test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

OMG nerf tacs

resoundingenvoyresoundingenvoy Member Posts: 439
Do I have your attention? Good. I will do my best to be polite, helpful, respectful, and to the point. I ask you do the same. Here are the sum total of the patch notes at your please. Please, site a clear reference if I am wrong.

I have tried the diplomatic approach. I have tried the disarming approach. Frankly I'm far too (justifiably) annoyed to keep that up. I will not try the direct approach.

This thread is about nerfing tactical captains. I will not bog you down with the small things. There are far older and more little picture players out there who can do that better, and I invite them to do so. Instead I'm going to show you proof of a trend that has steadily been weakening non-tactical roles, and strengthening tactical roles.

The first: Every feedback I've seen that I can recall about nerfing a engineering or science ability hasn't been how it has been unbeatable. It's been about how it breaks the simple pattern of pointing at something and killing it. Instead of first asking for help, seeking a alternate solution, or even bothering to look at it from the other side? The first thing is to cry how <x> ability is clearly over powered and needs to be nerfed.

As the older players can tell you, that trend has not been kind to them.

If am I wrong even 1/10th of the time, please show me.

Edit: I forgot one other detail. The Atrox was on the receiving end of a few nerfs for doing exactly what the dreadnaught does now.

The second: Everything increase the DPS in some way shape or form of cruisers it brought up, so too is the point "space whales" don't need it because they have the "huge" tanking ability. Even if that was a argument that had a merit it's moot now.

Whatever they started out with, the tactical side of thing has been steadily increase their hull and shield abilities. With no corresponding decrease in damage abilities. Case and point, in case you haven't been playing sense the start of the game:

Atrox vs. Jem'Hdar Dreadnought

Not only does the dreadnought have a share of science abilities, The only stat a the dreadnought doesn't directly beat out is the 5% shield difference. Before you tell me how that makes up the difference in 5K, please do the math of how much resistance or base points would be needed to cover that. Before you tell me "Yea, but the Atrox has shiny abilties to do that ...", that is the science ship's domain. I'm going to ask you what a escort is doing there.

If that wasn't enough, salting the wound is tactical pilots turning their nose at it for not being as good as their old ship.

If am I wrong even 1/10th of the time, please show me.

The third: Here is one I'm bet most tactical captains didn't even notice. Go down fighting. Even notice how many have volunteered it as more then required?

Where in that long list of patch notes has it been nerfed to offset the ever increase hull values? It has gone from a last gasp panic button, to doing +50-100% damage with more hull left then the ships it was originally used on had at 90% hull!

If am I wrong even 1/10th of the time, please show me.

The fourth: Anytime issues DPS are brought up, again the argument of needing that 30-45K base hull. Yes, escorts have such maneuverability they don't actually have to face 50% or more of the same firepower. Before bridge officer or captain abilities. The ability to flank is regularly used in PvP, but conveniently ignored in all arguments. Thus the power creeps ever higher.

A pilot's inability to notice it or even use it doesn't negate it's there, but again, calls for increased DPS by engineers and science captain fly cruisers or carriers are called unfair.

If am I wrong even 1/10th of the time, please show me.
Post edited by resoundingenvoy on
«13456

Comments

  • kamiyama317kamiyama317 Member Posts: 1,295 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Rather than nerf Tac, we should buff Eng and Sci.

    I think a major overhaul of Sci abilities is needed. Nearly every ability we have needs to be buffed. Also attack patterns should only buff weapon damage, not Sci or Eng abilities.

    I don't understand why DPS-increasing skills like Starship Weapons Training and Starship Energy Weapons are tier 1 and 2 skills, but Tanking skills like Threat Control and Armor Reinforcements are tier 4 and 5 skills. Yet the inverse is true for Science - Subsystem Repair is a tier 2 skill, Subspace Decompiler is a tier 5 skill.

    These abilities should be moved around. For instance Power Insulators should be moved up to tier 4, Subspace Decompiler should be moved to tier 3 or 4. Subsystem Repair should be moved to tier 5. Why? That just feels better to me. If you want to resist Science abilities you should have to pay for the skill ranks.

    We need a science console for Subspace Decompiler. At present one doesn't exist.

    I don't play an Engineering Captain so I couldn't tell you what they would need.
  • bareelbareel Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Good luck, it is true that the combination of DHCs, tac boffs, and tac captains has become so extremely overpowered it is laughable anyone would argue with it, yet they will.

    The main cause is simple, most of the players of these game are of low skill and have very little game system knowledge. Combine that with using the same mechanics in PvE and PvP gives you this result.

    I'm of very low skill level. It makes me cry inside everytime I carry ESTF groups simply because I know how to build a ship and mash my spacebar keybind with everything tied to it. Ok my defensive abilities are attached to Shift+spacebar and I have to change throttle settings to yo-yo but still.
  • kalvorax#3775 kalvorax Member Posts: 1,663 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    even though i myself am a Tac captain with a handful of escort class starships...i DO enjoy using my Atrox and my 2 cruisers....i would LOVE to see the eng/sci abilites buffed to get closer to the tac abilites...one of the things i DONT get is how the Tactical ability Tactical Fleet is 15 min CD....yet the Sci's Photonic fleet is only 4 min CD....
  • chk231chk231 Member Posts: 161 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Yeah, tactical captains just do too much damage in PVP (intended?), and this is coming from someone who has a Klingon tactical officer. As far as what to do to balance it, I have no idea.
  • mwgacy1mwgacy1 Member Posts: 132 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    cynder2012 wrote: »
    even though i myself am a Tac captain with a handful of escort class starships...i DO enjoy using my Atrox and my 2 cruisers....i would LOVE to see the eng/sci abilites buffed to get closer to the tac abilites...one of the things i DONT get is how the Tactical ability Tactical Fleet is 15 min CD....yet the Sci's Photonic fleet is only 4 min CD....

    Tactical Fleet should be compared to Science Fleet as they're both the final Captain ability you receive, Photonic Fleet is (IIRC) the equivalent to Go Down Fighting and Mircale Worker, I don't think many will argue that PF is superior to GDF, especially combined with the other tactical captain abilities and/ or low hull.
    Or do you mean Fleet Support (TF gives no NPC assistance), in which case Science and Engineer characters get the exact same ability with the exact same cool down.
  • bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Then those whom play tac will play whatever the newest topdog class and vessel combo becomes. Those same players will learn, adapt and continue to play above the majority of the playerbase. Cries of unbalance, unfair and omG-nerf **** will come from the disappointed playerbase whom still has not adapted to the change of the last "OmG" bitchfest and the cycle will repeat.
    Only the names of the classes,vessels or powers will change, the crying will still be the same when it comes down to it because while all that pissing and moaning may bring change, its nothing without balance.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • kamiyama317kamiyama317 Member Posts: 1,295 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    bitemepwe wrote: »
    Then those whom play tac will play whatever the newest topdog class and vessel combo becomes. Those same players will learn, adapt and continue to play above the majority of the playerbase. Cries of unbalance, unfair and omG-nerf **** will come from the disappointed playerbase whom still has not adapted to the change of the last "OmG" bitchfest and the cycle will repeat.
    Only the names of the classes,vessels or powers will change, the crying will still be the same when it comes down to it because while all that pissing and moaning may bring change, its nothing without balance.

    This is true. Though I will always play Sci out of personal preference, I would like a balance to be struck between all 3 classes. It's true Tac's are the most effective, but we shouldn't call for the Nerf Bat. Key buffs to the other 2 classes, some skill changes, and we should be all set.

    The only thing that I feel should be changed Tac side, is attack patterns buffing damage to science and engineering abilities. Attack patterns should really only buff weapons. If they did this, they could start buffing Sci abilities without people seeing attack pattern alpha gravity wells that hit for 1k+ damage per tick.
  • twg042370twg042370 Member Posts: 2,312 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Rather than nerf Tac, we should buff Eng and Sci.

    I think a major overhaul of Sci abilities is needed. Nearly every ability we have needs to be buffed. Also attack patterns should only buff weapon damage, not Sci or Eng abilities.

    We have a winnah!
    <3
  • robdmcrobdmc Member Posts: 1,619 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Unfortunately I'm inclined to agree. On my Fleet advance escort I have the following.

    [Console - Tactical - Plasma Infuser Mk XII]x5 @ 30% plasma
    [Console - Science - Emitter Array Mk XI [-Th] [Pla]]x2 @ 9% plamsa
    [Console - Zero-Point Energy Conduit] & [Romulan Hyper-Plasma Torpedo Launcher] @ 7% plamsa passive
    [Adapted M.A.C.O. Covariant Shield Array Mk XII] & [Adapted M.A.C.O. Combat Impulse Engines Mk XII] @ 25% kinetic passive

    This gives me effectively 175% plasma damage and 25% Torp/mine damage. Normally That would be 7 tac console equivalency in damage.

    I can't think of too many sci or eng abilities that can get that high and while yes this is only for plasma weapons for the most part it still blends very well.

    I also picked up a few Romulan Boffs, That and with a couple of other console I am now doing 15% crit chance and 66.8% severity. That also meshed well.

    When I look at the new fleet gear and consoles they really boost damage which is a tacs dream.

    When I look at the other embassy console that boost shield and Hull it looks like it is on a 2.5% chance where the plasma infused is constant plasma damage.

    Why were there no [Console - Tactical - Plasma Infuser Mk XI [+Th] [Sif]] or even a [Console - Engineering - Electroceramic Hull Plating Mk XI [-Th] [Em]] maybe a [Console - Engineering - Neutronium Alloy Mk XI [-th] [Gra]]? If this were to happen then they other 2 careers can stack bonuses like the tacs.

    I know that deflectors are glorified science console but why not remake a previous set like the Breen set to have a passive set bonus to boost sci and engineering abilities further instead of transphasic damage (hmm. more damage, some theme). Even remake these set to be onpar with the maco sets. have you compared the [M.A.C.O. Resilient Shield Array Mk XII] and the [Dielectric Oscillation Resilient Shields Mk XI].

    I know as a tac I do not want to give up the perks I just got but as you add more reputation systems and fleet holds you have an opportunity to focus on the other classes. I've heard that there might be a Deferi Rep system in the future to join in the ranks of the romulan and omega rep systems. There is a perfect place to revamp one of these sets like the Breen set which is already science oriented with the breen energy siphon for a set bonus to have instead of an ability with a 2 minute cool down to be another passive to boost science or engineering.
  • rajathomasrajathomas Member Posts: 130 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Roles are nothing new to warfare, each piece of gear, skill or training has specific purposes. You DON'T want everything to be the same, if it was you'd loose the specific advantages each one gives. The same is true for this game.

    The fact is many people completely ignore the role each capt type plays. TACs are about DPS, SCI is crowd control, placate and healing, ENGY is threat control. If you're a SCI flying around trying to DPS, you're doing it wrong. If you're an ENGY flying around trying to DPS, you're doing it wrong. Engineers are there to take a higher portion of incoming damage and keep the heat of everyone else. If he kills something in the process, even better. Science is also about controlling incoming damage, and healing team mates in the process. If he kills something in the process, even better. There are exceptions to these general outlines, but they're true 90% of the time.

    So do TACs need to be nerfed? No way. If the TACs on your team die, enemies survive longer and inflict more damage. Does that sound like a good idea? What this means is you need to play as a unit and work together. It's one of the things that make this game great.
    izf25xI.jpg
  • disposeableh3r0disposeableh3r0 Member Posts: 1,927 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    rajathomas wrote: »
    Roles are nothing new to warfare, each piece of gear, skill or training has specific purposes. You DON'T want everything to be the same, if it was you'd loose the specific advantages each one gives. The same is true for this game.

    The fact is many people completely ignore the role each capt type plays. TACs are about DPS, SCI is crowd control, placate and healing, ENGY is threat control. If you're a SCI flying around trying to DPS, you're doing it wrong. If you're an ENGY flying around trying to DPS, you're doing it wrong. Engineers are there to take a higher portion of incoming damage and keep the heat of everyone else. If he kills something in the process, even better. Science is also about controlling incoming damage, and healing team mates in the process. If he kills something in the process, even better. There are exceptions to these general outlines, but they're true 90% of the time.

    So do TACs need to be nerfed? No way. If the TACs on your team die, enemies survive longer and inflict more damage. Does that sound like a good idea? What this means is you need to play as a unit and work together. It's one of the things that make this game great.

    This would be an argument if the scoring in the game also considered healing output and enemy neutralization. As it is if i can destroy my target in seconds I dont really need healing or cc, and in the few missions where those things come in habdy you arent scored for doing it.

    I could go into a sb24 run and i gould grav well and tractor beam and toss sensor scan around, then i could toss he and tss at people maybe even afew teams, and you know what I would get for it? Nothing.

    I could the go into the same sb24 with a defiant and just blast away at everything and ignore my other teammates, and you know what i would get for that? 1st place.

    In stf's you barely have a need for healing or cc since I have see 2 (just 2) tac ships clear KASE with the optional. Hell people whine when they see more than 1 cruiser or science ship show up in their stf's.

    DPS is king untill the roles are tailored to that fact 2 are always going to be somewhat lacking.

    If you look toward somthing like battlefield you can clearly see there are roles and they have their uses, but they arent limited to only certain weapons or tactics. I can be a medic and carry my heavy MG, or I can be an assault class and bring a sniper rifle, and still perform my special role without rendering myself ineffective.
    As a time traveller, Am I supposed to pack underwear or underwhen?

    Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln

    Occidere populo et effercio confractus
  • chi1701dchi1701d Member Posts: 174 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    rajathomas wrote: »
    Roles are nothing new to warfare, each piece of gear, skill or training has specific purposes. You DON'T want everything to be the same, if it was you'd loose the specific advantages each one gives. The same is true for this game.

    The fact is many people completely ignore the role each capt type plays. TACs are about DPS, SCI is crowd control, placate and healing, ENGY is threat control. If you're a SCI flying around trying to DPS, you're doing it wrong. If you're an ENGY flying around trying to DPS, you're doing it wrong. Engineers are there to take a higher portion of incoming damage and keep the heat of everyone else. If he kills something in the process, even better. Science is also about controlling incoming damage, and healing team mates in the process. If he kills something in the process, even better. There are exceptions to these general outlines, but they're true 90% of the time.

    So do TACs need to be nerfed? No way. If the TACs on your team die, enemies survive longer and inflict more damage. Does that sound like a good idea? What this means is you need to play as a unit and work together. It's one of the things that make this game great.

    Engy are not threat controled, that was a feature added in f2p conversion. Im an engineer, and i refuse to go down that route due to simple minded people who only understand trinity style games of healer/dps/tank.
  • mn03mn03 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Cryptic has never really nerfed Tacs, so I doubt they will begin. But I bet they will nerf Sci and Eng again and call it Tactical online.
    Join date: 5 Feb 2010
  • radkipradkip Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    cynder2012 wrote: »
    even though i myself am a Tac captain with a handful of escort class starships...i DO enjoy using my Atrox and my 2 cruisers....i would LOVE to see the eng/sci abilites buffed to get closer to the tac abilites...one of the things i DONT get is how the Tactical ability Tactical Fleet is 15 min CD....yet the Sci's Photonic fleet is only 4 min CD....
    I think you're thinking Fleet Support, which all three classes get. That one is 15 minutes. Tactucal Fleet, Science Fleet and Engineering Fleet all have a five minute cooldown.

    Photonic fleet? Why bother using it, the ships spawned by it die instantly an overwhelming majority of the time. And they barely do any damage at all if they do manage to survive their full lifespans.
    Joined: January 2010

    Fanfiction! ZOMG! Read it now!
    kate-wintersbite.deviantart.com/art/0x01-Treachery-293641403
  • kalvorax#3775 kalvorax Member Posts: 1,663 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    mwgacy1 wrote: »
    Tactical Fleet should be compared to Science Fleet as they're both the final Captain ability you receive, Photonic Fleet is (IIRC) the equivalent to Go Down Fighting and Mircale Worker, I don't think many will argue that PF is superior to GDF, especially combined with the other tactical captain abilities and/ or low hull.
    Or do you mean Fleet Support (TF gives no NPC assistance), in which case Science and Engineer characters get the exact same ability with the exact same cool down.

    Yeah...sorry about that...I meant the Fleet Support ones hehe...ok i see what you meant...but i still think the 15 CD is ridiculous for such a ability that doesn't seem to work right.
  • notapwefannotapwefan Member Posts: 1,138 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Make PvP simple, i.e, tier 1 ships only with either 1 tactical, 1 sci or 1 tac boff with ensign slot.

    Problem solved :)

    But in all seriousness, sci career is very demanding. You can do very well as tac without spending skills in sci tree but you need skills in tac tree if you are playing sci.
    Grinding for MkIV epic gear?
    Ain't Nobody Got Time for That


    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • nicha0nicha0 Member Posts: 1,456 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Another person who doesn't know how to play calling for a nerf on something he knows nothing about.
    Tac has some bugs, most of it doing with it buffing science type damages, eng is under performing though it has a limited purpose, science is not focused but does have some pretty awesome abilities.
    Delirium Tremens
    Completed Starbase, Embassy, Mine, Spire and No Win Scenario
    Nothing to do anymore.
    http://dtfleet.com/
    Visit our Youtube channel
  • haravikkharavikk Member Posts: 278
    edited February 2013
    The fact is that we need the lineup to actually reflect how the different types should play:
    • Escorts should only be able to deliver the highest DPS in bursts either with a ton of cannons or as a torpedo boat. They shouldn't be able to stand up to return damage for long before they're forced to turn to take the strain off weakened shields. Right now escorts have far too many hit-points for ships of supposedly lower mass, and more than enough access to shield strengthening abilities that keep their hull out of the equation most of the time anyway.
    • Cruisers should be the constant DPS dealers; not tons of damage, but it should come constantly without pause, while they soak up damage, removing the need to turn unless under concentrated fire. Currently the extra hit-points on cruisers are tiny compared to many escorts, and they just aren't resilient enough to distinguish them. Add to this the fact that their damage potential is simply lower than escorts and it leaves them somewhat in the lurch.
    • Science ships have their subsystem targeting and shields which is nice, it's not a class of ships I've played as but the current DPS focus leaves them out as while they can buff and debug to a decent degree, escorts aren't exactly lacking in abilities to clear debuffs from themselves if they need to.

    My proposals to fix each ship type would be (and some of these ideas are borrowed/modified from other threads):
    • Reduce the effectiveness of the Tactical Team ability. Currently it's better at protecting your ship than Emergency Power to Shields, plus it clears boarders, tactical debuffs and gives a damage boost that escorts do not need. This ability should actively leach hit-points from other shield facings, giving escorts a bit more time on target but leaving them vulnerable if surrounded.
    • Change dual cannons to have the same damage and arc as dual beam banks, or put them somewhere in between dual heavy cannons and a dual beam bank. With a wider arc there would be a reason to take them, unlike now.
    • Add diminishing returns to damage boosting consoles so that three is the sweet-spot, and four isn't a no-brainer. This will allow engineering and science ships to compete (but not excel), while encouraging the use of hybrid builds on tactical ships such as two energy types or energy + kinetic damage. The diminishing returns would apply by type of damage boosted, so all-energy or all-kinetic consoles have an advantage that justifies taking them; while this would mean a Fleet Advanced Escort could still slot two all-energy plus three specific energy consoles for maximum damage, it wouldn't be as powerful and wouldn't stack nearly as far with abilities and other modifiers factored in.
    • Increase cruiser hit-points and fix how crew numbers affect hull and subsystem repair. Currently large crews count for very little, which devalues cruisers and carriers, and makes crew consoles and abilities largely worthless. They need to have more innate effect, and give a bigger boost to engineering abilities.
    • Give cruisers and science ships (or really just anything that can't take cannons) an innate staggered fire ability when firing multiple beam weapons. This would ensure beam weapons fire in a staggered pattern, and reduce total energy drain when firing continuously. My thinking is that it would reduce beam weapon power drain by 25%, but all weapons would affect power setting (no "free" first shot). So a full broadside of eight beams would require 60 weapon power instead of 70.
    • Give science ships an innate bonus to the arc of all science abilities representing specialised deflector arrays, sensor banks etc. Maybe even allow science ships to have an increase Auxiliary Power cap of 150, increasing the effects of all Auxiliary Power based abilities.
    • Add a class of Capital Ship weapon for large ships. First would be Quad Heavy Beam Banks which have double the damage of Dual Beam Banks but only in a 45 degree forward arc. They would have suffer significant accuracy penalties against non-Capital ships. Also available would be Broadside Heavy Beam Arrays which have a 90 degree arc to either side (i.e - broadside only) and deal double damage compared to a regular beam array, but likewise suffering accuracy penalties against smaller ships. The limited arcs and accuracy penalties mean they would roughly perform about as well as a dual beam bank or beam array against escorts and other "standard" ships, and perform very poorly against frigates and small craft, however they would be the ideal choice against other capital ships. This would allow for dedicated heavy beam ships that need to be protected by other fleet members or fighters (if a carrier), or capital ships could slot a mixture of heavy and normal beams for flexibility.


    I think the above changes would really add variety to how combat plays out, and give ships more well-defined roles.
  • marshalericdavidmarshalericdavid Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I don't think their needs to be a nerf but instead improve Science and Engineers and perhaps improve non escort ships a little bit.
  • wast33wast33 Member Posts: 1,855 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    ...if the scoring in the game also considered healing output and enemy neutralization.

    to me this would sound like a step towards a good solution without the need of "equaling" everything till all is just one "tac-sci-eng"-career :)
  • mn03mn03 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    People are asking this for many months, Cryptic has no plans of changing this I guess. If you want to do OP dps, just roll Tac/Escort.
    Join date: 5 Feb 2010
  • bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    This is true. Though I will always play Sci out of personal preference, I would like a balance to be struck between all 3 classes. It's true Tac's are the most effective, but we shouldn't call for the Nerf Bat. Key buffs to the other 2 classes, some skill changes, and we should be all set.

    The only thing that I feel should be changed Tac side, is attack patterns buffing damage to science and engineering abilities. Attack patterns should really only buff weapons. If they did this, they could start buffing Sci abilities without people seeing attack pattern alpha gravity wells that hit for 1k+ damage per tick.

    Im hoping the hints at revamp of the skills tree will help balance he classes. Though Tacs will always appear to have it easy as in any game being the blaster, fighter, Tac class is the simpliest class to play normally.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • ghennkinsghennkins Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I have 2 characters. A Sci-Sci Fed and a Tac-Cruiser KDF.

    I have maxed particle generator skill on my sci and use 2 blue mk XI particle gen consoles on the ship for my Sci Sci

    I have ZERO points in particle generator skill and ZERO consoles for particle gen on my Tac-Tac.


    My Tac's EWP3 does far more damage than my Sci Sci's GW3....


    Science captains are just not fun to play. It takes 2x+ longer to accomplish the same feats my tac does. It also feels incredibly gimpy and weak by comparison. I feel like dead weight in stfs while I wait for my weak GW3 to come off cool down and it's usually made useless because tacs can just torp spread III.. As a result, I only doff and dil farm on my Fed char anymore.

    It's not just me or the posters on this forum. If I look at either roster for my FED or KDF fleets, the vast majority are tac captains. The rest are alts people made for captain training.

    Why crowd control if the tacs just kill everything in seconds anyway? Why heal if no one gets hurt because the enemies are all dead already? Why tank when enemies don't get but a few seconds to cause damage until a tac pops them? DPS is king in STO and it is rewarded. Tanking, healing, CCing are not. Roles just don't work in this game. DPS is always going to work all the time where as tanking and healing are situational and most the time un-needed.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    One way (and probably the best way) would be to decouple attack patterns and sci skills then make sci skills actually effective again and then make all EPtX skills work to the same standard as EPtS meaning the EPtW weapon damage boost would cancel out the EPtS Shield resistance boost making cruisers a little more viable in pvp as well as reducing the drain effect (by whatever practical means) on beams thus making both science and engineers better without any major harm to the tac department and lets be honest, who flies tac to use sci powers?
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • diogene0diogene0 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    If you're talking about pve, it's because instances are too easy that you only need tacs to complete them. Add more DPS and abilities to NPCs and you'll need heal boats and science ships too.

    If you're talking about pvp, the problem is that tacs have several abilities increasing their dps and giving them immunities and resists at the same time. My KDF main is a tac and i love him but i also know that the attack pattern omega is giving way too much perks for what it is. And of course any tac captain will run APO half of the time, so, basically, we fly in god mode half of the times.
    Lenny Barre, lvl 60 DC. 18k.
    God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
  • buzzoutbuzzout Member Posts: 119 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I'm tac captain and I drive a fleet escort that is a DPS monster. But it didn't come that way off the shelf. I have invested hundreds of hours of endless mission grinding to get the gear I needed to make it that way. I have over 160 million invested in tac consoles alone and I'm still not done. Then there's the hours upon hours of researching STO fan sites comparing notes from other tac captains on the best way to spec out your tac captain and the respec tokens purchased to conduct a lot of trial and error on my own. Making my little escort a DPS monster has been a long evolutionary project with a huge investment of personal time and to have some goof come on this forum demanding that all my efforts be nerfed quite frankly pisses me off. When eng and sci captains start investing half of the time and trouble perfecting their skills and ships that tac captains do then you might have a right to complain, but until then...please shut up and go away.
  • lake1771lake1771 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    shield tanking escorts are just too durable.
    Science abilities aren't strong enough to force them to turn aside in order to avoid death. 2.5% isn't enough for subsystem targeting. not with a 2 minute cooldown.
    The only way a science officer can beat a tac scort is to dps him, outside of team play anyway. A buff to subsystem targeting would do a great deal to narrow this gap.
  • cmdrskyfallercmdrskyfaller Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I will add to the OP's post concerning the extremely unfair advantage Tac captains have compared to the other 2 careers:


    1- Damage boost abilities are global.

    Yes, that means a tac captain in a science ship will do more damage with science abilities than a full fledged sci capt in a sci ship. Hit atk Alpha, Go down Fighting and gravity wells/photonic shockwave/repulsor beams/tractor beams/ ANYTHING sci based that does damage... gets a ~300% damage boost. A sci captain cannot even creep close to that damage output with sci capt abilities alone. All other abilities available to science boffs are broken and the stats they are associated with dont provide any noticeable boost to the ability (aside from healing..im talking offensive/crowd control abilities).

    The same damage bonus applies to engineer damage abilities. Warp Plasma, Directed Energy Modulation... you name it.

    Its ABSURD that a Tactical captain performs better in sci ships than a sci captain and than an engineer in a cruiser.

    2- Escorts have access to all the defensive and navigation engineer and science bonuses via their tactical boff abilities.


    Case in point: Attack Pattern Omega.

    Defense boost = None. Unique.
    Speed Boost = Emg Pwr to Engine
    Immunity to holds = Polarize Hull
    Damage boost = Emg Pwr to Weapons
    Turn rate boost = Aux2Dampeners

    HOLY TRIBBLE. With this one ability the escort ship gets the EQUIVALENT of having Lt Cmdr engineer and Science station abilities.

    Atk Omega is one of the primary reasons escorts, and particularly tac captains in escorts, are so ridiculously overpowered.

    3- Stat bonuses are heavily biased to benefit tactical captains. This is the result of BAD design from the devs when they went F2P. The space revamp bunched all energy weapon types, all projectile weapon types, all the weapon-related damage boosting stats ...into an extremely simplistic 'this works for all' skill box. This resulted in all tac captains not needing to sacrifice skill points to gain max performance with which to stack upon their tac-capt dmg boosting abilities and their escort-based (lt cmdr tac+) station abilities.

    Engineer and Science on the other hand, their skill boxes remained largely the same. Science in particular lost several stat-types and got them bunched into other stats... but by doing so the devs broke the stats and they have not provided any noticeable boost ever since.

    Case in point: Gravity Well.

    Pre-F2P a grav well 3 fired by someone with ZERO particle/graviton skills would be what we have now @9pnts in both. Assuming both being fired @ max aux. A grav well 3 with 9pnts in grav/particle + max aux on the other hand, was so effective that ships would be sucked into the center of the anomaly and be held there the entire duration UNLESS they used polarize hull or evasive maneuvers. Atk Omega did not use to break you free from holds, it used to prevent holds (aka you had to had omega active before a hold hit you or it would not protect you).

    Today, the particle skill hardly gives you any damage bonus and graviton skill barely affects the super weak strength of the tractor effect.

    We know for a FACT that it is the bonus to these stats that is intentionally set so low that they are useless. How do we know? In season 3 or 4 (I forget which) there was a patch that boosted these stats...and for a few days grav wells had returned to pre-f2p levels.

    Case in point: Sensor abilities.

    Jam and Scramble Sensors used to have long durations and used to take a LOT of damage before the effect broke. A sci ship COULD crowd control with them back in pre-f2p. Now however the effect is so weak a single hit by a mk1 white turret will break a jam sensor 3 fired by a sci ship @ max aux +9pnts in countermeasures.

    Case in point: Tachyon Beam.

    Pre-F2P this ability was incredibly useful. It drained a darn good amount of shields and most importantly it used to prevent shield balancing while active (10 seconds). It was a true support ability and was an important asset for any team to have.

    Today, because the stat associated with it is so weak, tachyon beam 3 is a wasted slot. It doesnt even prevent shield balancing (no idea why this was removed in space revamp!).

    Case in point: Power Drains

    Same old story. Before a single siphon 3 could make a cruiser captain sweat... now its another wasted slot because flow capacitors bonus is very low. Plus the added power drain resists (which were never needed to begin with!).


    So, overall, tac abilities received an impressive boost while sci and engineer abilities got tossed and flushed down the toilet.

    Before F2P the game was balanced in the sense that escorts were NOT the highest damage dealers (cruisers were) but they were the only ships with the speed and turn rate to focus on one shield facing and pummel it down. Cruisers were the most difficult ships to shoot down since they were monster tanks AND they had the highest firepower..but their turn rate and speed were TRIBBLE. Sci ships were the best shield tanks but had very weak hulls so they could only buffer tank...and while they had the lowest dps of all ships, they did their fighting with science abilities... a disable, tractor, energy drain, grav well, sensor jam... all these were used to turn powerful enemies into weak enemies so that their low dps could take them down.

    Cruisers used to fear sci ships, sci ships used to fear escorts, escorts used to be VERY afraid of both cruisers and sci ships when under 5km range and REALLY flew to avoid cruiser broadsides and sci ship's forward aspect (most sci abilities fire forward)... but even though they were afraid of them the escort could shoot them both down quickly IF he attacked the same shield and IF he used his weapons and abilities right.

    That was the balance. It is gone now. Replaced by sheer idiotic raw DPS and ungodly tanking ability given to escort ships... its point/click/boom gameplay...and the 'brainplay' that used to be sci and engineer has been twisted into 'ooh look i can heal' spamming.


    How to FIX the game and return it to balance:

    1- Remove ALL speed/turn/rate/damage/healing bonuses granted by any skill box. Let ship equipment determine this.

    * the effect this will have is that it will make all ships return to pre-f2p tactical combat rather than stupid arcade fighting. By removing the rank-based boosts to all these, ship combat once again becomes a matter of who uses and flies their ships better not just who can stack damage abilities or healing abilities and spam them regardless of where their ship is pointing or flying.

    2- Split Atk Omega into Attack and Evasive Pattern.

    Atk Omega:

    Small Damage resist debuff
    Medium Damage boost
    Medium Turn rate boost
    Large Accuracy buff

    Evasive Gamma (?)
    Immunity to holds
    Large Speed Boost
    Medium Defense boost
    Medium turn rate boost.

    3- Increase stat effect of all sci and engineer skill boxes by a significant amount.

    4- Remove tactical captain boost abilities from affecting non-weapon based damage.
    I know the tac boosts do this because the damage done by non-weapons is always classed as kinetic... so how about simply re-assigning that non-weapon damage to a new damage type: Exotic damage. Just like pre-f2p.

    The only way to resist exotic damage should be through armor, consoles and boff ability resistance. Defense rating should not be factored into damage reduction equations since sci abilities are not 'aimed' like weapons are.
  • kronosathkronosath Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    The issue for me is the escorts benefit from the new shield and hull passives, doff-rep, that add to their tankiness. Escorts should be hit and run. Instead they became stop and hit.

    1. The cycle and the power drain of DHC in rapid fire is less than the beams with beam fire at will. A 1 sec increase in their cycle and an increase in drain, or a decrease in drain from beams should be implemented.

    2. Reverse shield polarity should be moved to be Lt. Com. eng boff with a cooldown 75- 90 sec instead of 120 sec. The same with Directed energy modulation with a 60-75 sec cooldown. A small increase in stats should also happen for these 2 abilities.

    3. Gravity Well should have bigger pull numbers. For sci abilities it is easy, restore them to values before of their nerf. Many of them had huge nerfs. Increase effectiveness/range of Charge particle burst and photonic shockwave. Some cooldowns should be made to 45 sec for sci abilities.

    I know that escort captains will object and say that these changes will make cruisers and science ships over powered. I would respond that escorts are fast in order to hit and run. Otherwise nerf their speed and turn numbers and name them Dreadnoughts.

    By the way, tell me the last time that you saw a science ship take an escort down. Because we all know that science ships > escorts, cruisers > science ships, escorts > cruisers. At least that was the original idea of the game at the start.
    Fed Sci: Tethys U.S.S. Chronos Aionios, U.S.S. Denomon Gnosis {Fleet: HSF}
    KDF Eng: Boreas I.K.S. Demonon Nemesis {Fleet: HoS}
    Rom Sci: Crius I.R.W. Noctem Aeternus {Fleet: LoS}
    Fed Tac: Kronos U.S.S. Xibalba, I.S.S. Theogonia{Fleet: HSF}
  • blockbustersblockbusters Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Whoa, hold your horses cowboys.

    You literally want to nerf the tac don't ya boys and girls!

    Thing is, a tac in a cruiser WILL do more damage, most of the time. However, an engineer will surive better, and could do a high amount of damage if you set your skills right.

    A tac in a science vessel, (I preshent you, the ballishtic misshile Submarine, Red October), can do more damage, because it will buff up it's weapons damage. But a science will perform the crowd controls, and science evil a LOT better.

    What some people are misunderstanding here, (and "what we have here, is a problem to communicate") is that ever class has a set of roles. Tac, primarily damage. Engineer, primarily tanking and healing support. Science Enemy Neutralisation and Crowd control.

    If you that character creator thingy, remember, when you pick your class? You'll see my point.

    We should make every class better at it's role, so perhaps buffing some of the less used science skills, such as mask energy signature, because come on, who uses that?
    I'm the guy that uses unconventional builds, and don't fall to the normal. I also don't believe in "No-BS" TRIBBLE, it's in the game, it's ready to be used. Think Clint Eastwood in Heartbreak Ridge.
Sign In or Register to comment.