As I said before Balance is for Deferi and whiny girls only! Not saying your either but I hate the balance argument - we need an arms race here is STO not balance! Good for profit as the Feregi would say and every arms manufacture in the world.
You might want to analyze the situation beyond the immediately obvious.
If you make the Vesta imbalanced compared to your backlog of properties, what does that do to said backlog?
If the Vesta is clearly better how many Advanced Research Retrofits are they going to sell? How many D'Kyr? How many Long Range Retrofits? How many FSMs so players can attain the Fleet Science Retrofit? Or the Fleet Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Reconnaissance? Or the Fleet Deep Space? Or the Fleet Advanced Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Long Range Retrofit?
That's right, somewhere boarding on none.
You've just moved from a situation where you can potentially make NINE sales to a new customer over the course of their stay, to a situation where you're going to be very hard pressed to make more than one because you've just devalued all of your backlog... a list of products you've invested time and effort in and are still trying to sell.
An "arms race" is a great way to make the vast majority of your wares obsolete, thus wasting themespecially when it comes to new players... and this in an industry (F2P MMOs) where a great deal of importance is placed on player churn (out with the old, in with the new). And you can expect a LOT of churn when you implement a for-pay arms race system since it will very effectively drive players away.
Basically... you're endorsing a very poor idea which would likely be detrimental to the game in the long term. You need to think beyond the immediate.
I have to agree , cryptic cannot really do a ' tier six ' because it would basically destroy their entire catalogue of ships. noone would ever buy t5 ships anymore
sure they can do powerful t5 ships , but thats it really
they'd have to completely rebuild the ship tier system
I have to agree , cryptic cannot really do a ' tier six ' because it would basically destroy their entire catalogue of ships. noone would ever buy t5 ships anymore
sure they can do powerful t5 ships , but thats it really
they'd have to completely rebuild the ship tier system
They can theoretically do a T6... but it's going to be problematic.
The Ask Cryptic seems to hint at being able to use your other ships as NPC backup with the Admiral rank when it's introduced. So T5 ships will still, theoretically, have some utility post-T5. Even with the presence of a T6 you might buy a D'Kyr if it's the best you can get at T5 while on your way to T6 (the way you might buy a +1 ship from earlier tiers).
This does, however, make buying any T5 ship less palatable as a whole since it requires a large(r) investment (than previous tiers) for something you're only going to be using temporarily. I think we can all agree that T5 CStore ships sell more than T1 to T4 CStore ships, and if you take a look at the ship releases I think Cryptic would agree there (we don't see them padding the intermediate tiers with more ships, do we?). This is no doubt due to them being seen as "endgame" ships... something you do invalidate with a T6 being introduced.
So it will devalue their entire catalogue of T5 ships... but while it will make them less attractive to buy, it won't make them substandard options within their tiers. So there's still some reason to purchase them. It will make them viewed as worth less as opposed to nearly worthless. It just raises the question of whether or not they will have enough merit to justify a price tag ranging from $20 to $25 each for something that will only really be used temporarily and then only see a sort of very limited functionality (and I'm thinking, generally, no here, that they won't be seen as having a worth to justify the price).
So I see introducing a T6 as a bad decision, but not as foolish as obsoleting ships within a tier.
When you make ships obsolete within their own tier you're not likely to be making any sales from your backlog beyond that one ship you've crowned king. While people might invest for a temporary benefit that's made immediately invalid when you've made that potential investment inferior even for that temporary period. You might still sell a D'Kyr to someone who is Vulcan-obsessed or a ship collector, but that's about it. And you could make those sales regardless of stats. So you'd be selling to a minority which, realistically, were already a sale in the bag. The idea, of course, isn't to try and sell to people who are already sold on what you're providing, but to everyone else... and when you make a ship obsolete you all but guarantee your loss of all of those potential sales.
Now remember the whole concept of churn, and you really begin to see how bad that idea is. When players frequently aren't even around for one year your backlog becomes incredibly important since that's going to be the only catalogue that most players will ever see. They aren't going to be sticking around for years to be continually gouged by better and better ships. If you want multiple sales from these people you need past offerings to retain some degree of merit, a concept which an in-tier "arms race" system just dumps all over.
So there's some potential for new tiers (though it will be problematic), while the "arms race" idea within tiers is basically like trying to make a career out of selling your kidneys... you might be looking at a nice one-time short term gain when you release a new product, but as a career opportunity it's going to hurt in the long run...
You might want to analyze the situation beyond the immediately obvious.
If you make the Vesta imbalanced compared to your backlog of properties, what does that do to said backlog?
If the Vesta is clearly better how many Advanced Research Retrofits are they going to sell? How many D'Kyr? How many Long Range Retrofits? How many FSMs so players can attain the Fleet Science Retrofit? Or the Fleet Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Reconnaissance? Or the Fleet Deep Space? Or the Fleet Advanced Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Long Range Retrofit?
That's right, somewhere boarding on none.
You've just moved from a situation where you can potentially make NINE sales to a new customer over the course of their stay, to a situation where you're going to be very hard pressed to make more than one because you've just devalued all of your backlog... a list of products you've invested time and effort in and are still trying to sell.
An "arms race" is a great way to make the vast majority of your wares obsolete, thus wasting themespecially when it comes to new players... and this in an industry (F2P MMOs) where a great deal of importance is placed on player churn (out with the old, in with the new). And you can expect a LOT of churn when you implement a for-pay arms race system since it will very effectively drive players away.
Basically... you're endorsing a very poor idea which would likely be detrimental to the game in the long term. You need to think beyond the immediate.
In a lot of ways you are right - however - 90% of the players in the game won't be in fleets that reach T5 so any sci ship from that is out of range - 75% won't be in fleets that reach T4 - so those ships will be out of range
So do they make a ship like the Vesta OP for the c-store where people know it is account wide and they sell say 150,000 over 1 year or stick with the fleet ships which may sell a few thousand at the high tiers?
Don't for get they can make this OP and charge $30 to $35 dollars and claim that the extra is due to the licencing and other fees of buying the ship. Something that is more than reasonable given the potential cost of acquiring it from the designer.
I think you're thinking of the Chimera Class, which is the 1000 Day Veteran Reward. The Vesta is going to a CStore ship released with Season Seven. Two totally different ships,
In a lot of ways you are right - however - 90% of the players in the game won't be in fleets that reach T5 so any sci ship from that is out of range - 75% won't be in fleets that reach T4 - so those ships will be out of range
And...?
Ultimately the Fleet ships are specifically there to tap people for more revenue. To hit people again for something they've essentially already paid for.
So do they make a ship like the Vesta OP for the c-store where people know it is account wide and they sell say 150,000 over 1 year or stick with the fleet ships which may sell a few thousand at the high tiers?
Most people aren't here for a year. If you've been around awhile and spend time befriending new people you'd have noticed this from your friend list.
You're focused on individual, successive sales to a static base, which lacks foresight. In order to tap transient gamers multiple times Cryptic's backlog is all-important, otherwise those players only have one valid option to buy; the "OP" one. That makes all of the time and effort you put into previous offerings all but worthless, and beyond that means you have to continually be developing new product to sustain yourself as you've made all your old product anathema to consumers. It means you can no longer rely on people wanting try out your old products because you've basically boxed them up, nailed their coffins closed, and buried them in salted earth.
So you've made your potential to earn via your past work all but nil. You've made your job harder by requiring a more steady, constantly flow of product to have any chance of seeing revenue. And you've done this to try and "one up" old products in order to try and continuously tap your installed base, a stagnant and shrinking portion of your market where new players are the norm, and the more lucrative option.
So basically you've shot yourself in the foot, oh, about three times.
Don't for get they can make this OP and charge $30 to $35 dollars and claim that the extra is due to the licencing and other fees of buying the ship. Something that is more than reasonable given the potential cost of acquiring it from the designer.
Don't forget that we have both $20 and $25 T5 ships which are essentially still balanced to each other within T5 (with some $20 ships even, theoretically, out-performing $25 options). Thus we already have a pricing disparity. So they can already release a $30 or $35 dollar Vesta that is still balanced and have grounds for doing so, and then still release an improved Fleet Version for an additional $5.
If your concern is them scrounging for that last buck then you've just undermined your own argument, as they can save the "OP" version for the Fleet incarnation and still make more on top of the standard sale.
Don't forget that we have both $20 and $25 T5 ships which are essentially still balanced to each other within T5 (with some $20 ships even, theoretically, out-performing $25 options). Thus we already have a pricing disparity. So they can already release a $30 or $35 dollar Vesta that is still balanced and have grounds for doing so, and then still release an improved Fleet Version for an additional $5.
If your concern is them scrounging for that last buck then you've just undermined your own argument, as they can save the "OP" version for the Fleet incarnation and still make more on top of the standard sale.
Ok fine - then what is the point of releasing new ships at all? To just continue the statis quo? If you only cater to the churn then I guess there is little incentive to stay.
Let's not even think of PvP - they need to finally throw the dirt on that coffin in it's grave and bury it once and for all!
The atrox is the biggest ship in the game, that alone is worthy of a lot of love.
And ofc the freudian cigar with onions shape it has, 2up right there. You still can't mess with that.
But more than anything you simply won't find a better ship to grind stf while watching tv hands down. You don't even have to be within attack range.
On top you get the best of the dps animations, that being sci abilities, and I'd say what is there not to love ? Slow turn rate ? I don't have to move into combat myself :cool:
Ok fine - then what is the point of releasing new ships at all? To just continue the statis quo? If you only cater to the churn then I guess there is little incentive to stay.
Balanced ships cater to people who've stayed as well by having new visuals, abilities and setups allowing those who've "been there, done that" to get something new and fresh. You can't tell me that old timers don't buy new ships because I see newer ships on people with the Veteran SP perk... that without introducing a steady flow of more and more broken ships.
And for those who've stuck around and don't want something fresh? Those who've grown attached to their ship...? Well, you're looking to undermine them by making newer ships OP. These people, they're why the Fleet Ships exist. So they can get upgraded versions of the ships they love and Cryptic can sell them those ships twice.
Your system only caters to a portion of the (shrinking) minority, those who've been here and stayed. It tries to continually tap a tiny well that's starting to run dry, while only catching a bit of run off from the ocean just a few dozen feet to the left which you'd like to leave mostly ignored.
You're trying to make multiple sales to a small, static and shrinking group of people... a system that was basically attempted with the subscription service, then abandoned for what is seen as the "greener pastures" of F2P. Meanwhile you're trying to make single sales to this larger, more dynamic flow of people... the group that entire switch over F2P was meant to court.
Balanced ships cater to people who've stayed as well by having new visuals, abilities and setups allowing those who've "been there, done that" to get something new and fresh. You can't tell me that old timers don't buy new ships because I see newer ships on people with the Veteran SP perk... that without introducing a steady flow of more and more broken ships.
And for those who've stuck around and don't want something fresh? Those who've grown attached to their ship...? Well, you're looking to undermine them by making newer ships OP. These people, they're why the Fleet Ships exist. So they can get upgraded versions of the ships they love and Cryptic can sell them those ships twice.
Your system only caters to a portion of the (shrinking) minority, those who've been here and stayed. It tries to continually tap a tiny well that's starting to run dry, while only catching a bit of run off from the ocean just a few dozen feet to the left which you'd like to leave mostly ignored.
You're trying to make multiple sales to a small, static and shrinking group of people... a system that was basically attempted with the subscription service, then abandoned for what is seen as the "greener pastures" of F2P. Meanwhile you're trying to make single sales to this larger, more dynamic flow of people... the group that entire switch over F2P was meant to court.
Your take is myopic in the extreme.
Again you could be right. But I look at it this way - people were begging for a Sov refit - and they gave them one that was ho hum - status quo and to me it appears like it was a financial dud.
People were asking for the Vesta and they had to jump through a lot of legal and financial hoops to get it - will it be status quo? Or will it be one up? - you say status quo? If it's just status quo and people pass can they afford a sales dud?
without looking at cryptics sale numbers , how do we know if things are a dud or not
You can likely make an educated guess at that by the number seen (or not seen) in Sector Space/STFs/etc. .
I'd tend to agree the Retrofit didn't sell, but I'd disagree with that's because it wasn't "OP". Plenty of balanced ships sell well, thus negating that idea. The problem seems to be more fundamental, going right down to the concept of the ship.
Again you could be right. But I look at it this way - people were begging for a Sov refit - and they gave them one that was ho hum - status quo and to me it appears like it was a financial dud.
The problem with the Sovereign refit is that it wasn't seen as having any value by most. Many people already had a Sovereign they liked as far as non-Fleet Vessels went, they were looking to upgrade to a better Sovereign... not a different ship... a better Sovereign. They wanted a Fleet Sovereign, but got an Assault Cruiser Retrofit.
It was a case of listening to people, but not hearing them. Giving them what they thought they wanted, as opposed to what they wanted.
You'd undermine these people just as readily by releasing an Ambassador that trumps the Sovereign and measures up to the Fleet Ships, or even better in your view surpasses them, as opposed to releasing a new Sovereign that trumps the old Sovereign.
People didn't want better ships, they wanted a Sovereign they felt measured up to the new Fleet Vessels. They wanted a viable version of that one iconic ship... and that's not what you're trying to give people. You're trying to give people an arms race.
You're asking for Cryptic to have an Arms Race. THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MINUTE. The Nuclear Arms Race, the greatest version seen to date, existed because of the Cold War. It was, itself, a war of resources... an attempt to cow the enemy with a show of unutilized force. Such a thing requires competition... two parties with competing interests waging this makeshift war against each other.
You're asking for Cryptic to have a war... with itself. To release products to compete with it's own products. You're asking them to intentionally devalue their own wares as opposed to that of a competitor... of which there isn't one. You are asking them to hurt themselves...
... or in other words; shoot themselves in the foot.
You can likely make an educated guess at that by the number seen (or not seen) in Sector Space/STFs/etc.
While for most other ships (it's hard to hide the fact you're flying a D'Kyr or Atrox), I'd agree with that, there's a huge problem with this method when it comes to the Regent; it can be made to look indistinguishable from your average Sovvie.
If you observe any given Sovvie very closely during an STF or other such game, you might be able to notice them firing THY3's at unusual angles. But if they used that slot for Attack Pattern Beta or FAW3 instead, you'd probably never know the difference, even if they did have the 180-degree quant equipped. A more obvious giveaway would be the gas console, but it's not all that useful; I dumped mine pretty quickly into the bank. It's possible many others have, as well.
My guess is for every Regent you see in the original skin, there's another flying around that same instance with a Sovvie or kitbash look. People who wanted a new Sovereign would likely skin it like a Sovereign.
While for most other ships (it's hard to hide the fact you're flying a D'Kyr or Atrox), I'd agree with that, there's a huge problem with this method when it comes to the Regent; it can be made to look indistinguishable from your average Sovvie.
Actually you can check the ships by selecting them and reading the tool tips... which I do tend to do in Sector Space while DOffing, just out of personal interest. I also tend to look for people flying Fleet Ship versions of lower tier ships. Maybe I'm a bit odd that way, but I do like to know who's flying what specifically to get an idea of what's popular/selling.
Al confirmed in an interview awhile back that if they let her slot cannons - which he believed they would because the designer wanted her like the books - that she will be able to slot any cannon - dual or dual heavy cannon.
She's a tiny bit smaller - only a few meters - than the Sov but designed tighter for more manuverability to use the cannons up front so I would say a 37 to 39k hull and a 12 turn
4 weapons in front 3 in the rear - 10 console slots - 4/4/2 or better 4/3/3
1.3 shield mod
3 univ BO 1 cmdr Sci 1 Lt cmd sci
Sub system targeting and enhanced sensor analysis
i would run her with 2 dual heavys up front, 1 dual beam and 1 wide angle torp and 2 turrets rear and a quatum torp
3 things you need to understand:
- $$$ is everything
-- Balance is for Deferi and whiny girls
-- Vesta launches with season 7 - she needs to be a sales smash hit going into fiscal year end.
money is everything, but pissing half the playerbase off is worse than selling a few xtra ships. they will never give a sci ship 4 forward firing weapons. (im not sure, but i believe i saw a dev say that a year or so ago when this was discussed) im not saying no to cannons, im just saying to balance it they would have to slash something. to gain something, you gots to lose something. that is balance. every video game works on balance, that is why they change (nerf and buff) things on a regular schedule. it is why they dont just launch an idea without internally testing it and it is why there is a tribble server. (as we all know its not to find bugs lol)..
so dont get me wrong, cannons would be cool, but i want to know what your giving up to get them...
Actually you can check the ships by selecting them and reading the tool tips... which I do tend to do in Sector Space while DOffing, just out of personal interest. I also tend to look for people flying Fleet Ship versions of lower tier ships. Maybe I'm a bit odd that way, but I do like to know who's flying what specifically to get an idea of what's popular/selling.
Which when it's new is going to be a serious minority.
No "poll" is perfect (any type of sampling is going to be off by a margin), but it's still going to be indicative.
Personal Experience may vary.....Youre claiming you can get a round about idea of how popular a ship is based on something with so many variables its near impossible for you to be even remotely accurate.
Theres all kinds of things youre obviously not taking into consideration here.
Time of Day
Time of Week
Peak Hours
Holidays/Schedules
Instances
Number of individuals Online
Mothballed Ships
Production level Quantum Slipstream Drive: Starfleet?s first slipstream drive intended for continuous use over long distances. The drive can also be run to an even higher setting than a normal drive, but cannot sustain this.
Game Term: Doubles all speeds in sector space and uncaps sector space speed regardless of impulse drive choice.
Experimental Heavy Cannon: The Vesta class is fitted with Starfleet?s latest experimental heavy cannon system in a fixed forward mount under the saucer.
Game Terms: A cannon type version of the Spinal Lance from the Gal X. Nothing more to say.
Ma mount the Intrepid Refits Ablative Amour Console.
Consle: Advanced Multi-Frequency control Firing Computer: Starfleet?s latest and greatest attempt to build an automated targeting system for combating the borg. This advanced system is able to not only randomize frequencies, but self determine when the enemy has adapted and alter it's frequency modulation algorithms accordingly. It is even able to utilize sensor data in an attempted to adapt perfectly, allow the Vesta class to occasionally mimic the borgs own adaptation trickery. The algorithm are useful against any enemy, but more so vs the borg.
Game Terms: Can only be fitted to the Vesta.
+10% weapons bleedthrough
5% chance on any shot of: +100% weapon bleedthrough
100% chance of: +2000 damage for all weapons vs borg.
Discussion:
At it's core this is something of a bit of everything ship.
The choice of boff/console layout is very much a sci/tac hybrid, whilst the base stats bar shields are a cruiser at heart. The spinal cannons hearken back to the Gal-X, and nicely answer many players demands for a fleet level gal-X, albeit in a roundabout way. The drive stuff is mostly pure fluff. The console I literally made up as I honestly didn't have any other idea's, I?m only familiar with the ship from the wiki. That said it?s a nice firepower buff of a unique kind, and gives people a way to get access to STF grade anti-borg abilities without having to un-slot their fleet stuff.
Overall despite one hell of a hull shield combo I think this ship will balance out on he basis of having one of the weaker tanks in the game and a sub par evasion. It might be destructive and be capable of all kinds of cute sci tricks, but you?re going to have to watch your incoming more than usual.
seems okay aside from the weapons
from what we know , its most likely going to be a science ship , not a cruiser
so 3/3 more like it
from cryptic ( hurr ) comments by geko , ' the canon gives this ship everything '
a balanced outlook is probably the best one
Personal Experience may vary.....Youre claiming you can get a round about idea of how popular a ship is based on something with so many variables its near impossible for you to be even remotely accurate.
Theres all kinds of things youre obviously not taking into consideration here.
Time of Day
Time of Week
Peak Hours
Holidays/Schedules
Instances
Number of individuals Online
Mothballed Ships
You're making a lot of assumptions about my observations. My schedule fluctuates and I'm on at all hours on varying days, and this isn't something I've done once, it's something I check consistently while I DOff, which is almost all I do these days, and is something I've done nearly every day since the release of this new season. And of course the general consensus seems to follow what I've seen.
So all signs point to the Assault Cruiser Refit selling poorly. If you're seeing them all the time and have conflicting data you can feel free to say so... but you don't seem to be doing that.
Beyond that, my comment was clearly prefaced with "You can likely make an educated guess..." so it's not as though I was presenting my opinion as concrete fact, but as an educated guess, which it is.
I am going to yield on this debate to those i have discussed with, there is absolutely little point in discussing this as we will get what we get and have no real input one way or the other what will come.
seems okay aside from the weapons
from what we know , its most likely going to be a science ship , not a cruiser
so 3/3 more like it
from cryptic ( hurr ) comments by geko , ' the canon gives this ship everything '
a balanced outlook is probably the best one
I went 4/4 becuase of the cruiser angle i was throwing in, besides with no EPTW avalibile all the time it's not really going to be all that powerful if it has them. Only cannon users can really use more than 6 slots effectivlly all the time so it's not going to be all that OP IMHO.
yeah i just re-read it , was too pre-occupied with the cruiser weapon slots lol
cannons built in ' could' work , but its most likely going to be just able to be outfitted with them , think it was mentioned on priority one that all forward slots could use them.
as for turn rate , it'll be sovereign or slightly better , going by the size and mass .
best description ive seen somone could up with for the vesta is a similar layout to the orb-weaver , except with a lt cmmdr tac instead of it being universal
And turn rate, 6? the Galaxy and Odyssey turn rate when the ship itself is about as long as the Soverign?
In fact with 40k hull we have Dreadnaught with a higher shield modifier and 1.5 is higher that any T4 and VA science ship and they only get that because of their weaker hull.
What I see is a Galaxy-X with higher shields, the loss of a Cmdr Eng is made up by gaining even more shields and having a Lt. Cmdr Tact, having the Phaser Lance turned into a Cannon changes nothing and makes it a Galaxy-X.
Also stealing the Intrepid-R console? NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!
Erm try the loss of a Cmdr Eng and a Lt Cmdr Eng. If you can't see the massive downside of having only 1 ensign eng slot your blind as well as dumb:eek:.
A typical science ship has a weak hull, weak tank and weak DPS. But gets a strong sheild and some nice utility sci abilities as it's compensation.
This design not only gives up a huge amount of turn rate and speed, but even more tanking while hybridising the sci over into tactical. It's got the tradeoffs to justify it IMHO.
cannons built in ' could' work , but its most likely going to be just able to be outfitted with them , think it was mentioned on priority one that all forward slots could use them.
Then it shouldn't be allowed to fit cannons. If it's not got at least 10 turn rate it should never have the option of fitting cannons. it just suckers bad players into putting cannons on a ship that can't actually use them, and forces us to take a downside in compensation for somthing we can't properly use.
Thats why i put the cannons in as a lance equivelent. it gives Gal X owners somthing they've been dying for, (a fleet stat level, spinal lance ship), and fits them in a way that makes them genuinlly useful.
EDIT: How big is this thing, from the vishual images and the wiki it looks oddy sized.
EDIT2: I also realised i forgot to add the sci ship abilities of subsystem targeting and sensor analysis.
You can likely make an educated guess at that by the number seen (or not seen) in Sector Space/STFs/etc. .
I'd tend to agree the Retrofit didn't sell, but I'd disagree with that's because it wasn't "OP". Plenty of balanced ships sell well, thus negating that idea. The problem seems to be more fundamental, going right down to the concept of the ship......
It was a case of listening to people, but not hearing them. Giving them what they thought they wanted, as opposed to what they wanted.
I think so as well. And to top it off the Regent wasn't a very nice looking ship at all. The one saving grace for the ship was the 180 Degree Torpedo.
Still, why didn't Cryptic simply sell the Regent Skin and the torp as a $10 USD bundle instead? Anyone pining for a better Sovy is going for a Fleet version, that much has been clear. The fact the Fleet version is character specific is easier to swallow in light of the way the game is focusing on single character progression now. They could also sell the Ambassador as a skin for the Sovy and call it a day. How much resentment would it cause if the Ambassador was somehow better at being an assault cruiser than a Fleet or even a regular Sovy?
Why not give it a Phaser Autocannon like the Bortasqu' Disruptor Autocannon?
This would give it a little bit of Burst damage, and help with the Canon arguements.
[SIGPIC]Handle: @kirian_darkstar
Registered: Oct/2009 , LTS : Feb/2011
Fleets: Warriors of the Phoenix, Kirian Industries[/SIGPIC] Three years and still no Captain Klaa hair...
Comments
You might want to analyze the situation beyond the immediately obvious.
If you make the Vesta imbalanced compared to your backlog of properties, what does that do to said backlog?
If the Vesta is clearly better how many Advanced Research Retrofits are they going to sell? How many D'Kyr? How many Long Range Retrofits? How many FSMs so players can attain the Fleet Science Retrofit? Or the Fleet Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Reconnaissance? Or the Fleet Deep Space? Or the Fleet Advanced Research Retrofit? Or the Fleet Long Range Retrofit?
That's right, somewhere boarding on none.
You've just moved from a situation where you can potentially make NINE sales to a new customer over the course of their stay, to a situation where you're going to be very hard pressed to make more than one because you've just devalued all of your backlog... a list of products you've invested time and effort in and are still trying to sell.
An "arms race" is a great way to make the vast majority of your wares obsolete, thus wasting them especially when it comes to new players... and this in an industry (F2P MMOs) where a great deal of importance is placed on player churn (out with the old, in with the new). And you can expect a LOT of churn when you implement a for-pay arms race system since it will very effectively drive players away.
Basically... you're endorsing a very poor idea which would likely be detrimental to the game in the long term. You need to think beyond the immediate.
sure they can do powerful t5 ships , but thats it really
they'd have to completely rebuild the ship tier system
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
They can theoretically do a T6... but it's going to be problematic.
The Ask Cryptic seems to hint at being able to use your other ships as NPC backup with the Admiral rank when it's introduced. So T5 ships will still, theoretically, have some utility post-T5. Even with the presence of a T6 you might buy a D'Kyr if it's the best you can get at T5 while on your way to T6 (the way you might buy a +1 ship from earlier tiers).
This does, however, make buying any T5 ship less palatable as a whole since it requires a large(r) investment (than previous tiers) for something you're only going to be using temporarily. I think we can all agree that T5 CStore ships sell more than T1 to T4 CStore ships, and if you take a look at the ship releases I think Cryptic would agree there (we don't see them padding the intermediate tiers with more ships, do we?). This is no doubt due to them being seen as "endgame" ships... something you do invalidate with a T6 being introduced.
So it will devalue their entire catalogue of T5 ships... but while it will make them less attractive to buy, it won't make them substandard options within their tiers. So there's still some reason to purchase them. It will make them viewed as worth less as opposed to nearly worthless. It just raises the question of whether or not they will have enough merit to justify a price tag ranging from $20 to $25 each for something that will only really be used temporarily and then only see a sort of very limited functionality (and I'm thinking, generally, no here, that they won't be seen as having a worth to justify the price).
So I see introducing a T6 as a bad decision, but not as foolish as obsoleting ships within a tier.
When you make ships obsolete within their own tier you're not likely to be making any sales from your backlog beyond that one ship you've crowned king. While people might invest for a temporary benefit that's made immediately invalid when you've made that potential investment inferior even for that temporary period. You might still sell a D'Kyr to someone who is Vulcan-obsessed or a ship collector, but that's about it. And you could make those sales regardless of stats. So you'd be selling to a minority which, realistically, were already a sale in the bag. The idea, of course, isn't to try and sell to people who are already sold on what you're providing, but to everyone else... and when you make a ship obsolete you all but guarantee your loss of all of those potential sales.
Now remember the whole concept of churn, and you really begin to see how bad that idea is. When players frequently aren't even around for one year your backlog becomes incredibly important since that's going to be the only catalogue that most players will ever see. They aren't going to be sticking around for years to be continually gouged by better and better ships. If you want multiple sales from these people you need past offerings to retain some degree of merit, a concept which an in-tier "arms race" system just dumps all over.
So there's some potential for new tiers (though it will be problematic), while the "arms race" idea within tiers is basically like trying to make a career out of selling your kidneys... you might be looking at a nice one-time short term gain when you release a new product, but as a career opportunity it's going to hurt in the long run...
In a lot of ways you are right - however - 90% of the players in the game won't be in fleets that reach T5 so any sci ship from that is out of range - 75% won't be in fleets that reach T4 - so those ships will be out of range
So do they make a ship like the Vesta OP for the c-store where people know it is account wide and they sell say 150,000 over 1 year or stick with the fleet ships which may sell a few thousand at the high tiers?
Don't for get they can make this OP and charge $30 to $35 dollars and claim that the extra is due to the licencing and other fees of buying the ship. Something that is more than reasonable given the potential cost of acquiring it from the designer.
Oh okay, right on
And...?
Ultimately the Fleet ships are specifically there to tap people for more revenue. To hit people again for something they've essentially already paid for.
Most people aren't here for a year. If you've been around awhile and spend time befriending new people you'd have noticed this from your friend list.
You're focused on individual, successive sales to a static base, which lacks foresight. In order to tap transient gamers multiple times Cryptic's backlog is all-important, otherwise those players only have one valid option to buy; the "OP" one. That makes all of the time and effort you put into previous offerings all but worthless, and beyond that means you have to continually be developing new product to sustain yourself as you've made all your old product anathema to consumers. It means you can no longer rely on people wanting try out your old products because you've basically boxed them up, nailed their coffins closed, and buried them in salted earth.
So you've made your potential to earn via your past work all but nil. You've made your job harder by requiring a more steady, constantly flow of product to have any chance of seeing revenue. And you've done this to try and "one up" old products in order to try and continuously tap your installed base, a stagnant and shrinking portion of your market where new players are the norm, and the more lucrative option.
So basically you've shot yourself in the foot, oh, about three times.
Don't forget that we have both $20 and $25 T5 ships which are essentially still balanced to each other within T5 (with some $20 ships even, theoretically, out-performing $25 options). Thus we already have a pricing disparity. So they can already release a $30 or $35 dollar Vesta that is still balanced and have grounds for doing so, and then still release an improved Fleet Version for an additional $5.
If your concern is them scrounging for that last buck then you've just undermined your own argument, as they can save the "OP" version for the Fleet incarnation and still make more on top of the standard sale.
Ok fine - then what is the point of releasing new ships at all? To just continue the statis quo? If you only cater to the churn then I guess there is little incentive to stay.
Let's not even think of PvP - they need to finally throw the dirt on that coffin in it's grave and bury it once and for all!
So much so I grinded my way to an f2p one
The atrox is the biggest ship in the game, that alone is worthy of a lot of love.
And ofc the freudian cigar with onions shape it has, 2up right there. You still can't mess with that.
But more than anything you simply won't find a better ship to grind stf while watching tv hands down. You don't even have to be within attack range.
On top you get the best of the dps animations, that being sci abilities, and I'd say what is there not to love ? Slow turn rate ? I don't have to move into combat myself :cool:
Balanced ships cater to people who've stayed as well by having new visuals, abilities and setups allowing those who've "been there, done that" to get something new and fresh. You can't tell me that old timers don't buy new ships because I see newer ships on people with the Veteran SP perk... that without introducing a steady flow of more and more broken ships.
And for those who've stuck around and don't want something fresh? Those who've grown attached to their ship...? Well, you're looking to undermine them by making newer ships OP. These people, they're why the Fleet Ships exist. So they can get upgraded versions of the ships they love and Cryptic can sell them those ships twice.
Your system only caters to a portion of the (shrinking) minority, those who've been here and stayed. It tries to continually tap a tiny well that's starting to run dry, while only catching a bit of run off from the ocean just a few dozen feet to the left which you'd like to leave mostly ignored.
You're trying to make multiple sales to a small, static and shrinking group of people... a system that was basically attempted with the subscription service, then abandoned for what is seen as the "greener pastures" of F2P. Meanwhile you're trying to make single sales to this larger, more dynamic flow of people... the group that entire switch over F2P was meant to court.
Your take is myopic in the extreme.
Again you could be right. But I look at it this way - people were begging for a Sov refit - and they gave them one that was ho hum - status quo and to me it appears like it was a financial dud.
People were asking for the Vesta and they had to jump through a lot of legal and financial hoops to get it - will it be status quo? Or will it be one up? - you say status quo? If it's just status quo and people pass can they afford a sales dud?
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
You can likely make an educated guess at that by the number seen (or not seen) in Sector Space/STFs/etc. .
I'd tend to agree the Retrofit didn't sell, but I'd disagree with that's because it wasn't "OP". Plenty of balanced ships sell well, thus negating that idea. The problem seems to be more fundamental, going right down to the concept of the ship.
The problem with the Sovereign refit is that it wasn't seen as having any value by most. Many people already had a Sovereign they liked as far as non-Fleet Vessels went, they were looking to upgrade to a better Sovereign... not a different ship... a better Sovereign. They wanted a Fleet Sovereign, but got an Assault Cruiser Retrofit.
It was a case of listening to people, but not hearing them. Giving them what they thought they wanted, as opposed to what they wanted.
You'd undermine these people just as readily by releasing an Ambassador that trumps the Sovereign and measures up to the Fleet Ships, or even better in your view surpasses them, as opposed to releasing a new Sovereign that trumps the old Sovereign.
People didn't want better ships, they wanted a Sovereign they felt measured up to the new Fleet Vessels. They wanted a viable version of that one iconic ship... and that's not what you're trying to give people. You're trying to give people an arms race.
You're asking for Cryptic to have an Arms Race. THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MINUTE. The Nuclear Arms Race, the greatest version seen to date, existed because of the Cold War. It was, itself, a war of resources... an attempt to cow the enemy with a show of unutilized force. Such a thing requires competition... two parties with competing interests waging this makeshift war against each other.
You're asking for Cryptic to have a war... with itself. To release products to compete with it's own products. You're asking them to intentionally devalue their own wares as opposed to that of a competitor... of which there isn't one. You are asking them to hurt themselves...
... or in other words; shoot themselves in the foot.
While for most other ships (it's hard to hide the fact you're flying a D'Kyr or Atrox), I'd agree with that, there's a huge problem with this method when it comes to the Regent; it can be made to look indistinguishable from your average Sovvie.
If you observe any given Sovvie very closely during an STF or other such game, you might be able to notice them firing THY3's at unusual angles. But if they used that slot for Attack Pattern Beta or FAW3 instead, you'd probably never know the difference, even if they did have the 180-degree quant equipped. A more obvious giveaway would be the gas console, but it's not all that useful; I dumped mine pretty quickly into the bank. It's possible many others have, as well.
My guess is for every Regent you see in the original skin, there's another flying around that same instance with a Sovvie or kitbash look. People who wanted a new Sovereign would likely skin it like a Sovereign.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Actually you can check the ships by selecting them and reading the tool tips... which I do tend to do in Sector Space while DOffing, just out of personal interest. I also tend to look for people flying Fleet Ship versions of lower tier ships. Maybe I'm a bit odd that way, but I do like to know who's flying what specifically to get an idea of what's popular/selling.
Which when it's new is going to be a serious minority.
No "poll" is perfect (any type of sampling is going to be off by a margin), but it's still going to be indicative.
money is everything, but pissing half the playerbase off is worse than selling a few xtra ships. they will never give a sci ship 4 forward firing weapons. (im not sure, but i believe i saw a dev say that a year or so ago when this was discussed) im not saying no to cannons, im just saying to balance it they would have to slash something. to gain something, you gots to lose something. that is balance. every video game works on balance, that is why they change (nerf and buff) things on a regular schedule. it is why they dont just launch an idea without internally testing it and it is why there is a tribble server. (as we all know its not to find bugs lol)..
so dont get me wrong, cannons would be cool, but i want to know what your giving up to get them...
Personal Experience may vary.....Youre claiming you can get a round about idea of how popular a ship is based on something with so many variables its near impossible for you to be even remotely accurate.
Theres all kinds of things youre obviously not taking into consideration here.
Time of Day
Time of Week
Peak Hours
Holidays/Schedules
Instances
Number of individuals Online
Mothballed Ships
Hull: 40,000
Sheilds:1.43
Weapons 4/4
Impulse Modifier: 0.15
Turn: 6
Consles: 5R/4B/1Y
Layout: CMDR, Lt Sci/Ensign Eng/Lt, LtCMDR Tac
Built in Abilities:
Production level Quantum Slipstream Drive: Starfleet?s first slipstream drive intended for continuous use over long distances. The drive can also be run to an even higher setting than a normal drive, but cannot sustain this.
Game Term: Doubles all speeds in sector space and uncaps sector space speed regardless of impulse drive choice.
Experimental Heavy Cannon: The Vesta class is fitted with Starfleet?s latest experimental heavy cannon system in a fixed forward mount under the saucer.
Game Terms: A cannon type version of the Spinal Lance from the Gal X. Nothing more to say.
Ma mount the Intrepid Refits Ablative Amour Console.
Consle: Advanced Multi-Frequency control Firing Computer: Starfleet?s latest and greatest attempt to build an automated targeting system for combating the borg. This advanced system is able to not only randomize frequencies, but self determine when the enemy has adapted and alter it's frequency modulation algorithms accordingly. It is even able to utilize sensor data in an attempted to adapt perfectly, allow the Vesta class to occasionally mimic the borgs own adaptation trickery. The algorithm are useful against any enemy, but more so vs the borg.
Game Terms: Can only be fitted to the Vesta.
+10% weapons bleedthrough
5% chance on any shot of: +100% weapon bleedthrough
100% chance of: +2000 damage for all weapons vs borg.
Discussion:
At it's core this is something of a bit of everything ship.
The choice of boff/console layout is very much a sci/tac hybrid, whilst the base stats bar shields are a cruiser at heart. The spinal cannons hearken back to the Gal-X, and nicely answer many players demands for a fleet level gal-X, albeit in a roundabout way. The drive stuff is mostly pure fluff. The console I literally made up as I honestly didn't have any other idea's, I?m only familiar with the ship from the wiki. That said it?s a nice firepower buff of a unique kind, and gives people a way to get access to STF grade anti-borg abilities without having to un-slot their fleet stuff.
Overall despite one hell of a hull shield combo I think this ship will balance out on he basis of having one of the weaker tanks in the game and a sub par evasion. It might be destructive and be capable of all kinds of cute sci tricks, but you?re going to have to watch your incoming more than usual.
from what we know , its most likely going to be a science ship , not a cruiser
so 3/3 more like it
from cryptic ( hurr ) comments by geko , ' the canon gives this ship everything '
a balanced outlook is probably the best one
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
You're making a lot of assumptions about my observations. My schedule fluctuates and I'm on at all hours on varying days, and this isn't something I've done once, it's something I check consistently while I DOff, which is almost all I do these days, and is something I've done nearly every day since the release of this new season. And of course the general consensus seems to follow what I've seen.
So all signs point to the Assault Cruiser Refit selling poorly. If you're seeing them all the time and have conflicting data you can feel free to say so... but you don't seem to be doing that.
Beyond that, my comment was clearly prefaced with "You can likely make an educated guess..." so it's not as though I was presenting my opinion as concrete fact, but as an educated guess, which it is.
I went 4/4 becuase of the cruiser angle i was throwing in, besides with no EPTW avalibile all the time it's not really going to be all that powerful if it has them. Only cannon users can really use more than 6 slots effectivlly all the time so it's not going to be all that OP IMHO.
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
cannons built in ' could' work , but its most likely going to be just able to be outfitted with them , think it was mentioned on priority one that all forward slots could use them.
as for turn rate , it'll be sovereign or slightly better , going by the size and mass .
best description ive seen somone could up with for the vesta is a similar layout to the orb-weaver , except with a lt cmmdr tac instead of it being universal
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
Erm try the loss of a Cmdr Eng and a Lt Cmdr Eng. If you can't see the massive downside of having only 1 ensign eng slot your blind as well as dumb:eek:.
A typical science ship has a weak hull, weak tank and weak DPS. But gets a strong sheild and some nice utility sci abilities as it's compensation.
This design not only gives up a huge amount of turn rate and speed, but even more tanking while hybridising the sci over into tactical. It's got the tradeoffs to justify it IMHO.
Then it shouldn't be allowed to fit cannons. If it's not got at least 10 turn rate it should never have the option of fitting cannons. it just suckers bad players into putting cannons on a ship that can't actually use them, and forces us to take a downside in compensation for somthing we can't properly use.
Thats why i put the cannons in as a lance equivelent. it gives Gal X owners somthing they've been dying for, (a fleet stat level, spinal lance ship), and fits them in a way that makes them genuinlly useful.
EDIT: How big is this thing, from the vishual images and the wiki it looks oddy sized.
EDIT2: I also realised i forgot to add the sci ship abilities of subsystem targeting and sensor analysis.
Rear Admiral , Engineering Division
U.S.S. Sheffield N.C.C. 92016
I think so as well. And to top it off the Regent wasn't a very nice looking ship at all. The one saving grace for the ship was the 180 Degree Torpedo.
Still, why didn't Cryptic simply sell the Regent Skin and the torp as a $10 USD bundle instead? Anyone pining for a better Sovy is going for a Fleet version, that much has been clear. The fact the Fleet version is character specific is easier to swallow in light of the way the game is focusing on single character progression now. They could also sell the Ambassador as a skin for the Sovy and call it a day. How much resentment would it cause if the Ambassador was somehow better at being an assault cruiser than a Fleet or even a regular Sovy?
This would give it a little bit of Burst damage, and help with the Canon arguements.
Registered: Oct/2009 , LTS : Feb/2011
Fleets: Warriors of the Phoenix, Kirian Industries[/SIGPIC]
Three years and still no Captain Klaa hair...