especially the DSSV and the Nebula can also tank quite effectively, but the DSSV would be a more shield focused tank. I'm working on getting a Heavy Escort Carrier right now, I think of all the Escort Ship Types it seems to be the tank-iest but I can't really say until I get it. Obviously it's never to compete with the Cruiser types but an Escort that offers more survivability with so few drawbacks would make an ideal platform to use in my opinion. Does Threat Control do anything to the fighter pets?
It's the least efficient for survivability, but not for holding aggro.
If you're a Tac Captain then you have a bit of extra damage potential. Holding aggro is part of tanking. A big part, if you happen to be a non-escort, and you're trying to tank (and thus both hold aggro AND weather damage) with an Escort or two on your team.
So I suppose you could technically make the argument that since survivability itself is so easy to come by in the game (given that a few BOFF powers can handle most of what the game can throw at you), then the most efficient method of increasing your tanking ability would be to cover the basics of survivability and then increase your potential for holding aggro any way you can - more DPS, more threat control, etc.
Basically: once you have sufficient armor, sharpen your sword.
Tacs have a better sword than Engineers, Engineers have better armor than Tacs.
Which do you need more of? Depends on your ship, your build, and your skill.
Personally, given that I've found myself able to regularly tank things in Escorts, I'd lean more heavilly towards Swords than Armor...
OK, this is my first time actually calling you out... but seriously?
That's a troll post right there.
Please Stop.
Why should an Intrepid be debris? (in the game, not in Star Trek Voyager... that series was downright ridiculous when it came to space combat, Voyager basically ended up as a toothless carrier with infinite shuttlecraft due to the Chakotay effect...)
In STO the Intrepid is one of the hardier Science Vessels.
Back when Shuttlecraft were allowed in the STF queues, you had teams of them completing Elite runs. An Intrepid if specced properly can solo anything in the game (read: weather the damage from it and not die - actually "tanking" things would require that it be able to reliably hold aggro over allied ships with higher DPS, which is probably doable in certain situations, especially with a Torpedo boat build, but will be trickier than on a Cruiser/Escort.)
So you didn't read the first post
At all??
Did several times#
3 of them wound up in bits
multiple times
the other held station and used science powers it survived
I can only say what I think
but hey
can someone shut this thread down please
Because its now doing the opposite of intended and making people NOT read the descriptions
which will lead to more newbies getting blown to hell and back
Yes I did, you seemed to be saying how you shouldn't be taking threat control if you didn't WANT to tank, and how you should read the description of the skill, and you also mentioned something about how you only used it with your tactical officer which is how the entire thing got started.
When? I saw you were trying to draw parallels to in universe examples, but you never mentioned the fact that this discussion was meant as such, or that what you write should be viewed through a more RP lens.
Why don't I just post it, saving them some trouble?
From STOWiki
http://www.stowiki.org/Skill:_Starship_Threat_Control
This is in the little blue box on the side of the page, and is also in the details section
This is under Special Notes on the Page
This is the latter half of the Details section, the first part was the same as the in-game description as seen above.
That's the player, not the ship.
It's easy to point the finger at a certain ship class, but it's more difficult to cure the age-old root cause of the problem: a combination of ignorance and stupidity that transcends captain type, ship class, and even the game itself... (besides, if anything, it's Odysseys that have a reputation for being completely bloody useless!)
Unfortunately the kind of people who need simple game mechanics pointed out to them are usually precisely the kind of people that think they know it all already, and aren't prepared to listen.
Arrrrgh! My eyes it BUUUUUUUUUUURNS!! :eek:
Please how could that possibly burn, after 14 pages of this? :P
Probably flying an Intrepid.
Please everyone knows flying an Intrepid is just like this. Threat Control actually probably helps an Intrepid since odds are you're grav wells are grabbing the attention of everything anyway.