That game was a Strategy game, and those ships would not fit in an MMO, since they were turnbase .
I know that BotF is a turnbased Strategy Game, i have played it for years.
But even in strategy Games that old Stone/Paper/Scissor mechanic is wiedly common.
Not so in BotF, at least they could hide it so good it didn't even matter very much.:cool:
In that game Star Trek ships wheren't extreme specialists, althrough each ship had some special task or ability in combat. But it wasn't limited to that job. All Starfleet ships for example could stand on their own very well. The Galaxy class for example was classified as "Command Cruiser". Its special ability was to increase alied ships tactical capabilities a bit. But no one came to that rediculus idea to give the Galaxy the least Firepower of all Cruisers in the game. Only Cryptics designers can do that, lol.
My point is that a game doesn't have to rely on that ancient Stone/Paper/Scissor mechanic, if the developers are resourceful enough to create a fitting system by themselves for that certain game universe. I know this must be a lot of work but if made good, the game will be much more unique and better, than just to put over that standart Strategy/MMO stone/paper/scissor mold.
Many players still seem to believe that there isn't any other way to make games. For me it's just lazy TBH.
This applies especially to a Star Trek game. Putting Star Trek ships into that old MMO system is just bad/lazy design IMO. A system which was made for Fantasy Characters in a Fantasy world using Swords, Magic and fighting Dragons.
This is especially objectionable because Star Trek ships, unlike other Sci fi starships, are especially independent.
They don't usually work in groups. Even more so Starfleet ships, which are especially designed to be all round ships, able to sucessful complete a wide array of mission types.
Putting them into roles like "healer" or "supporter" is completely rediculus and shows how little some people understand of Star Trek.
Good night.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
DHCs Have an inherent additional 10% critD...why not give beam arrays an inherent 5% acc? It makes sense particularly in seeing how beams were often used to target various subsystems in the shows....this would create SOME parity immediately..l
DHCs Have an inherent additional 10% critD...why not give beam arrays an inherent 5% acc? It makes sense particularly in seeing how beams were often used to target various subsystems in the shows....this would create SOME parity immediately..l
They're still trying to fix Acc mods not working on FAW (as well as there being various other issues that they haven't shared all the details on regarding weapon abilities, mods, and procs).
Folks want to avoid a return to 100% accuracy FAW spam though...and who can blame them?
There are a lot of variables at play here...several things one could say are broken at the same time - so they have to be careful in what they add before they fix what is broken, because who knows where that would take us when they do fix it, eh?
I know that BotF is a turnbased Strategy Game, i have played it for years.
But even in strategy Games that old Stone/Paper/Scissor mechanic is wiedly common.
Not so in BotF, at least they could hide it so good it didn't even matter very much.:cool:
In that game Star Trek ships wheren't extreme specialists, althrough each ship had some special task or ability in combat. But it wasn't limited to that job. All Starfleet ships for example could stand on their own very well. The Galaxy class for example was classified as "Command Cruiser". Its special ability was to increase alied ships tactical capabilities a bit. But no one came to that rediculus idea to give the Galaxy the least Firepower of all Cruisers in the game. Only Cryptics designers can do that, lol.
My point is that a game doesn't have to rely on that ancient Stone/Paper/Scissor mechanic, if the developers are resourceful enough to create a fitting system by themselves for that certain game universe. I know this must be a lot of work but if made good, the game will be much more unique and better, than just to put over that standart Strategy/MMO stone/paper/scissor mold.
Many players still seem to believe that there isn't any other way to make games. For me it's just lazy TBH.
This applies especially to a Star Trek game. Putting Star Trek ships into that old MMO system is just bad/lazy design IMO. A system which was made for Fantasy Characters in a Fantasy world using Swords, Magic and fighting Dragons.
This is especially objectionable because Star Trek ships, unlike other Sci fi starships, are especially independent.
They don't usually work in groups. Even more so Starfleet ships, which are especially designed to be all round ships, able to sucessful complete a wide array of mission types.
Putting them into roles like "healer" or "supporter" is completely rediculus and shows how little some people understand of Star Trek.
Good night.
What you want then is a Single player game, where you're Kirk or Picard, and everything Revolves around the main character.
Also that game had a very OP Romulan faction due to the fact that the Romulans would get a first turn thanks to their cloak, nothing like a fleet of Warbirds showing up cloaked and taking out most of your fleet. which made the Galaxy class meh compared to the Romulan ships. The most powerful ship in that game for the Feds was the Defiant, which could take out almost any ship in that game even on it's own...and that's why there is Rock paper scissors in games, because you can't have a ship that rules them all in a game with more than one player.
Also that game had a really bad Star Trek design when it came to ships, they looked horrible especially the Klingon ships now that was lazy.
What you want then is a Single player game, where you're Kirk or Picard, and everything Revolves around the main character.
That's not even remotely the point.
How do you come to that conclusion?
Even if you where right, just because i don't like that "stone/paper/scissor mechanic" doesn't mean i want a game where one ships rules all others or al single player game.
That's exactly the opposite of what i want.
What i want is a balance where all ships are more or less equal, but with different focus.
A ship could have some special ability to support other ships without being automaticly the weakest ship of them all.
On the other hand, there shouldn't be any class of ships that outguns all others, just because some dev "feels" that he likes it that way. That's exactly the wrong way to do it.
My point was that a game can be made different, i hope that's clear.
Surely BotF had some terribele faults, but it showed that a good team of developers CAN do it different, without twisting Star Trek into something completely different.
And btw. it was much more like Star Trek than STO IMO.
Just because almost all game devlopers go the lazy way and use the S/P/S system doesn't mean that there is no other way to do it. My second point is that especailly a star trek game doesn't harmonize with that system. Other game universes maybe fit very good into that system but Star Trek doesn't. I hope i made my point clear now.
If you want to again interpret something completely different into this, then i can't help you.
Also that game had a very OP Romulan faction due to the fact that the Romulans would get a first turn thanks to their cloak, nothing like a fleet of Warbirds showing up cloaked and taking out most of your fleet. which made the Galaxy class meh compared to the Romulan ships. The most powerful ship in that game for the Feds was the Defiant, which could take out almost any ship in that game even on it's own...and that's why there is Rock paper scissors in games, because you can't have a ship that rules them all in a game with more than one player.
Also that game had a really bad Star Trek design when it came to ships, they looked horrible especially the Klingon ships now that was lazy.
Surely that game had some awful faults, without question, but it was just a example of not obviously using the S/P/S system.
Compared to the time (1999) when the game was released the graphics was more then OK.
You speak about hat being lazy, i think it is more lazy not to care about the universe the game is set and just putting that S/P/S mechanic on it. That's lazy.
Just because some ship models wheren't very good made is just a sign of the time it was released.
- - - Just a thought,
speaking of the terrible Galaxy Class model in BotF.
Thats something everyone notices in no time, but very few even care about how awful CRYPTIC made that ship in this game. (i'm not speaking about the model but its performance)
For me it is more important that a ship is useful and fun to fly. I really don't care if the model doesn't look 100% like the original (STOs Galaxy Class model isn't very accurate too, btw.), as long as the designer didn't do any serve mistake i could live with a ship model like in BotF.
Heck i would even want to use the BotF ship model, if the ship wasn't the most boring and completely inferior (in allmost all aspects) compared to all others. - - -
What i wanted to say was that, when a game devloper wants to design a Star Trek game they cannot just use the S/P/S system and easy get away with it. Because in Star Trek ships work completely different. Maybe you don't care much about this, but i do.
Some players may be pleased to see the same old mechanic in every game over and over again.
Maybe they don't care if Star Trek ships get completely twisted and turned upside down.
But when i see how terrible Cryptic implemented some ships, i get just angry about the clueslessnes and ignorance of some devs.
It's a shame those people are in charge of a product like this to be honest.
On the other hand Star Trek has a long sad tradition of having completely incompetent and clueless people in charge of a product (game/movie), which is a terrible shame.
Star Trek devserves better IMO.
Again, just putting the S/P/S system on a Star Trek game is just lazy, cheap and completely wrong.
"...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--"
- (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie
...nothing like a fleet of Warbirds showing up cloaked and taking out most of your fleet.
They can't do that in STO anyways. Every time the first officer speaks, the entire fleet would decloak and be destroyed before they could get shields up.
The question I was asked was basically "my beams are not as good as cannons, can you make them better".
My feeling is that beams are fine. They are WAD and don't need to be made better. The outlier are the cannons, and, in a perfect world (see what I did there), I would bring cannon power drain in line with beams instead of making beams more powerful. The analogy I was suggesting is that if everything good, and one thing is OP, its healthier for the game to bring the OP item down in line with all the other items instead of raising all items to the level of the one OP item.
My comment was suggesting the question should evaluate what the real problem is.
I meant no subtext to suggest if enough players complained, there would be justification to nerf cannons.
Again, we have no plans to nerf cannons in any way. I cant make it any more clear than that.
Al Rivera beams are not fine. Get it through your head. They are worthless in pvp currently at this time. Cannons do way too much damage. My bug ship should not be tanking 2 or 3 cruisers and sci vessels beam damage in pvp hardly being scratched by veteran players.
I'm so sick and tierd of killing helpless players due to garbage mechanics and balance issues just because YOU say they are fine when they are not. The evidence is all around you yet you are totally blind to see it.
There is no fun killing players that can bearly provide a fair challenge. This is why this game has the worst pvp I've ever seen in playing MMO's for over 16 years. Even SWTOR is FAR more balance in mechanics than this game has ever damn been.
I'm sorry but you have no idea what is going on here for balance just like the voldemort bug issue that you denied repeatedly until you said " oh it looks like the players were right after almost 18 months of this bug existing. " Then take the credit for fixing it.
You are pathetic. If anything the best thing to get balance to this game is to have some else do the balancing act instead of you because you clearly have damaging intent to this game. Not just to players but to yourself in the long run.
I do not like you at all. Many players do not like you. Your intentions are quite clear on the issues of this game. I hope for the benefit of this game that you are replaced as soon as possible. Otherwise things will stay grim for pvp.
I'll tell you what Al. I've modded games for over 20 years of many kinds and all my mods had amazing balance and threw life into games and was always given the highest awards on the website. Like Star Trek Bridge Commander. Mount and Blade, X3. Etc.
I'll tell you what I'll do your job for you and fix this game for free. You just provide the plane ticket and I'll live in your Studio basement. Just give me 2 weeks. That's all I need. I'll let you even take the " credit " for it. Since that's about all you know how to do well.
First, this is not a PvP MMO, it is a PvE MMO with some instanced PvP, and yes, the instanced PvP is the worst game experiencie I ever seen in all MMO I played. The PvP balance can destroy this game, period.
Second, are you talking about SWTOR, aka Stun Wars The Old Republic? Lol, pretty balance in that game indeed.
Al Rivera beams are not fine. Get it through your head. They are worthless in pvp currently at this time. Cannons do way too much damage. My bug ship should not be tanking 2 or 3 cruisers and sci vessels beam damage in pvp hardly being scratched by veteran players.
I'm so sick and tierd of killing helpless players due to garbage mechanics and balance issues just because YOU say they are fine when they are not. The evidence is all around you yet you are totally blind to see it.
There is no fun killing players that can bearly provide a fair challenge. This is why this game has the worst pvp I've ever seen in playing MMO's for over 16 years. Even SWTOR is FAR more balance in mechanics than this game has ever damn been.
I'm sorry but you have no idea what is going on here for balance just like the voldemort bug issue that you denied repeatedly until you said " oh it looks like the players were right after almost 18 months of this bug existing. " Then take the credit for fixing it.
You are pathetic. If anything the best thing to get balance to this game is to have some else do the balancing act instead of you because you clearly have damaging intent to this game. Not just to players but to yourself in the long run.
I do not like you at all. Many players do not like you. Your intentions are quite clear on the issues of this game. I hope for the benefit of this game that you are replaced as soon as possible. Otherwise things will stay grim for pvp.
I'll tell you what Al. I've modded games for over 20 years of many kinds and all my mods had amazing balance and threw life into games and was always given the highest awards on the website. Like Star Trek Bridge Commander. Mount and Blade, X3. Etc.
I'll tell you what I'll do your job for you and fix this game for free. You just provide the plane ticket and I'll live in your Studio basement. Just give me 2 weeks. That's all I need. I'll let you even take the " credit " for it. Since that's about all you know how to do well.
I understand your and the other PvPers frustration - but I fail to see how name calling and being rude to Mr Rivera will result in any changes and interaction.
For the first time in a long time Al made an appearence here - I doubt he would in the pvp sub-forum - and there have been many constructive posts on how to solve several issues. I am sure Mr Rivera would be willing to consider making changes and is not too swayed from acting based on comments like this.(at least I hope:rolleyes:)
First, this is not a PvP MMO, it is a PvE MMO with some instanced PvP, and yes, the instanced PvP is the worst game experiencie I ever seen in all MMO I played. The PvP balance can destroy this game, period.
why shouldn't this be THE pvp game?
the ship combat is way too fun to let it go
pvp just need balance and killwalls / some kind of PVP reputation, more accolades...
Because it is kill just for kill here. A true warrior fight for the empire, a true fed defend the federation. All I can see here is fighters. Figth can be fun some time but I need an inmersive objetive at last. Klingons should conquest fed planets and Feds should defend their planets. So you will not see me playing this skirmish STO PvP.
Every post a poem of thought and the melody of language. Like the entire works of Carl Sagan compressed into a few lines.
With an eloquence that can only be matched by the screams of agony of those condemned to Gre'thor and a harmony that can only be compared to the United States New York Stock Exchange.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
The question I was asked was basically "my beams are not as good as cannons, can you make them better".
My feeling is that beams are fine. They are WAD and don't need to be made better. The outlier are the cannons, and, in a perfect world (see what I did there), I would bring cannon power drain in line with beams instead of making beams more powerful. The analogy I was suggesting is that if everything good, and one thing is OP, its healthier for the game to bring the OP item down in line with all the other items instead of raising all items to the level of the one OP item.
My comment was suggesting the question should evaluate what the real problem is.
I meant no subtext to suggest if enough players complained, there would be justification to nerf cannons.
Again, we have no plans to nerf cannons in any way. I cant make it any more clear than that.
What do you think the real problem is I don't mean to doubt your intentions or think maybe your view point doesn't have any validity. But many many of community are really wonder if cryptic will address the growing disparity in both the power and even rewards... of being a escort vs cruiser or a science vessel.
In the case of pve which I'm more experienced in. There is no reason to bring cruisers into group content.... They just don't pull there weight as well due to the end game group content rewarding dps over healing/support and tanking. Since most rewards are to geared toward damaging as quickly as possible, and that's escorts specialty. I'm sure you see the point. I would also like to mention escort can be outfitted to tank so well and still damage well that, even if cruiser statistically can tank better and longer, their purpose is very watered down...
Pvp which I'm less experienced in but from what i have, the worst part about cruisers in pvp is not being able to even bring my guns to bear with full force, not to mention if i even happen to, the escort uses tactical team along with other defensive abilities, keeping my burst of damage even at full weapon power(nadian and eps on) with mark 12 phasers from punching through... Some time i get the jump on them but that's with the help of escorts...
Most of the time I'm basically mobbed by fast maneuverable escorts who tear my backside to ribbons. But I'm not a experienced pvp so it could be just my build isn't best suited for it.
With an eloquence that can only be matched by the screams of agony of those condemned to Gre'thor and a harmony that can only be compared to the United States New York Stock Exchange.
The devs can't spare the time to chat with us because they're too busy calling Heaven to see if they're missing some angels.
With an eloquence that can only be matched by the screams of agony of those condemned to Gre'thor and a harmony that can only be compared to the United States New York Stock Exchange.
Coupled with the sublime prose of nuclear fallout, and the all the courtesy, kindness, and understanding possessed by Rosie O'Donnell.
Since this thread started there have been another 4 pop up about fixing beams vs cannons
Al I really think you are going to have to address this issue. I know you said you won't nerf cannons but with all the new passive defense skills beams are becoming useless - too much drain - too much cycling vs cannons.
Maybe their drain could be lowered and the base damage increased?
The question I was asked was basically "my beams are not as good as cannons, can you make them better".
My feeling is that beams are fine. They are WAD and don't need to be made better. The outlier are the cannons, and, in a perfect world (see what I did there),
What about dual beams? There is a flaw in dual beams in that you only have 4 weapons on target with bridge officer skills. You can have 8 cannons rapid firing or scatter volley at a target. 8 beam arrays with FaW but when it comes to dual beams you can only have 4 beams on target with a bridge officer skill. You can have 4 turrets and 4 dual beams but that is much worse than 8 beam arrays or 8 cannons. Even 180" cannons and 4 turrets beat out 4 dual beams and turrets due to rapid fire or scatter volley and you have a wider weapon arc
What we could do with is some sort of rear weapon that does nto fire but boosts dual beams or rear beams that fire forward and work with FaW.
Just to be clear the problem is not that dual beams are weak, the problem in synergy and rear weapons do not go well with dual beams. Add in the rear weapon problem with slow turn rate and it is no wonder dual beams are so rare. A full beam ship with dual beams can only fire 4 weapons at 1 target at any time.
Al - In addition to decreasing beam drain+stacking beam drain, increasing base beam damage - I have one other request:
My favorite ship the most beautiful crusier ever - Fleet Excel - needs a bit of a buff
Increase turn to 10
Shield mod to 1.3
Hull to 44k
and turn - Ens Eng - into Ens Universal - boff
And if anyone asks why - just say because you can:D:eek:
Thx
The Fleet Excelsior is the best Cruiser in the game, and you think it needs a buff?
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
Comments
30-40% resists in pvp makes beams useless, its not as apparent in pug matches, but it still is there.
But even in strategy Games that old Stone/Paper/Scissor mechanic is wiedly common.
Not so in BotF, at least they could hide it so good it didn't even matter very much.:cool:
In that game Star Trek ships wheren't extreme specialists, althrough each ship had some special task or ability in combat. But it wasn't limited to that job. All Starfleet ships for example could stand on their own very well. The Galaxy class for example was classified as "Command Cruiser". Its special ability was to increase alied ships tactical capabilities a bit. But no one came to that rediculus idea to give the Galaxy the least Firepower of all Cruisers in the game. Only Cryptics designers can do that, lol.
My point is that a game doesn't have to rely on that ancient Stone/Paper/Scissor mechanic, if the developers are resourceful enough to create a fitting system by themselves for that certain game universe. I know this must be a lot of work but if made good, the game will be much more unique and better, than just to put over that standart Strategy/MMO stone/paper/scissor mold.
Many players still seem to believe that there isn't any other way to make games. For me it's just lazy TBH.
This applies especially to a Star Trek game. Putting Star Trek ships into that old MMO system is just bad/lazy design IMO. A system which was made for Fantasy Characters in a Fantasy world using Swords, Magic and fighting Dragons.
This is especially objectionable because Star Trek ships, unlike other Sci fi starships, are especially independent.
They don't usually work in groups. Even more so Starfleet ships, which are especially designed to be all round ships, able to sucessful complete a wide array of mission types.
Putting them into roles like "healer" or "supporter" is completely rediculus and shows how little some people understand of Star Trek.
Good night.
They're still trying to fix Acc mods not working on FAW (as well as there being various other issues that they haven't shared all the details on regarding weapon abilities, mods, and procs).
Folks want to avoid a return to 100% accuracy FAW spam though...and who can blame them?
There are a lot of variables at play here...several things one could say are broken at the same time - so they have to be careful in what they add before they fix what is broken, because who knows where that would take us when they do fix it, eh?
What you want then is a Single player game, where you're Kirk or Picard, and everything Revolves around the main character.
Also that game had a very OP Romulan faction due to the fact that the Romulans would get a first turn thanks to their cloak, nothing like a fleet of Warbirds showing up cloaked and taking out most of your fleet. which made the Galaxy class meh compared to the Romulan ships. The most powerful ship in that game for the Feds was the Defiant, which could take out almost any ship in that game even on it's own...and that's why there is Rock paper scissors in games, because you can't have a ship that rules them all in a game with more than one player.
Also that game had a really bad Star Trek design when it came to ships, they looked horrible especially the Klingon ships now that was lazy.
How do you come to that conclusion?
Even if you where right, just because i don't like that "stone/paper/scissor mechanic" doesn't mean i want a game where one ships rules all others or al single player game.
That's exactly the opposite of what i want.
What i want is a balance where all ships are more or less equal, but with different focus.
A ship could have some special ability to support other ships without being automaticly the weakest ship of them all.
On the other hand, there shouldn't be any class of ships that outguns all others, just because some dev "feels" that he likes it that way. That's exactly the wrong way to do it.
My point was that a game can be made different, i hope that's clear.
Surely BotF had some terribele faults, but it showed that a good team of developers CAN do it different, without twisting Star Trek into something completely different.
And btw. it was much more like Star Trek than STO IMO.
Just because almost all game devlopers go the lazy way and use the S/P/S system doesn't mean that there is no other way to do it. My second point is that especailly a star trek game doesn't harmonize with that system. Other game universes maybe fit very good into that system but Star Trek doesn't. I hope i made my point clear now.
If you want to again interpret something completely different into this, then i can't help you.
Surely that game had some awful faults, without question, but it was just a example of not obviously using the S/P/S system.
Compared to the time (1999) when the game was released the graphics was more then OK.
You speak about hat being lazy, i think it is more lazy not to care about the universe the game is set and just putting that S/P/S mechanic on it. That's lazy.
Just because some ship models wheren't very good made is just a sign of the time it was released.
- - - Just a thought,
speaking of the terrible Galaxy Class model in BotF.
Thats something everyone notices in no time, but very few even care about how awful CRYPTIC made that ship in this game. (i'm not speaking about the model but its performance)
For me it is more important that a ship is useful and fun to fly. I really don't care if the model doesn't look 100% like the original (STOs Galaxy Class model isn't very accurate too, btw.), as long as the designer didn't do any serve mistake i could live with a ship model like in BotF.
Heck i would even want to use the BotF ship model, if the ship wasn't the most boring and completely inferior (in allmost all aspects) compared to all others. - - -
What i wanted to say was that, when a game devloper wants to design a Star Trek game they cannot just use the S/P/S system and easy get away with it. Because in Star Trek ships work completely different. Maybe you don't care much about this, but i do.
Some players may be pleased to see the same old mechanic in every game over and over again.
Maybe they don't care if Star Trek ships get completely twisted and turned upside down.
But when i see how terrible Cryptic implemented some ships, i get just angry about the clueslessnes and ignorance of some devs.
It's a shame those people are in charge of a product like this to be honest.
On the other hand Star Trek has a long sad tradition of having completely incompetent and clueless people in charge of a product (game/movie), which is a terrible shame.
Star Trek devserves better IMO.
Again, just putting the S/P/S system on a Star Trek game is just lazy, cheap and completely wrong.
They can't do that in STO anyways. Every time the first officer speaks, the entire fleet would decloak and be destroyed before they could get shields up.
And that's 'Working As Intended'...XD
Al Rivera beams are not fine. Get it through your head. They are worthless in pvp currently at this time. Cannons do way too much damage. My bug ship should not be tanking 2 or 3 cruisers and sci vessels beam damage in pvp hardly being scratched by veteran players.
I'm so sick and tierd of killing helpless players due to garbage mechanics and balance issues just because YOU say they are fine when they are not. The evidence is all around you yet you are totally blind to see it.
There is no fun killing players that can bearly provide a fair challenge. This is why this game has the worst pvp I've ever seen in playing MMO's for over 16 years. Even SWTOR is FAR more balance in mechanics than this game has ever damn been.
I'm sorry but you have no idea what is going on here for balance just like the voldemort bug issue that you denied repeatedly until you said " oh it looks like the players were right after almost 18 months of this bug existing. " Then take the credit for fixing it.
You are pathetic. If anything the best thing to get balance to this game is to have some else do the balancing act instead of you because you clearly have damaging intent to this game. Not just to players but to yourself in the long run.
I do not like you at all. Many players do not like you. Your intentions are quite clear on the issues of this game. I hope for the benefit of this game that you are replaced as soon as possible. Otherwise things will stay grim for pvp.
I'll tell you what Al. I've modded games for over 20 years of many kinds and all my mods had amazing balance and threw life into games and was always given the highest awards on the website. Like Star Trek Bridge Commander. Mount and Blade, X3. Etc.
I'll tell you what I'll do your job for you and fix this game for free. You just provide the plane ticket and I'll live in your Studio basement. Just give me 2 weeks. That's all I need. I'll let you even take the " credit " for it. Since that's about all you know how to do well.
I'm always at a loss to explain why devs rarely interact with us. It's a real mystery of the ages on par with Stonehenge, methinks.
Second, are you talking about SWTOR, aka Stun Wars The Old Republic? Lol, pretty balance in that game indeed.
I mean... I can't imagine why considering all of us are so polite and well spoken.
I understand your and the other PvPers frustration - but I fail to see how name calling and being rude to Mr Rivera will result in any changes and interaction.
For the first time in a long time Al made an appearence here - I doubt he would in the pvp sub-forum - and there have been many constructive posts on how to solve several issues. I am sure Mr Rivera would be willing to consider making changes and is not too swayed from acting based on comments like this.(at least I hope:rolleyes:)
why shouldn't this be THE pvp game?
the ship combat is way too fun to let it go
pvp just need balance and killwalls / some kind of PVP reputation, more accolades...
I know. We always give such well structured, intelligent arguments, and constructive criticism well worth listening too.
Because customer complaints are always so kind.
Every post a poem of thought and the melody of language. Like the entire works of Carl Sagan compressed into a few lines.
With an eloquence that can only be matched by the screams of agony of those condemned to Gre'thor and a harmony that can only be compared to the United States New York Stock Exchange.
What do you think the real problem is I don't mean to doubt your intentions or think maybe your view point doesn't have any validity. But many many of community are really wonder if cryptic will address the growing disparity in both the power and even rewards... of being a escort vs cruiser or a science vessel.
In the case of pve which I'm more experienced in. There is no reason to bring cruisers into group content.... They just don't pull there weight as well due to the end game group content rewarding dps over healing/support and tanking. Since most rewards are to geared toward damaging as quickly as possible, and that's escorts specialty. I'm sure you see the point. I would also like to mention escort can be outfitted to tank so well and still damage well that, even if cruiser statistically can tank better and longer, their purpose is very watered down...
Pvp which I'm less experienced in but from what i have, the worst part about cruisers in pvp is not being able to even bring my guns to bear with full force, not to mention if i even happen to, the escort uses tactical team along with other defensive abilities, keeping my burst of damage even at full weapon power(nadian and eps on) with mark 12 phasers from punching through... Some time i get the jump on them but that's with the help of escorts...
Most of the time I'm basically mobbed by fast maneuverable escorts who tear my backside to ribbons. But I'm not a experienced pvp so it could be just my build isn't best suited for it.
The devs can't spare the time to chat with us because they're too busy calling Heaven to see if they're missing some angels.
Hey Gecko ... in PvP these are the beams I'm looking for ...
Not having any luck so far ... , perhaps you can tell me how I'm doing it wrong ? :cool:
The last three years of PvP development should answer that question for you.
Coupled with the sublime prose of nuclear fallout, and the all the courtesy, kindness, and understanding possessed by Rosie O'Donnell.
Al I really think you are going to have to address this issue. I know you said you won't nerf cannons but with all the new passive defense skills beams are becoming useless - too much drain - too much cycling vs cannons.
Maybe their drain could be lowered and the base damage increased?
What we could do with is some sort of rear weapon that does nto fire but boosts dual beams or rear beams that fire forward and work with FaW.
Just to be clear the problem is not that dual beams are weak, the problem in synergy and rear weapons do not go well with dual beams. Add in the rear weapon problem with slow turn rate and it is no wonder dual beams are so rare. A full beam ship with dual beams can only fire 4 weapons at 1 target at any time.
My favorite ship the most beautiful crusier ever - Fleet Excel - needs a bit of a buff
Increase turn to 10
Shield mod to 1.3
Hull to 44k
and turn - Ens Eng - into Ens Universal - boff
And if anyone asks why - just say because you can:D:eek:
Thx
Absolutly nothing wrong with making the best - even better!:P:)
P.S. Where did you go for like 5 months?