test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Universal Slots for Federation Cruisers
eraserfish
Member Posts: 0 Arc User
TL; DR? scroll down to the quote box near the bottom.
Federation cruisers are in danger of becoming irrelevant. With the introduction of increasing numbers of heavy carrier vessels, they're being pushed out of their key role of providing tanking and support, and being put into a position where they simply cannot do anything particularly well. While many complaints regarding the deficiencies of cruisers are also applicable to science vessels or attributable to other aspects of gameplay, this situation is especially critical because the performance of cruisers is equal to or worse than that of carriers.
The point is that, even if changes were to be made to the overall balance of the game, it still won't change the fact that cruisers appear to be getting replaced by ships that are better than them in almost every way possible.
With that in mind, I believe that role of Federation cruisers should be changed. Aside from some revision of their stats (which have not aged well since the game went F2P), they should be given some characteristic that would make them stand out. I propose that the role of Federation cruisers should be revised so that they are a "jack-of-all-trades" rather than the current "master of none".
At VA level, existing cruiser BOff slots would be changed so that:
1 Lt Cmdr and 1 Ens slots are changed to Universal
or
2 Lt slots are changed to Universal
*Note that this should be adjusted differently for all ranks preceding VA.
Aside from helping Federation cruisers stand out a little more, it makes them a bit more interesting and fun to play with. By opening up cruisers more to abilities from other trees, players are no longer forced into a cookie-cutter tanking build or making bad compromises with Engineering BOff abilities (which to say the least, are rather restrictive in terms of options). This in turn contributes to making cruisers more appealing for all PC classes to use. In addition, the shift towards a multi-mission vessel would be more in line with canon than the current cruiser actually is.
I would also like to suggest an additional 2 points of turn rate for all cruisers (except for the Odysseys) and a Universal Console slot. All this could be done in exchange for a reduction of 1000 hitpoints from the base hull of all cruisers.
To help you visualize the proposed changes:
Cruiser (Lt Cmdr)
Eng Con: 1 | Sci Con: 1 | Tac Con: 1 | Uni Con: 1
Lt: Eng | Ens: Tac | Ens: Sci | Ens: Uni
Exploration Cruiser (Cmdr)
Eng Con: 2 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 2 | Uni Con: 1
Cmdr: Eng | Lt: Tac | Lt: Sci | Lt: Uni
Assault Cruiser (RA)
Eng Con: 3 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 3 | Uni Con: 1
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Eng | Lt: Tac | Lt: Uni | Ens: Uni
Adv. Heavy Cruiser Retro. (RA, Store)
Eng Con: 3 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 3 | Uni Con: 1
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Tac | Lt: Uni | Lt: Uni | Ens: Eng
Fleet Exploration Cruiser Retro. (RA, Fleet)
Eng Con: 4 | Sci Con: 3 | Tac Con: 2 | Uni Con: 1
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Uni | Lt: Tac | Lt: Sci | Ens: Uni
As for the Odysseys, they would get one more Universal Console and Officer slot, adjusted according to their specialization:
Odyssey Tactical Cruiser
Eng Con: 3 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 3 | Uni Con: 2
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Uni | Lt: Tac | Lt: Uni | Ens: Uni
Odyssey Operations Cruiser
Eng Con: 4 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 2 | Uni Con: 2
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Uni | Lt: Eng | Lt: Uni | Ens: Uni
Odyssey Science Cruiser
Eng Con: 3 | Sci Con: 3 | Tac Con: 2 | Uni Con: 2
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Uni | Lt: Sci | Lt: Uni | Ens: Uni
Mind you, this is the kosher version: personally, I'd prefer it if every cruiser let you choose what to put in the Lt Cmdr slot, but the system that I have proposed seems to be safe. It also doesn't require a ton of adjustment to implement, and would be far simpler than coming up with some new game mechanic that is more likely to break the game.
Federation cruisers are in danger of becoming irrelevant. With the introduction of increasing numbers of heavy carrier vessels, they're being pushed out of their key role of providing tanking and support, and being put into a position where they simply cannot do anything particularly well. While many complaints regarding the deficiencies of cruisers are also applicable to science vessels or attributable to other aspects of gameplay, this situation is especially critical because the performance of cruisers is equal to or worse than that of carriers.
The point is that, even if changes were to be made to the overall balance of the game, it still won't change the fact that cruisers appear to be getting replaced by ships that are better than them in almost every way possible.
With that in mind, I believe that role of Federation cruisers should be changed. Aside from some revision of their stats (which have not aged well since the game went F2P), they should be given some characteristic that would make them stand out. I propose that the role of Federation cruisers should be revised so that they are a "jack-of-all-trades" rather than the current "master of none".
At VA level, existing cruiser BOff slots would be changed so that:
1 Lt Cmdr and 1 Ens slots are changed to Universal
or
2 Lt slots are changed to Universal
*Note that this should be adjusted differently for all ranks preceding VA.
Aside from helping Federation cruisers stand out a little more, it makes them a bit more interesting and fun to play with. By opening up cruisers more to abilities from other trees, players are no longer forced into a cookie-cutter tanking build or making bad compromises with Engineering BOff abilities (which to say the least, are rather restrictive in terms of options). This in turn contributes to making cruisers more appealing for all PC classes to use. In addition, the shift towards a multi-mission vessel would be more in line with canon than the current cruiser actually is.
I would also like to suggest an additional 2 points of turn rate for all cruisers (except for the Odysseys) and a Universal Console slot. All this could be done in exchange for a reduction of 1000 hitpoints from the base hull of all cruisers.
To help you visualize the proposed changes:
Cruiser (Lt Cmdr)
Eng Con: 1 | Sci Con: 1 | Tac Con: 1 | Uni Con: 1
Lt: Eng | Ens: Tac | Ens: Sci | Ens: Uni
Exploration Cruiser (Cmdr)
Eng Con: 2 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 2 | Uni Con: 1
Cmdr: Eng | Lt: Tac | Lt: Sci | Lt: Uni
Assault Cruiser (RA)
Eng Con: 3 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 3 | Uni Con: 1
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Eng | Lt: Tac | Lt: Uni | Ens: Uni
Adv. Heavy Cruiser Retro. (RA, Store)
Eng Con: 3 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 3 | Uni Con: 1
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Tac | Lt: Uni | Lt: Uni | Ens: Eng
Fleet Exploration Cruiser Retro. (RA, Fleet)
Eng Con: 4 | Sci Con: 3 | Tac Con: 2 | Uni Con: 1
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Uni | Lt: Tac | Lt: Sci | Ens: Uni
As for the Odysseys, they would get one more Universal Console and Officer slot, adjusted according to their specialization:
Odyssey Tactical Cruiser
Eng Con: 3 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 3 | Uni Con: 2
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Uni | Lt: Tac | Lt: Uni | Ens: Uni
Odyssey Operations Cruiser
Eng Con: 4 | Sci Con: 2 | Tac Con: 2 | Uni Con: 2
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Uni | Lt: Eng | Lt: Uni | Ens: Uni
Odyssey Science Cruiser
Eng Con: 3 | Sci Con: 3 | Tac Con: 2 | Uni Con: 2
Cmdr: Eng | Lt Cmdr: Uni | Lt: Sci | Lt: Uni | Ens: Uni
Summary
So, to summarize what I have suggested thus far:
- Add Universal BOff slots
- Add a Universal Console slot
- Increase turn speed by two points
- Reduce hitpoints (if needed)
Mind you, this is the kosher version: personally, I'd prefer it if every cruiser let you choose what to put in the Lt Cmdr slot, but the system that I have proposed seems to be safe. It also doesn't require a ton of adjustment to implement, and would be far simpler than coming up with some new game mechanic that is more likely to break the game.
Post edited by eraserfish on
0
Comments
This reads like "I am bad and need lots of help. Here are my ideas to break the game.".
Agreed with all of the above. It would solve the following:
- Allow more build diversity for cruisers
- Reduce the "flying brick" feel of cruisers
Personally, i'd go so far as to say that the Lt. Cmdr slot on ALL ships (Cruisers, Escort, Science) should be made Universal, with the primary BOff slot (Commander) determined by ship "class". I'd also favor making the Ensign slots Universal, as there are often times too many of a specific BOff type, or useless BOff abilities for Ensign (Case in point, Ensign Engineers).
I've accepted that possibility, but does that really change anything that I've said?
If you believe that this would break the game, please tell me how. While you're at it, I suggest you go onto the wiki and compare Federation cruisers to their counterparts in the KDF, or to all classes of carriers.
Your baseline cruiser for comparison should probably be a Galor.
This would make Cruisers in general much more versatile and much more like they "should" be.
In my experience giving some cruisers a Turn rate lower tahn 8 is just evil and has nothing to do with balance anymore. The only point of it is to make those ships unpopular in favour of faster ships.
I could also live with a slight reduction of their hitpoints, if Starfleetr Cruisers would finally become a bit more the "jack of all trades" instead of being completely un-fun and useless (COMPARED to almost all other ships in STO).
There is one little thing i would like to add:
Cryptic should release a universal console for Starfleet Cruisers only, which makes them able to equip dual Cannons. This would make them virtually on par with Klingon Cruisers if the Starfleet Cruiser Captain want his ship to be like that.
Of course that console would occupy one Console Slot to compensate the Hull Hitpoints difference between Starfleet and KDF cruisers.
Additionally there wouldn't be any reason for KDF crusier Captains to feel disadvantaged, since Starfleet Cruisers still would be less maneuverable and still wouldn't have acess to a cloaking device.
If Cryptic would change Cruisers as you suggested and if they would introduce such a console, Dual Cannons would finally have some purpose AND the game would see finally a much wider array of different builds. Flying Cruisers would be
On the other hand Escorts wouldn't be touched by this, they still would be DPS kings, but Cryptic cannot expect that everyone wants to fly THEIR favourite ship, especially in a Star Trek Game.
So in a way, your suggestions would also make STO much more like Star Trek while making it more fun at the same time.
I think it would be a Win - Win for everyone.
It sounds like you're just trying to troll this idea which IMO is the best idea I've ever seen so far about fixing cruisers.
If you want a different Lt Commander slot and ensign slot... there's a cruiser that does that, its the Odyssey. For all others they're the different flavor of cruiser.. The Ambassador for sci, The Regent or Excelsior for Tac, and Galaxy / Galaxy X for Engineering.
Yes it requires that you either be a ship junkie and have all these if you want to switch around or specialize and stick to a ship. Begging like this is like wanting to have your cake an eat it too.
For you see, a long time ago, universal slots only existed on a small bird of prey...
Now they're all up in most new fed ships -p
You're argument is flawed.
Cruisers are the "jack of all trades, master of none", in the real Star Trek productions (movies, tv-shows), yet in STO, they act solely as the "tanks" in a pseudo-Trinity style gameplay. A tank in most MMOs, tends to be the fairly stationary target, which absorbs most of the damage, and protect his/her teammates from being hit. Ring any bells?
The introduction of more widespread usage of "Universal" BOff slots on Cruisers, would make Cruisers exactly that: Jack of all trades, master of none. Yes, you can switch between ships to get the "exact" build you want. The bigger question is, why should you have to? If I love flying a Galaxy Class due to it's appearance, and hate it's BOff layout, why should I get shoe-horned into flying a ship with the "proper" BOff layout, but for which I hate the design?
The solution is actually alot simpler in this regard; For every Cruiser you unlock via Zen store purchase, Lockbox, Dilithium or Lobi crystals, you unlock the "skin" for said cruiser, usable by ANY cruiser you choose to fly. Obviously without having the ability to mix-and-match parts from different cruiser styles.
As for the universal spots...I dunno.
It's a bit difficult to say. I mean, even if you switch to Tac and sci skills, at the lower levels, there's still not a huge amount of choices, so you'd still have to be limited in your decisions, though at least that would open it up more.
Honestly, if there were more Ensign and Lt. level (specifically engineering) skills that DIDN'T all just share cooldowns with each other, it wouldn't be quite so bad. Between a few more skills and a turn rate buff, cruisers would probably be a lot better. They're truly gimped due to turn and lack of BOFFs I feel now a days more than anything. KDF cruisers, cannons and cloak or not, still have to deal with the same thing, but at least they usually have the turn to make it work.
Still, just feels like universal slots aren't the way to go.
I agree as well. I think some ship/console/uni boff stations may need to be rebalanced, but the idea as a whole is very good. And not just because I proposed something similar in a post a while ago!
I'm still uncertain about the console requirement to allow them to equip Duals though. KDF battlecruisers have lower HPs in part because they have a cloak, its not just because they have a better weapon selection and a little better turning. Maybe the Dual console could have something else built in like a half to a third of a RCS console's turning boost?
The only problem I see with the Uni boff station idea is that it gets in teh way of Cryptic's never ending attempts to sell more ships. If anything they'd want to sell a pack that has all 3 options for a Lt. CMDR slot instead of selling you one ship with a uni LT. CMDR.
Fed cruisers don't have a high turnrate because they do not need it. Fed cruiser pilots complaining about turnrates is just funny as hell. KDF cruisers need higher turnrates because they have a different focus and carry DHCs. If people want a cruiser like that, they should play KDF instead of trying to steal yet another KDF concept for the greedy Federation players who want to have their cake and eat it, too.
Otherwise, get used to flying and using the Fed cruisers like you're supposed to fly and use them. Or fly some Romulan cruiser when the faction comes out, I'm sure they'll be slightly more DPS oriented than Federation cruisers.
As for engineering skills, that's an argument I actually agree with. Engineering skills aren't as flexible or all-inclusive. Granted, they're supposed to be focused on tanking skills, but I agree that there should be some more offensive options in there.
Lastly, I disagree with the further distribution of universal slots. As a BoP pilot, it absolutely infuriates me that universal boffslots are being cheapened by their inclusion in Tier 5.5 fleetships, lockbox ships, and lobi ships. The BoP sacrifices stats for a reason, to gain access to not only the battlecloak, but also the universal slots. Yet these new ships do not sacrifice anything for their universal boffslots.
This is not about KDF vs Starfleet. ALL cruisers would benefit from it.
Second, very few want and no one needs Crusiers as supporters or healers, thats just an old antiquated MMO concept, which is completely wrong at a Star Trek game.
First and foremost in a Star Trek game Big ships are not supposed to heal others.
Personally i am not in the least interested in flying a Klingon ship, in order to fly a Crusier as it is supposed to be. If anything Klingon Cruisers should be the ones supporting the Klingon BoP, Raptors and whatever ship Klingons use.
Starfleet ships should be the versatile ones, being able to dish out damage and to fulfill various roles.
Having one of the oldest ships being the most Veratile ones is rather ... strange IMO.
What's truly sad is that its a possibility that is also something the original devs though. In practice however, better turning equates (for most players at least) into a mor exciting gamestyle. Designing without takign into consideration player fun is partly why Fed cruisers are soooo boring unless you really work at doing something interesting with it. It shouldn't be that way.
Science Skills: Support/Debuff
Tactical Skills: Damage Enhancing
Engineering Skills: Survival/Defensive
And guess what? Neither of the above clearly says "You must TANK!!!". Every Captain benefits from additional survivability or defensive skills. Every Captain benefits from Damage Enhancing skills, and every Captain benefits from having the ability to Support friendly team members, or Debuff enemies.
The whole notion of the "Holy Trinity" in Star Trek Online seems rather alien to me. Starfleet ships especially, regardless of ship class have always been leaning towards a tendency of "jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none". Sure, there have been certain individual classes with a more specified ship role (Oberth Class Science Vessel for instance, or Defiant Class Heavy Escort). But for the most part, ships are rather generalized, capable of dealing impressive damage, high survivability and longevity.
Pretty much all ships are setup with an array of science facilities to support the whole "Deep Space Exploration" mission of Starfleet, with some ships having less (Defiant) or more (Nova/Oberth).
I'm curious why some people seem to want to force the Holy Trinity system into STO, when it's simply not appropriate for the game (or genre) ?
"You can't nerf escorts/cannons cause we're the damage dealers and you can't buff cruisers cause you're the tanks and if you want to deal damage then fly escorts and escorts need a buff to hull cause we die too fast and you don't."
Etc.
Sounds about right. Thing is, I see the benefit of some ships dealing more damage than others. Case in point: Defiant Class. I also see the benefit in some ships being better at scientific assignments (Oberth Class). But there really isn't any "tanking" niche for Federation ships. Hull hitpoints are determined by the ships mass, and there are plenty of examples of high mass "Escorts", which are not classified as "tanks" by the game. Akira Class and Prometheus Class being two quite notable examples of this. Both are considered Escorts in STO, and both have a rather high mass (and thus should have high hitpoints).
Ultimately, the best balance would be to achieve one where all ships (no matter if they are escorts, cruisers or science ships) deal relatively the same amount of damage, and have relatively equal survivability potential. Choice of ship should come down to player preference. Not "You must choose THIS ship, to be best at doing THIS". What's the point in having 50 different ships, if only ONE specific ship is the best for a given task?
(As a primarily Science Captain/Science ship flyer, I do not feel subject to this whole "Escort fanboyism-bs")
And FWIW, I don't necessarily see a need to make 1 buffed, and 1 nerfed. I'd rather just see an across-the-board balance between the ships, rather than shoe-horning ships into given roles (which have no place in a Trek game).
Speed, maneuverability, damage, and tankiness (at 80% hull strength of cruisers, they ARE tanks as well).
Super serious.
Every cruiser would still demand some degree of specialization, as the stations are not 100% interchangeable like on a bird of prey. If you consider everything else that's been going on with other ships, I would say that it's high time that cruisers get an update. Things change; keep up and get with the times.
At this point in time, there's no reason why cruisers should not get a buff in turn rate.
Anyhoo...
There are problems inherent in the way that BOff abilities are set up. Concerning Engineering BOff abilities, I've noticed that a lot of the abilities are poorly suited for cruisers and would work much better elsewhere. For all of its usefulness, Eject Warp Plasma cannot reaching its full potential because cruisers are rather unwieldy; mounting it on a bird of prey expands its uses. Likewise, Directed Energy Modulation is more effective with cannon weapons because the damage is solely determined by weapon power and applied per hit, and Aceton Beam would be better off on a science vessel.
Now as I have mentioned before in my first post, I am concerned that Federation cruisers are falling behind and that some form of intervention is needed to prevent them from becoming completely obsolete. This is one of the reasons why I believe that they should be revised from raw tankers into more versatile, multipurpose vessels. Another reason is that this option seems a lot simpler than fixing Engineering BOff abilities, which I believe would require an overhaul of the entire BOff ability system. With the release of new ships every quarter or so, it is only a matter of time before the limited flexibility and restrictive roles of Federation cruisers leads their designs to a dead-end.
It is not fun to have an escort on your tail and not be able to do anything about it, to float straight into a cloud of Warp Plasma that you thought you could avoid, or to just pass over an ally you wanted to heal because your turn rate screwed up your Z-XY movement. Believe it or not, turn rate is important for reasons that have nothing to do with DHC. Disregarding the mangled parts of your metaphor, Federation cruiser captains (especially Engineers) like myself would like to know why Cryptic knocked the cake out of our hands and hasn't bothered to give us a fresh slice.
On some cruisers, I don't mind nearly as much that my damage can't even do scratch damage. But when it gets to the point that a so-called tactical cruiser has trouble doing so AND tanking, that's where I'm going to put my foot down. Ditching my cruiser in favour of something else is not an option: I want to play Federation, just as much as Klingon players want to see content. That being said, the concerns which prompted me to open this thread lie in a different direction entirely, and are only partially related to the issue of damage. Rather curious how many players speak of flying cruisers how they are supposed to be flied, even though a significant portion of them are not certain of what that entails.
Your assertion that birds of prey "sacrifice" stats to gain access to universal slots or the battle cloak is somewhat questionable. Birds of prey are some of the most agile craft in the game, second only to small craft such as shuttles or fighters. While the battle cloak has something of an offensive function, the ability to cloak while under fire seems to indicate that it is just as much of an escape mechanism. I'm not sure why the type has been singled out to be the only craft with full universal BOff slots, but I do not think this has anything to do with having to fit a specific niche. That being said, you are being rather petulant about this.
The moment you started calling people fanboys you lost the argument. It is a well known fact that people only resort to that kind of name calling when they're losing an argument and/or are trolling and of course nobody likes trolls. And you are very obviously a troll.
His point still stands however. Whenever a thread is started, calling for a buff to Cruisers and/or Science, the "Escort fanboys" as he called it, come out in droves arguing against a buff to any other ship but their own. And why? Well, because they don't want to feel "replaced" as the go-to dps ship(s) in the game.
I believe i've argued again and again (a few times in this thread), that Cruisers are supposedly the "jack of all trades" in Star Trek, with the Escorts or Science vessels being more specialized. Officially, Trek doesn't use such designations (Cruiser, Escort, Frigate, Destroyer etc) unless they are in a state of war. On the FED side, ships are primarily designed for multi-purpose exploration, with the ability to defend themselves if attacked.
Not once, have I viewed any of the "so called" Cruisers in the Star Trek shows/movies, as "flying bricks", which is what they represent in the STO status quo. I'd like to honestly ask the "Escort Captains", what buffs they could conceivably see as appropriate for Cruisers, without necessarily stepping on their turf as "DPS Kings".
I find it unbeliveable for professional game developers that this is in question at all.
Telling someone who doesn't play this game about this meets just an incredulous shake of the head
The MMO trinity was made for fantasy characters wielding swords, axes and casting magic, NOT for Starfleet ships!
The MMO Trinity doesn't work with Trek ships, period.
Pressing them (star trek ships) into that system can only result in turning them upside down, just for the sake of a system that wasn't made for Star Trek at all.
As i said i find it just unbeliveable for game developers not even to see that problem
(well as long as their beloved Escorts dominate the game...)
The sad thing about this is, it wouldn't need much work to make ships in STO more like they should. But the devs seem not even to reckognise the problem in the first place.
Ultimately it is not that difficult
Escorts: Fast, nimble firepower specialists
Science ships: similar to cruisers, but smaller and mor science focussed.
Cruisers: Jack of all trades, capable of doing almost Escort like Damage or Science stuff.
So in a sense, Escorts and Science ships are specialists while Cruisers should be much more Generalists.
Strangely we don't hear one single word from the devs about that, they don't even respond to a thread like this, because they seem to be not interested in any opinions contradicting to their own.
Personally i find it really sad, because STO has so much potential only limited by some developers egos or opinions.
Carriers.
In a way, this thread points out that the so-called trinity no longer exists, and that this will only become more evident as time goes on.
Slight differences should point at the ship relative size/mass differences (so slightly more hull+shileds on bigger ships and more manouevrability on smaller. Bot overall 8 beam cruiser should be just as deadly as 4 DHC escort or 3 torp/3 mines sci ship.
And this is whre Cryptic fails utterly. Both sci and cruiser ships have literaly no way of getting up there to the escort level of damage.
To fix it without massive changes to the game I would propose to make all ships all-universal (BoP-like). This way there would be no "but cruiser is eng and must heal" bull****. Eng/cruiser should be just a little more tankier escort that is using eng captain and cmdr (lt.cmdr) BOFF to get energy levels high enough to compete with escorts whil having enough tactical slots for heaviest tactical buffs: BO III, HYT III, AP:O III.
But it would not happen. Sadly.
Trinity in this never existed in the first place.
Wrong. Up until recently, Cruisers are Tanks, Science are Support, and Escort are DPS Kings. If a Cruiser or Science ship wanted to do comparable dps, he/she gets told to re-roll in an Escort. Cruisers and Science ships have weapons too, don't they?
They have virtually identical weapons, and weapon strength is based primarily on available power (warpcore). Unless ships are limited to sublight only (most shuttles), then the ships with the biggest warpcore (Cruisers) should technically be capable of the most damage potential.
its your oppinion that they are supposed to tank. Cryptic stated and no i cant get a direct link to this, that before launch and after, that the term tank doesn't mean trinity tank but ability to absorb damage, they used tank because people understood that concept.
I do recall reading something about that.
However, it used to be that ship classes on the Federation side could be clearly divided into those three groups. The stats and abilities also corresponded to such labels, so I hardly think that it was the case in practice.
I also remember something about the devs referring to a "trinity", in which case I will say that they need to get with the programming.