test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Vesta Stats

123457

Comments

  • bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    genhauk wrote: »
    A KDF player advocating Siphon Drones being further balanced?

    Come now, you keep up this talk my friend and everyone will think Klingons actually are quite sensible and fair.

    Next you might have them thinking we fight with honor as well. :)

    (( I agree with what he said, btw.))

    And then we strike while they are unbalanced by the uncharacteristic attitudes we display.......:P


    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA*


    * sorry. That was the politician in me coming out.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    It's kind of funny, in stopping to think about it.

    There's an easy way to kill ASD.
    There's an easy way to kill ADR.

    The way to kill ASD does not work on ADR.
    The way to kill ADR does not work on ASD.
  • esquire1980esquire1980 Member Posts: 152 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    I've just read this entire thread since I posted yesterday and got myself updated on what has happened since.

    Brandon, just exactly what did Cryptic expect us to believe? You guys have locked yourself into this box with your P2W designs, selling more and more versatility and power, for the sole purpose of adding to the bottom line. There were more than 1 of the playerbase that called this out at the onset and it would seem that these people's worst fears have now been realised. Your still calling these new lockbox/10 console single payment ships current tier but it is very clear they exceed all of the past ships by a large margin. Personaly, I have tried to get a beam-boat excel to be able to compete and there is simply no way now. The past ships have simply been outclassed via the "Tim Taylor-ing" of present designs. The seach for "MORE POWER".

    Other MMORPGs do this as well with upgrading gear/etc but the main factor with most of these remains that there is simply a way, grind, new levels, etc to get all this new "cool", more powerful gear in a in-game situation or a added paid expansion that includes levels, etc. Here, it's simply head for the store and the costs seem to be ever increasing along with the "Tim Taylor-ing". Now, yet another $50 bucks for P2W 3 console set increasing the need to yet spend that 50 on the entire set. It's pretty easy to see the design characteristics here. While the players last investment fo 20, 25, or whatever dollars turns into not much more than slag. And this 50 will simply be outclassed via the next 50.

    All of these pay as you go DPS adds while existing static powers/abilities (mostly to healing/tanking) have been NERFed to high heaven with the latest being the borg set now on the chopping block. Did anyone at Cryptic even factor this NERF (or even the past NERFs) to simple tanking in with the P2W consoles/abilitys included in this new ship or even with the last one in the Chim? It would appear that Cryptic seems to develope according to the "this would be cool" factor without any regard for game balance what-so-ever to anyone with half a clue how the mechanics work in this game. And PVP gameplay has severly suffered due to all of these factors. This is almost the entire reason why a Cryptic developer would come to these forums and make a statement such as " we could take PVP entirely out of the game and noone would even notice".

    I was one of those "secret testors" over in SWG for and by SOE and the player driven "senate" for quite a number of years. I actualy took part in PVP and PVE enough to qualify, in that set of dev's minds. The last version of a development team SOE had actualy used our feedback and SWG PVP gameplay was on the up-swing for both quantity and quality until EA threw the wrench in the works there with having LA go up on the IP fees to get SWG out of the way for TOR. Here, it's the other way around and I'm sure your metrics tell the tale pretty well or statements such as referenced above would not be made via Cryptic employees.

    The entire problem here is a developer mindset as was the entire problem with the CU, NGE, and C6CD over at SOE. And, to be honest, once you have gotten this far into P2W, I'm not even sure you can get yourself out of it at this point in time. Players and payers now expect that "MORE POWER" and look forward to your new releases in the store for PVE purposes. And a new released ship that doesn't contain that new power will not have the same effect on the bottom line as the one that does. I'm sure you guys are well aware of that with the bottom line comparables between the new sov and the bug and/or time ship.
  • webdeathwebdeath Member Posts: 1,570 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    You know DDIS.. your right.. that build is tactically inclined.. Here's an Engi version..In the Tactical Variant of course!!

    Lt Tac: Tac Team 1, Rapid Fire 1
    Cmd Sci: Tractor beam 1, TSS 2, Viral 1, Energy Siphon 3
    Ltc Uni: Sci team 1, HE 2, Tyken's Rift 2
    Lt Engi: EpTS 1, EpTS 2
    Ensign Uni: Tac Team 1

    Weapons: 3 Aux DHC Fore Aft: 2 Mine Launcher + Beam Array
    Consoles:
    Engi Resist/other
    Sci Flow Capaciter x4
    Tac: Phaser x4
    Doffs:
    2 BFI (if they are still valid)
    1x Tyken's Doff (Purple)
    1x Viral Doff (Purple)
    1x Energy Siphon Doff (Purple)

    Power Settings:
    Weapons /25
    Shields /25
    Engines /50
    Aux /100

    The Build primarly Vampires Power settings in order to keep Shields, and even Weapons at high numbers for those Moments when you just need to swap power settings. Other wise, leave them at base. With EPS and energy siphon you can guarentee constant weapon fire, a good turn rate, and with Viral matrix you can also make sure that you can turn better then your enemy to keep your Tyken's on target. Adding in Danube Runabouts and your own Tractor Beam for extra Gravy service. Or Change this to a Sci for Subnuc and Sensor Scan Goodness. Nothing says FU like a Full Aux Sensor Scan and Subnuc stripping.

    Edit: This build is also built on the assumption that Aux DHC's drain Aux power like normal DHC's drain weapon power.
    You think that your beta test was bad?
    Think about this:
    American Football has been in open beta for 144 years. ~Kotaku
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • carl103carl103 Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    Brandon: try not to take it so personal. Yes i go nuts with you guys somtimes. But i have no doubt that even if i consider somthing tottally idiotic to the point of moronic as a gut reaction, there was/is a valid logical argument behind what you've done, it just won't be obvuious to me. Also frankly some of the forum are a bit too negetive ;).
  • sonicshowersonicshower Member Posts: 216 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    Your still calling these new lockbox/10 console single payment ships current tier but it is very clear they exceed all of the past ships by a large margin. Personaly, I have tried to get a beam-boat excel to be able to compete and there is simply no way now. The past ships have simply been outclassed via the "Tim Taylor-ing" of present designs. The seach for "MORE POWER".

    They did update the Gal-X and added a third tac console slot. I am hoping at the very least they will bring the oldest of the C Store ships in line with the new ones.
    sh2sxc7.gif
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    It's a question of the return on the investment. How many of those Vesta folks would buy the ship just because it's a Vesta? How many more will buy it if it makes them feel warm and fuzzy? So it adds up, how to get the best return...

    It leaves me to wonder what will happen if/when they put the Ambassador in... will they, can they? Will there be enough return from just the folks that want to fly an Ambassador... or will it end up being some twisted monstrosity that boggles the mind?

    As an aside, I still think the Ambassador should have an innate ability - say a 0.01% - that summons in three Rommies to blow it up. :)
  • webdeathwebdeath Member Posts: 1,570 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    They did update the Gal-X and added a third tac console slot. I noticed it today on tribble. I am hoping at the very least they will bring the oldest of the C Store ships in line with the new ones.

    Not to side track the thread any, but I'm still waiting for the Gal-X to get it's darn Saucer Seperation ability with Phaser Shotgun. :(
    You think that your beta test was bad?
    Think about this:
    American Football has been in open beta for 144 years. ~Kotaku
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    They did update the Gal-X and added a third tac console slot. I noticed it today on tribble. I am hoping at the very least they will bring the oldest of the C Store ships in line with the new ones.

    It is one of those things - where you look at the prices on some of the older things in comparison to the newer things...and it leaves you wonder why you would spend anything on those older ships. They either need to look at reducing those prices or updating the ships at those prices.

    Given how quick it is to get to the endgame, though - they'd likely generate more revenue on certain ships simply by lowering the cost of them.
  • trek21trek21 Member Posts: 2,246 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    Nope, sorry Brandon but the facts speak for themselves.
    Facts are also easy to misread/mis-intrepret, then assumptions run wild, and it spirals out of control... hey, it's happened before

    Thinking STO's team works on NW at the same time... that's just as absurd as thinking the Moon and the Earth are the same body :rolleyes: That's not how they work

    Felt it had to be said
    Was named Trek17.

    Been playing STO since Open Beta, and have never regarded anything as worse than 'meh', if only due to personal standards.
  • sonicshowersonicshower Member Posts: 216 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    webdeath wrote: »
    Not to side track the thread any, but I'm still waiting for the Gal-X to get it's darn Saucer Seperation ability with Phaser Shotgun. :(

    Im with ya.
    sh2sxc7.gif
  • sonicshowersonicshower Member Posts: 216 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    It is one of those things - where you look at the prices on some of the older things in comparison to the newer things...and it leaves you wonder why you would spend anything on those older ships. They either need to look at reducing those prices or updating the ships at those prices.

    Given how quick it is to get to the endgame, though - they'd likely generate more revenue on certain ships simply by lowering the cost of them.

    Which is why they probably updated the Gal-X to keep things on an even keel. Someone was complaining that their Excelsior's firepower is not up to snuff with the new line up of tier 5 ships. The Excelsior I don't expect them to ever update. It is a level 40 ship, it always has been. It is attainable once you hit RA lower half.
    sh2sxc7.gif
  • webdeathwebdeath Member Posts: 1,570 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    this is what i'd use for a tac captain, mine was more sci cap focused. having your own tractor beam, at global cooldown, is pretty cruel and unusual punishment wile also having a runabout hanger lol

    And if you really want to shine them on it's Hasta la vista baby! :D
    You think that your beta test was bad?
    Think about this:
    American Football has been in open beta for 144 years. ~Kotaku
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • venetar90venetar90 Member Posts: 2 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    id just like to say i told you so to everyone that doubted that this would be the most overpowered ship ever. called the station setup too. i underestimated how overpowered it would be actually. those console configurations, the tractor pets, the incredible ease of use it will have with DHCs, this is truly a ship of nightmares.


    Well damn man science needs something with all the freakin offensive science powers nerfed nowdays!
    [/SIGPIC][SIGPIC]
  • esquire1980esquire1980 Member Posts: 152 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    Which is why they probably updated the Gal-X to keep things on an even keel. Someone was complaining that their Excelsior's firepower is not up to snuff with the new line up of tier 5 ships. The Excelsior I don't expect them to ever update. It is a level 40 ship, it always has been. It is attainable once you hit RA lower half.

    I just do not see how that can stand expecialy if you've been around long enough to know the history. The excel was put into STO when level 45 was the top and was probably the 1st in the line of P2W ships with it's 3 tac boff slots (altho that is really the design for beam-boats in the 1st place - to have 3 boff tac slots), that's why it is a level 40 ship. The new sov-R is not as viable as the excel as it gets the excel's 3 tac console layout along with the P2W torp, but trades ET1 for TT1 and loses turn rate in the process. If your thinking was indeed the case, then this version of P2W development STO would have the sov outclass the excel and there would be at least, a fleet version.

    And the GalX will take alot more than just another tac console to fix that thing.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    venetar90 wrote: »
    Well damn man science needs something with all the freakin offensive science powers nerfed nowdays!

    wat? science hasn't needed any help since doffs were introduced, its been more dangerous then ever with tholian and temporal ships. a sci captain with DHCs available to them is extreamly dangerous
  • sonicshowersonicshower Member Posts: 216 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    I just do not see how that can stand expecialy if you've been around long enough to know the history. The excel was put into STO when level 45 was the top and was probably the 1st in the line of P2W ships with it's 3 tac boff slots (altho that is really the design for beam-boats in the 1st place - to have 3 boff tac slots), that's why it is a level 40 ship. The new sov-R is not as viable as the excel as it gets the excel's 3 tac console layout along with the P2W torp, but trades ET1 for TT1 and loses turn rate in the process. If your thinking was indeed the case, then this version of P2W development STO would have the sov outclass the excel and there would be at least, a fleet version.

    And the GalX will take alot more than just another tac console to fix that thing.

    The Gal X like the game itself for many of you has turned into some form of masochism. I've been around long enough to know this is how things are going to be so im well past the denial stage and accepted things as they are. People always say vote with their money. Lets see what the exit polls show when the Vesta hits the c store.
    sh2sxc7.gif
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    People always say vote with their money. Lets see what the exit polls show when the Vesta hits the c store.

    Considering all the Jem spam with the Reinforcements Pack promo - I think it's pretty much a given that the Vesta will do well..
  • eagledracoeagledraco Member Posts: 340 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    Wrong, balance is balance, either on PVP or PVE. All ship needs to be viable on both areas!

    Good luck next time.

    Sorry but that formula simply does not work under F2P and Pay-2-Win. The evidence of that is staring you in the face all over this thread.

    The way forward is a separate damage and ability system for PvP regardless of what ship and equipment you have. That is the final solution for all these P2W ships.

    The do nothing, status quo option is the continued moaning and fighting over OP vs Nerf, PvE vs PvP. It's simply not viable as long as Cryptic continues to release more and more special ships abilities to increase sales.

    Good luck to you too.
  • esquire1980esquire1980 Member Posts: 152 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    The Gal X like the game itself for many of you has turned into some form of masochism. I've been around long enough to know this is how things are going to be so im well past the denial stage and accepted things as they are. People always say vote with their money. Lets see what the exit polls show when the Vesta hits the c store.

    Now /agree on your last point. For me, personaly, I just updated TOR for any P2W/F2P notions I may get in the future. Bought a sub to another game that isn't F2P in any way, shape, or form, took off about 30 items in the GTN here (including Mk 12 purple consoles), and put all my STO toons into moth balls and have not logged in since really before the announcement. Even people who grew up with an IP, closed beta vets, and bought the lifetime a long time ago can become disheartened by developer actions and designs. If they ever get it all straightened out, I may take another look. Until then, STO just does not have all the gameplay options that I require for my time and money (both good PVE and decent PVP). Meanwhile, I'll get 5K Zen a month just in case they ever do get it all straightened out.

    For some1 who did live thru the ramifications of the CU, NGE, and C6CD where game developers just about set out to destroy the playerbase in their own game, I have no wants nor needs to do that again.
  • theindefatigabletheindefatigable Member Posts: 351 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    eagledraco wrote: »
    Sorry but that formula simply does not work under F2P and Pay-2-Win. The evidence of that is staring you in the face all over this thread.

    The way forward is a separate damage and ability system for PvP regardless of what ship and equipment you have. That is the final solution for all these P2W ships.

    The do nothing, status quo option is the continued moaning and fighting over OP vs Nerf, PvE vs PvP. It's simply not viable as long as Cryptic continues to release more and more special ships abilities to increase sales.

    Good luck to you too.

    You're probably right; however, I always hated it in other games where certain weapons and gear were available in campaign/pve mode but not in pvp or were nerfed beyond all recognition in pvp. I understood the need for balance, but it was still disappointing somehow.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Former/Cryptic Name: Captain_Hans_Langsdorff
    Founding member, Special Service Squadron
    "Fear God and Dread Nought." First Sea Lord, Adm. Jacky Fisher
  • jadensecurajadensecura Member Posts: 660 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    wat? science hasn't needed any help since doffs were introduced, its been more dangerous then ever with tholian and temporal ships. a sci captain with DHCs available to them is extreamly dangerous

    You obviously haven't tried to make a Sci Ship your primary vessel in the past year. Sci can do little more than be a nuisance as things stand, perhaps that can be useful in a good premade PvP team, but it's worthless in PvE. The best things sci ships bring to the table in PvE are CPB, which doesn't come close to making up for their lack of firepower, and the ability to kill heavy torps with GW or TR, which escorts can do just as well with CSV. A halfway decent escort is more valuable to a team than a top notch sci ship, as is a fairly good cruiser. The Vesta just might change that, it'll depend on whether the hangar can make up for the few weapons and need for Aux in addition to Shields and Weapons power that sci ships have always suffered from.
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    according to this, http://priorityonepodcast.com/wordpress/priority-one-episode-103-supplemental-the-vesta-fiesta/ , the aux DHCs will be completely aux based and have nothing to do with weapons power at all, and they will get acc2 dam1 now. but they are going to be restricted to only the vesta.

    also the recharge time on runabout TB is gonna be reduced, but no mention of lowing its duration, or lowering its hitpoints. and yes, all those things need to be done on it a once because they are that op.
  • aetam1aetam1 Member Posts: 228 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    Now the real question is, how many cannons do you get? Are they like the quad cannons and limited to one per ship?
    One cannon using aux while your other weapons use weapon power isn't really going to help.

    My stomach is clear and my mind is full of bacon!
  • jadensecurajadensecura Member Posts: 660 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    aetam1 wrote: »
    Now the real question is, how many cannons do you get? Are they like the quad cannons and limited to one per ship?

    You can have at least 3, which is all you can use.
  • aetam1aetam1 Member Posts: 228 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    You can have at least 3, which is all you can use.

    Well you can probably just delete and reclaim the ship to get as many guns as you want. But some things, like the quads or a borg console are simply limited to one per ship. Actually I think all the special weapons so far, like the lobi stuff, were limited to one per ship. Only the galor beams come to mind were you can use more.

    My stomach is clear and my mind is full of bacon!
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    aetam1 wrote: »
    Well you can probably just delete and reclaim the ship to get as many guns as you want. But some things, like the quads or a borg console are simply limited to one per ship. Actually I think all the special weapons so far, like the lobi stuff, were limited to one per ship. Only the galor beams come to mind were you can use more.

    Correct...
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    according to this, http://priorityonepodcast.com/wordpress/priority-one-episode-103-supplemental-the-vesta-fiesta/ , the aux DHCs will be completely aux based and have nothing to do with weapons power at all, and they will get acc2 dam1 now. but they are going to be restricted to only the vesta.

    also the recharge time on runabout TB is gonna be reduced, but no mention of lowing its duration, or lowering its hitpoints. and yes, all those things need to be done on it a once because they are that op.

    Reduced sales
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • aetam1aetam1 Member Posts: 228 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    reyan01 wrote: »
    To be honest I'd likely only use one of the Aux cannons anyway - I'll be sticking my Quad cannons on my Aventine.

    But if you combine aux cannons with normal ones you will never be able to shoot with all guns on full power, unless you use batteries. So I don't really see the point of the aux cannon.

    My stomach is clear and my mind is full of bacon!
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    edited November 2012
    aetam1 wrote: »
    But if you combine aux cannons with normal ones you will never be able to shoot with all guns on full power, unless you use batteries. So I don't really see the point of the aux cannon.

    Well, for aux builds, that usually run only torps, you could run 1 dual cannon. Aft weapons would suck tho.

    I think it was not that thought out addition.
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
Sign In or Register to comment.