test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Could we get a "torpedo tube" slot?

123578

Comments

  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I welcome discussion, just keep it to a dull roar please.

    I'm not sure I can keep my extreme distaste for all the nauseating amounts of requests powercreep that appear in threads day in and day out...to a dull roar. ;)

    I will say, I agree with not adding an additional torpedo only slot...with a dull roar, maybe a mild grumble.

    edit: Oh yeah, btw, curse you for having me look at General Troll and some of the extreme silliness that's been proposed there. :P
  • atalossataloss Member Posts: 563 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    If Cryptic can't make money from it, they won't do it. It's just that simple.

    Instead of another torpedo slot why not a 2nd deflector of Science ships. As it's been mentioned before in some episodes that THEY DO have a 2nd deflector.

    Another thing, why overhaul the crafting system? Their's so many other thing can need improvement, but is being ignored. Why? because those things don't generate intimidate income.

    Shiney new ships is king (and using real world money for dill). It's obvious to me that since the summer events, people are not playing this game. Just look at the ques. I personally stopped playing this game for 60 days. Just got back and it's a ghost town. So how will they remedy this? By releasing a Ship for the Klingon's and probably another ship (I've noticed one is released every 3 weeks or so).
    One day Cryptic will be free from their Perfect World overlord. Until that day comes, they will continue to pamper the whales of this game, and ignore everyone that isn't a whale.
  • earlnyghthawkearlnyghthawk Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    ataloss wrote: »
    If Cryptic can't make money from it, they won't do it. It's just that simple.

    Instead of another torpedo slot why not a 2nd deflector of Science ships. As it's been mentioned before in some episodes that THEY DO have a 2nd deflector.

    Another thing, why overhaul the crafting system? Their's so many other thing can need improvement, but is being ignored. Why? because those things don't generate intimidate income.

    Shiney new ships is king (and using real world money for dill). It's obvious to me that since the summer events, people are not playing this game. Just look at the ques. I personally stopped playing this game for 60 days. Just got back and it's a ghost town. So how will they remedy this? By releasing a Ship for the Klingon's and probably another ship (I've noticed one is released every 3 weeks or so).

    Well, being honest, I've played around a bit with crafting in this game, and it's really not worth it as it is. As far as "other things needing improvement", every one's got their agendas or lists, of what they'd like to see improved, and in what order. Other than a 2nd deflector dish for sci (or some sci anyway), what other things do you feel that really need to be improved? (Come on, bring out your ideas....)
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
    Temperance Brennan, "A building"
  • donrahdonrah Member Posts: 348
    edited January 2014
    Especially if torpedoes were actually useful and worth adding skillpoints for, I'd be fine with an ammunition mechanic. Thing is the more things are proposed to change, the more people will resist it. Gamer culture is that way.

    Well, I can't say that I'm too keen with torpedoes being a detriment to ship performance. That's just not right. On one hand you have torps, which are only fully effective if you can land it on hull. On the other hand, you have energy weapons that perform effectively on shields and hull. I think it's pretty obvious which is the superior option. Why waste valuable points and weapon slots for a weapon that's only effective within a short window?

    It makes perfect sense that ships should have torpedo launchers regardless of your other weapons. Torpedo launchers aren't hard point weapons, they're part of the ship and the only thing that differs about them is the ammunition it fires. So having a torpedo slot is just logical. It would also be good if you could have multiple slots for each launcher so you can select between different torpedo types. Obviously, this would vary depending on the type of ship you command.

    And as for the complaint directed towards you that it would be "restrictive" to have dedicated torpedo and energy weapon slots, it wouldn't be restrictive. It would make sense. You can't mount a torpedo launcher of the likes that Star Trek uses. An external launcher would have to carry all of it's ammunition outside of the ship, which would heavily restrict how much ammo you can have. And what about reloads? Are you going to go EVA to reload that launcher in the middle of combat? So no, the launcher should have its own slot if you expect to be able to fire more than 2-4 torpedoes before you have to go back to ESD to resupply. A dedicated launcher that accepts various types of torpedoes with a finite quantity is perfectly reasonable.

    There is one last thing I'd like to add on the torpedo as ammo issue. There is a question of acquiring more torpedoes after you've spent them. I think that one type of torpedo should be free for each faction. As an example: Feds get quantum, Roms get plasma, KDF get photon. Any other type would have to be purchased as per the usual methods. Rep torps would have to be bought with their respective marks (a small amount, less than what you get in one STF) from the reputation store.
    Go here and show your support for a better Foundry!
  • abystander0abystander0 Member Posts: 649 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I read that other thread. It was basically an argument between the OP and two others. I posted in there asking a simple question. The entire thread was a huge dance around one simple point.

    To me, it seemed that all the supporters of the addition of torpedo slots wanted was more dps. The rest was smokescreen.

    If being canon is so important to someone's immersion, then what is stopping them from installing a torpedo launcher on their ship right now?

    No matter how you slice it, it is a desire for higher damage output. This is NOT power creep, but a power grand prix.

    The claim that adding dedicated torpedo weapon slots will add variety, and greater customization, is false. What will happen is everyone will stack all energy weapons in the universal slots and torpedoes in the torpedo slots. How is that variety? With weapon cycles and cooldowns the way they are, stacking more than two launchers is counterproductive. There will still be "The One True Build" or optimal setup. Mandating a weapon to a particular slot will not change that.

    To think that this is some great equalizer is silly. The min/max crowd will ALWAYS find ways of squeezing more performance out of something than a casual person. This will increase the disparity in damage between the min/max crowd and those who reside near middle and bottom of the damage output scale.

    Meanwhile either NPCs are buffed to compensate for the newer damage output, putting the non-min/max crowd back where they are now (possibly worse), or all PVE is rendered completely worthless in terms of challange for even a casual player (much more so than now, as min/max crowd can obliterate anything PVE with little effort currently). In PvP the gap will be even more startling, making PvP less enticing than it is now for casuals.

    In short, I fail to see how this would benefit anyone.
  • earlnyghthawkearlnyghthawk Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I read that other thread. It was basically an argument between the OP and two others. I posted in there asking a simple question. The entire thread was a huge dance around one simple point.

    To me, it seemed that all the supporters of the addition of torpedo slots wanted was more dps. The rest was smokescreen.

    If being canon is so important to someone's immersion, then what is stopping them from installing a torpedo launcher on their ship right now?

    No matter how you slice it, it is a desire for higher damage output. This is NOT power creep, but a power grand prix.

    The claim that adding dedicated torpedo weapon slots will add variety, and greater customization, is false. What will happen is everyone will stack all energy weapons in the universal slots and torpedoes in the torpedo slots. How is that variety? With weapon cycles and cooldowns the way they are, stacking more than two launchers is counterproductive. There will still be "The One True Build" or optimal setup. Mandating a weapon to a particular slot will not change that.

    To think that this is some great equalizer is silly. The min/max crowd will ALWAYS find ways of squeezing more performance out of something than a casual person. This will increase the disparity in damage between the min/max crowd and those who reside near middle and bottom of the damage output scale.

    Meanwhile either NPCs are buffed to compensate for the newer damage output, putting the non-min/max crowd back where they are now (possibly worse), or all PVE is rendered completely worthless in terms of challange for even a casual player (much more so than now, as min/max crowd can obliterate anything PVE with little effort currently). In PvP the gap will be even more startling, making PvP less enticing than it is now for casuals.

    In short, I fail to see how this would benefit anyone.
    Most of your points, I made myself. And got shouted down by most of the proponents that were steadily posting, with only one exception. AND got repeatedly told, "Oh you got yours already, you just don't want someone else to get theirs." Ended up being the reason I stopped saying anything in that thread.

    I'd also like to see some genuine ideas from people, on what, for the ships especially, they think would genuinely improve gameplay. (Whether from more options, to just being fun)
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
    Temperance Brennan, "A building"
  • abystander0abystander0 Member Posts: 649 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Most of your points, I made myself. And got shouted down by most of the proponents that were steadily posting, with only one exception. AND got repeatedly told, "Oh you got yours already, you just don't want someone else to get theirs." Ended up being the reason I stopped saying anything in that thread.

    I'd also like to see some genuine ideas from people, on what, for the ships especially, they think would genuinely improve gameplay. (Whether from more options, to just being fun)

    I saw that. Most of that thread was an unproductive vituperative attack, with a repeat of the same refrain.

    It's why I didn't bother posting any further in it. After a certain point, reasoned honest discussion becomes impossible.

    As for making torpedoes more desirable, I would look into reducing the global cooldown on them, or reducing the time to target.

    I don't think that side facing weapon slots are necessary thanks to beam arrays. As for beam turrets, I am not a terribly big fan of the concept since arrays cover such a large arc, but that is just my opinion.
  • earlnyghthawkearlnyghthawk Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I saw that. Most of that thread was an unproductive vituperative attack, with a repeat of the same refrain.

    It's why I didn't bother posting any further in it. After a certain point, reasoned honest discussion becomes impossible.

    As for making torpedoes more desirable, I would look into reducing the global cooldown on them, or reducing the time to target.

    I don't think that side facing weapon slots are necessary thanks to beam arrays. As for beam turrets, I am not a terribly big fan of the concept since arrays cover such a large arc, but that is just my opinion.

    For me, the single thing that would bring up torps the most, whilst not making them "overpowering", would be to get rid of the global shared cooldown.

    As far as side slots, I'm thinking that would bring up more ways to customize a ship. But again, I think to make it viable, most, if not all, weapon systems, particularly the beam arrays, & single cannons, would have to have their firing arcs reduced.
    And for beam turrets, sure, beam arrays cover a huge margin, meaning, mount those both front & rear, you get the broadside tactic in use now, no point in them using any kind of turret. (Beyond MAYBE the KCB & the 360 A/P). But Dual beam bank users are left in the cold, having to use cannon turrets to supplement their fire, which means, any skills that enhance their beam attacks (Beam Overload, and Fire At will), will not also enhance the turrets. They have to use further skills for that. Whereas cannon/dual cannon/dual heavy cannons can use the same skills for both their front cannons, and their turrets.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
    Temperance Brennan, "A building"
  • tragamitestragamites Member Posts: 424 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    donrah wrote: »
    Well, I can't say that I'm too keen with torpedoes being a detriment to ship performance. That's just not right. On one hand you have torps, which are only fully effective if you can land it on hull. On the other hand, you have energy weapons that perform effectively on shields and hull. I think it's pretty obvious which is the superior option. Why waste valuable points and weapon slots for a weapon that's only effective within a short window?

    It makes perfect sense that ships should have torpedo launchers regardless of your other weapons. Torpedo launchers aren't hard point weapons, they're part of the ship and the only thing that differs about them is the ammunition it fires. So having a torpedo slot is just logical. It would also be good if you could have multiple slots for each launcher so you can select between different torpedo types. Obviously, this would vary depending on the type of ship you command.

    And as for the complaint directed towards you that it would be "restrictive" to have dedicated torpedo and energy weapon slots, it wouldn't be restrictive. It would make sense. You can't mount a torpedo launcher of the likes that Star Trek uses. An external launcher would have to carry all of it's ammunition outside of the ship, which would heavily restrict how much ammo you can have. And what about reloads? Are you going to go EVA to reload that launcher in the middle of combat? So no, the launcher should have its own slot if you expect to be able to fire more than 2-4 torpedoes before you have to go back to ESD to resupply. A dedicated launcher that accepts various types of torpedoes with a finite quantity is perfectly reasonable.

    There is one last thing I'd like to add on the torpedo as ammo issue. There is a question of acquiring more torpedoes after you've spent them. I think that one type of torpedo should be free for each faction. As an example: Feds get quantum, Roms get plasma, KDF get photon. Any other type would have to be purchased as per the usual methods. Rep torps would have to be bought with their respective marks (a small amount, less than what you get in one STF) from the reputation store.

    Launchers are THE hard point weapons. They can not be moved nearly as easily as a Beam Array strip or even cannons. The setup of a launcher system is 1- the storage area of the weapon system internal of the ship. 2- the loading area where projectiles are moved from the storage area into the firing tube to be launched. 3- the tubular from the internal ship to external projectile area. 4- the projectile area, the place the projectile leaves the ship and enters space.

    Other weapon systems can be mounted externally and only need to be connect to EPS conduits for power.

    As far as munitions go, photon is the galactic standard. offering "free" types to a faction while sounding logical would not be prudent. I feel that projectiles themselves should have a certain rarity for play.

    Consumable devices available should be:
    • Photon
    • Quantum
    • Plasma
    • Transphasic
    • Chroniton
    • Chroniton Flux
    • Breen Transphasic Cluster
    • Tractor Beam Mines
    • Tricbalt
    • Hargh'peng
    • Bio-Molecular Warhead
    • Romulan Hyper-Plasma
    • Omega
    Non Consumed devices available should be:
    • Bio-Neural
    • Thermionic
    Launcher items include
    • Torpedo Launcher
    • Mine Launcher
    • Missile Launcher(Small Craft)
    • Probe Launcher
    • Temporal Disruption Device
    • Concentrated Tachyon Mine Launcher
    • Rapid Fire Missile Launcher
    • Wide Angle Launcher (unique)
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    For me, the single thing that would bring up torps the most, whilst not making them "overpowering", would be to get rid of the global shared cooldown.

    Say you've got a torp with a base DPV of 1503. Say you've got 3 of them with PWOs. Your base DPS would be 1002. If you removed the TCD, your base DPS would be 3006-4509 or so....depending on how they swung things. Likely the 3006, though, I believe.

    Base DPV on DHCs is 174. Say you maintain stable 125 Weapon Power, it would be 435 DPV. Your base DPS for 3 of them would be 870.

    So you'd be comparing 3006 DPS for the 3x Quants and 870 DPS for the 3x DHCs.

    Wait, somebody says - shields! Sure, vs. infinite shields the 3x Quants would do 751.5 DPS (because of the innate 75% kinetic damage reduction).

    Well, that's not fair, somebody says! That's 118.5 DPS less! Yeah, 118.5 DPS less...where you could run 15 Weapon Power instead of 125.

    And that's only while the shields were up...then you'd be back to the 3006 vs. 870.

    A Crit HY3 Quantum w/ 0 Tac Consoles will do more damage to hull than a Crit BO3 w/ 5 Tac Consoles. Likewise, a Crit BO3 w/ 0 Tac Consoles will do more damage to shields than a Crit HY3 Quantum w/ 5 Tac Consoles.

    Torps kind come down to use. I'll give an example of somebody watching my guy in his T'varo in an ISE.

    Vs. Gens - the person watching is probably getting a headache from the /facepalm as those torps just plink plink against a Gen like it's going to take all day. Sure, not using any buffs - saving them for the Trans - but the other folks with energy weapons aren't using buffs either and they're eating into the Gens. It just looks really, really, really...did I mention...really bad!

    Say somebody drops one of the Gens before anybody's even fired on one of the other three. Well, my guy flies over to the Spheres coming through the Gate. GW1, HY1 Omega Torp, Destabilized Torp, TS3 Graviton Torp, Temporal Torp, Hargh'peng Torp, Sensor Scan, Singularity Jump...

    ...and all the Spheres are likely all but dead before I finish my lazy turn to head back to the guys taking out the other three Gens before tackling the Trans.

    Yep, the same /facepalm guy vs. the Gen has slaughtered all those Spheres.

    It's not really about DPS...it's about Spike. Heck, could drop the TS3 to a TS2 and add in a DPB2 to add more Spike (some prefer dropping the APO3 to APO1 to go with a DPB3 instead of the DPB2). I like carrying an APD1 in my role as a Support Guy.

    People have an expectation of being able to use everything as if it were the same...just different icons and different visual FX. Things are different, they have to be used differently. It requires some thought, some planning, and definitely some understanding of the underlying mechanics.

    Removing the TCD on Torps would definitely make them OP. Removing the 75% kinetic damage reduction of shields would make them OP. So many of the suggested changes for them would make them OP.

    It's like comparing apples and oranges, and wanting the apple to have all the qualities of the apple while also picking up certain desired properties of the orange. Folks do it not only with Torps, but they do it with Beams, Cannons, consoles, everything...
  • scurry5scurry5 Member Posts: 1,554 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Hmm....If I could make one change to torps, it would be to make at least the untargetable ones move faster depending on distance-to-target - It looks plain silly to see escorts trailing strings of torps behind them.

    Of course, a mild speed boost to the targetables would be nice too, but I'm none too sure how that would affect balance.
  • stofskstofsk Member Posts: 1,744 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I agree with everything virusdancer has said on this matter. I find torpedoes useful and I only really equip them primarily for canon/immersion reasons. But yeah, talk of a 'dedicated' torpedo slot strikes me suspiciously like people want to have their cake and eat it too. Sorry, but there are 4 forward weapon slots on almost every ship other than the ones with 5, and anywhere between 2-4 on the back. Absolutely NOTHING in the game says that you have to put DHCs or beam arrays in every single one of those weapon slots. Those that feel they must have an unhealthy obsession with combat parse logs.
  • stofskstofsk Member Posts: 1,744 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    tragamites wrote: »
    Launchers are THE hard point weapons. They can not be moved nearly as easily as a Beam Array strip or even cannons. *snip*
    Explain how beam array strips and cannons that are afixed and integrated into the spaceframe like they are on the Enterprise's saucer or the Defiant and the Klink's Bird of Prey can be 'easily moved'. Those things aren't just plugged into the ship-wide power network, they are built into the ship, like weapon systems are in real life. And behind them unseen because they would be entirely internal to the spaceframe are complicated electronics and power relay systems (and probably things like capacitors and heat sinks) that are designed to channel some heavy-duty wattage into them in order for the weapon system to actually do its job.

    Everything you've just written about torpedo launchers being hardpoints can just as easily be written about directed energy weapons with a bit of tweaking. It's certainly no justification for adding a mechanic to STO that is, frankly, not required.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    scurry5 wrote: »
    Hmm....If I could make one change to torps, it would be to make at least the untargetable ones move faster depending on distance-to-target - It looks plain silly to see escorts trailing strings of torps behind them.

    Of course, a mild speed boost to the targetables would be nice too, but I'm none too sure how that would affect balance.

    A funny thing about those trailing torpedoes - they'll have often hit before they hit. It's easier to see if they're torps that do other things, have other visual FX, etc...you'll see those FX on the target before the torps ever get there. If you happen to be watching the combatlog or have the damage showing on screen, you can even see the damage happen before the torps get there.

    Though, I guess that being funny - depends on the kind of funny and the kind of humor. Could be haha, could be meh...etc, etc, etc.
  • ghyudtghyudt Member Posts: 1,112 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I'm against the idea of port and starboard weapons for all ships. The fact that most have a wrap-around beam array (federation) would suggest that a single weapon fires to port, fore, and starboard. Dividng up the weapons in this manner would cause all sorts of problems, especially since the game wasn't designed around it. I think our current weapon coverage is perfectly adequate as is.

    As for the dedicated torpedo slot, you're suggesting that each ship have a weapon slot fore and aft be changed to support only torpedos? Well, as much as I'd like to see this, I have to say it really infringes on individual playstyle. While I agree each ship should carry more variety, and be for tactically built, I can't agree with forcing it on players. However, it could be made more appealing if torpedos were more effective. I have never run my ship without a fore and aft launcher, and even though I think it works better than all beams, I still find torps slightly lacking.

    Since were putting in new ideas, I'm a fan of the theory of adding ventral and dorsal shields. This would add more to the game in the way of tactics, such as coming at the enemy from above or below. The only problem I see is how to display it without too much clutter, and how to manually distribute power to those specific shields.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,005 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    It doesn't change anything, but think about it this way: In STO, if you slot no torpedoes you don't actually remove the torpedo launchers from your ship, you just don't use them/don't power them or whatever. Likewise, you don't remove the phaser arrays when you don't slot them. Every ship is supposed to have something along the likes of 10 phaser arrays and 4 launchers, yet in STO you are always limited to 8 weapons on cruisers for example. Of course, quite a lot of ships have too much weapons as well, a KDF Raider has 4 weapon hardpoints, a Sabre or Defiant as well. But meh. It's STO XD
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • ghyudtghyudt Member Posts: 1,112 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Say you've got a torp with a base DPV of 1503. Say you've got 3 of them with PWOs. Your base DPS would be 1002. If you removed the TCD, your base DPS would be 3006-4509 or so....depending on how they swung things. Likely the 3006, though, I believe.

    Base DPV on DHCs is 174. Say you maintain stable 125 Weapon Power, it would be 435 DPV. Your base DPS for 3 of them would be 870.

    So you'd be comparing 3006 DPS for the 3x Quants and 870 DPS for the 3x DHCs.

    Wait, somebody says - shields! Sure, vs. infinite shields the 3x Quants would do 751.5 DPS (because of the innate 75% kinetic damage reduction).

    Well, that's not fair, somebody says! That's 118.5 DPS less! Yeah, 118.5 DPS less...where you could run 15 Weapon Power instead of 125.

    And that's only while the shields were up...then you'd be back to the 3006 vs. 870.

    A Crit HY3 Quantum w/ 0 Tac Consoles will do more damage to hull than a Crit BO3 w/ 5 Tac Consoles. Likewise, a Crit BO3 w/ 0 Tac Consoles will do more damage to shields than a Crit HY3 Quantum w/ 5 Tac Consoles.

    Torps kind come down to use. I'll give an example of somebody watching my guy in his T'varo in an ISE.

    Vs. Gens - the person watching is probably getting a headache from the /facepalm as those torps just plink plink against a Gen like it's going to take all day. Sure, not using any buffs - saving them for the Trans - but the other folks with energy weapons aren't using buffs either and they're eating into the Gens. It just looks really, really, really...did I mention...really bad!

    Say somebody drops one of the Gens before anybody's even fired on one of the other three. Well, my guy flies over to the Spheres coming through the Gate. GW1, HY1 Omega Torp, Destabilized Torp, TS3 Graviton Torp, Temporal Torp, Hargh'peng Torp, Sensor Scan, Singularity Jump...

    ...and all the Spheres are likely all but dead before I finish my lazy turn to head back to the guys taking out the other three Gens before tackling the Trans.

    Yep, the same /facepalm guy vs. the Gen has slaughtered all those Spheres.

    It's not really about DPS...it's about Spike. Heck, could drop the TS3 to a TS2 and add in a DPB2 to add more Spike (some prefer dropping the APO3 to APO1 to go with a DPB3 instead of the DPB2). I like carrying an APD1 in my role as a Support Guy.

    People have an expectation of being able to use everything as if it were the same...just different icons and different visual FX. Things are different, they have to be used differently. It requires some thought, some planning, and definitely some understanding of the underlying mechanics.

    Removing the TCD on Torps would definitely make them OP. Removing the 75% kinetic damage reduction of shields would make them OP. So many of the suggested changes for them would make them OP.

    It's like comparing apples and oranges, and wanting the apple to have all the qualities of the apple while also picking up certain desired properties of the orange. Folks do it not only with Torps, but they do it with Beams, Cannons, consoles, everything...

    So, what just happened here was an alpha strike with torpedos. I have to say I disagree with this. Its bad enough that escorts can do this all day long (they're even whining about how there's no challenge anymore because of it), we really don't need torp boats doing it too. This would set some of us back even further, like the ones who like to use a more classic trek loadout. And besides, there's already the ability to send a nearly endless stream of heavy plasma torps at a target, why do we need more of that with different torps? I'm all for player ingenuity and preference, but there has to be a limit, if not to what can go on a ship, then to how effective it is.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I tend not to share ideas, because I know how woefully unpopular they would be. :D

    STO's a very casual game that's full of "magic"...there's far more fantasy than science to our little Sci-Fi adventure here.

    Think about the ease that we switch equipment for example, eh? It's waving a magic wand - done! Folks would have a cow if somebody were to suggest things should be DOFF assignments of various lengths to switch stuff out. Switching Cannon X for Cannon Y might be Z time...switching Deflector Arrays? Yeah...Z's going to be a wee bit longer. Heck, want to trade Cannon X for Array Y...Z's going to be longer than just switching two Cannons.

    So yeah...I tend not to share my ideas, cause STO would have failed long ago with me at the helm...lol.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    ghyudt wrote: »
    I have to say I disagree with this.

    Er...I'm confused as to what you're disagreeing with. You quoted me...where I'm disagreeing with the removal of the TCD - giving an example of where it would be OP. The rest of your post suggests that you're agreeing with me...but you quoted me saying you disagree with this.

    What's the "this" that you're disagreeing with?
  • earlnyghthawkearlnyghthawk Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I tend not to share ideas, because I know how woefully unpopular they would be. :D

    STO's a very casual game that's full of "magic"...there's far more fantasy than science to our little Sci-Fi adventure here.

    Think about the ease that we switch equipment for example, eh? It's waving a magic wand - done! Folks would have a cow if somebody were to suggest things should be DOFF assignments of various lengths to switch stuff out. Switching Cannon X for Cannon Y might be Z time...switching Deflector Arrays? Yeah...Z's going to be a wee bit longer. Heck, want to trade Cannon X for Array Y...Z's going to be longer than just switching two Cannons.

    So yeah...I tend not to share my ideas, cause STO would have failed long ago with me at the helm...lol.

    Actually, I wouldn't. To me, having a time on how long it takes to dismount, and mount ship equipment is a good idea, personally.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    butcher suspect, "What'd you hit me with?"
    Temperance Brennan, "A building"
  • stofskstofsk Member Posts: 1,744 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    It's a great idea for a RP/Immersion perspective, but bad idea for gameplay/business perspective. I could definitely get behind some kind of cooldown for any gear swap process. But I would bet my right nut that the majority of players would chuck a hissy fit the very moment it takes them more than 1 second to install the latest shiny.
  • sandormen123sandormen123 Member Posts: 862 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    What i'd like to see regarding torpedos, is the use of a limited amount.
    Now, everyone can blare of TS upon TS. Lets say a ship only have access to 10 torpedos.
    The autofire would not be used, unless to stupid to understand the consequence of firing off torpedos randomly. The TS would be the; "Yahrr! Their shield are down! Fire all tubes, naow!" A button Saved, savoured, and used with a much greater satisfaction, than zombiehitting it, and cursing the CD. Being conservative in the use of torpedos, a player could get in two TS, before the ship would be out of torps.

    After a battle, the ship would be automagically be restocked, so no expenses to worry about, alternatively, torps must be bought. Afterall, they are in the shops. Lets use their purpose for this.

    This way torpedos mayhaps become unnerfed, and sweetly powerful with a blast and some suger on top.
    /Floozy
  • stofskstofsk Member Posts: 1,744 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Well, while we're at it, why don't we have persistent ship injuries until you visit a starbase and specifically seek out the chief engineer to have your ship repaired.

    I'd get behind that for sure, but most people would be like 'hell no'.
  • scurry5scurry5 Member Posts: 1,554 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    A funny thing about those trailing torpedoes - they'll have often hit before they hit. It's easier to see if they're torps that do other things, have other visual FX, etc...you'll see those FX on the target before the torps ever get there. If you happen to be watching the combatlog or have the damage showing on screen, you can even see the damage happen before the torps get there.

    Though, I guess that being funny - depends on the kind of funny and the kind of humor. Could be haha, could be meh...etc, etc, etc.

    Ayup, I've seen it happen before - which kinda makes me wonder if the time for a torp to hit target is precalculated based on distance to target, or if there's a max limiter - and if things like rifts from the gravimetric torp spawn upon damage application or upon the torps appearing to hit.
  • abystander0abystander0 Member Posts: 649 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    I tend not to share ideas, because I know how woefully unpopular they would be. :D

    STO's a very casual game that's full of "magic"...there's far more fantasy than science to our little Sci-Fi adventure here.

    Think about the ease that we switch equipment for example, eh? It's waving a magic wand - done! Folks would have a cow if somebody were to suggest things should be DOFF assignments of various lengths to switch stuff out. Switching Cannon X for Cannon Y might be Z time...switching Deflector Arrays? Yeah...Z's going to be a wee bit longer. Heck, want to trade Cannon X for Array Y...Z's going to be longer than just switching two Cannons.

    So yeah...I tend not to share my ideas, cause STO would have failed long ago with me at the helm...lol.

    I wouldn't be opposed to this idea. First fitting, like when you just get it could be free, but any refitting would be done in this fashion. Like getting your ship assembled to your specifications at the shipyard, but refitting it later would take time for a tear down/refitting.

    What i'd like to see regarding torpedos, is the use of a limited amount.
    Now, everyone can blare of TS upon TS. Lets say a ship only have access to 10 torpedos.
    The autofire would not be used, unless to stupid to understand the consequence of firing off torpedos randomly. The TS would be the; "Yahrr! Their shield are down! Fire all tubes, naow!" A button Saved, savoured, and used with a much greater satisfaction, than zombiehitting it, and cursing the CD. Being conservative in the use of torpedos, a player could get in two TS, before the ship would be out of torps.

    After a battle, the ship would be automagically be restocked, so no expenses to worry about, alternatively, torps must be bought. Afterall, they are in the shops. Lets use their purpose for this.

    This way torpedos mayhaps become unnerfed, and sweetly powerful with a blast and some suger on top.

    This is a terrible idea. It's a fantastic way to relegate torpedoes to a niche role, if that. This would make them a device rather than a weapon.

    We could always ask that when our crew dies, the ship is completely unable to function.

    For even more fun we could tie the crew complement to the number of doffs that we have, and when we take crew damage we lose a percentage of the doffs based on the damage ( as in they are permanently removed).

    I can think of all sorts of dismaying mechanics.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    IMVHO, it's not that Torps need to be buffed...it's that Energy needs to be nerfed (and nerfed hard).

    That folks can do 20-30k+ DPS with Energy isn't balanced. That folks can do 10-15k DPS with Projectiles...is even pushing it.

    You can complete the optional in ISE with 5x Eng in RA Cruisers with TRIBBLE gear, TRIBBLE DOFFs if any, etc, etc, etc...where they're each putting out ~2k DPS. That's ~10k DPS combined. To have 5x ships each putting out 3x that? How anybody does not see that as ludicrous has always left me needing some Excedrin from the epic /facepalm that ensues.

    We're coming up on the 4 year Anniversary. In many games, we'd have seen at least two if not more increases in the level cap - including an increase in "difficulty" matching the increase in player power. So we'd be at level 60 or 70...if not higher. As is, with all the gearing that's been added - we're probably at 80-90 if not 100 or higher. On top of that, not only has player power been buffed out the wahzoo...difficulty has actually been nerfed as well.

    "Typical Game"

    Level 50...Level 50 NPCs, mix of trash/lieutenant/boss mobs.
    Level 60...Level 60 NPCs.
    Etc, etc, etc...

    While I'm no fan of the meatier mob with the bigger stick form of difficulty increase that follows that typical gear progression scenario - lol, it's the very core of STO that's like that...but it just doesn't keep up.

    We fight Borg at level 1...we fight meatier Borg with bigger weapons at level 50. We do something called Elite, where they're that much meatier and have that much bigger weapons.

    But where the NPCs in the "Typical Game" will continue that meatier/bigger angle as the players do - that not only has not happened in STO, but with STO aiming at the extremely casual player...the NPCs have actually been made weaker.

    A fresh 50 these days has an easier time against level 50 mobs than they would have a year ago, two years ago, three years ago...at the rate this continues, if we were to bounce over to the "actual" Star Trek Universe...well, somebody in an EVA Suit could take over the whole Universe at some point down the line.

    It's just ridiculous on an epic level. That folks want even more - need more - need more...it took me 2 seconds to kill everything, I know I can get that down to 1.67 seconds if Cryptic would just give me more! Well, that's just painful and sad...

    I'm glad that Cryptic tried to avoid the Trinity as much as possible, there's already too much damn awful space magic taking place in the game...but I can't help but feel we'd be in a better position if they had gone that cursed route. If it was a case that the typical Tank/Heals/3 DPS or some mix of that was required to complete content - actually complete it because it was a challenge to do so without such a mix...then maybe we wouldn't have the silliness that's this desire to push Torpedoes up to doing 30k DPS as well...because 30k DPS is what everybody should be doing...

    ...meh, maybe I'm just burnt out on the ability to do anywhere from 7-10k+ DPS by just pressing the spacebar and the a key...flying around in circles while watching TV and trying not to think about why I'm even bothering.

    It was only PvP that kept me engaged in the game as long as I have been...because it was actually engaging. But the powercreep has reached such absurd points (which makes me chuckle, actually - after they made the changes to the BO/etc Tac abilities to try to increase TTK and folks will disappear before a 0.5s activation delay ability can kick in)...that it's either a case that you're dead in the blink of an eye or your target's dead in the blink of an eye...and the engagement is lost, the fun is lost - might as well be playing some archaic FPS game where everybody just charges blindly at the other side and hopes in the end, they win.

    STO, imho, is not a game for those that want balance - to have engaging fights - to have challenging fights where they feel like they accomplished something...

    STO, imho, is like that episode of King of the Hill where Bobby is supposed to go hunting to kill his first deer...and Hank takes him to a special hunting lodge. Both Bobby and Hank realize it's wrong...so they leave. That's STO...a special kind of hunting lodge.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    stofsk wrote: »
    Well, while we're at it, why don't we have persistent ship injuries until you visit a starbase and specifically seek out the chief engineer to have your ship repaired.

    I'd get behind that for sure, but most people would be like 'hell no'.

    Critical hits having a chance to proc minor injuries. If minor injuries are in place, the chance for major injuries. The ability to assign DOFFs to repair injuries, requiring components, but not being "instant" fixes like they are now. That if the ship gets blown up again during the repairs, they have to be restarted from scratch - as well as dealing with any new repairs that have to be made.

    Additional massive injuries that would require the need to hit up a starbase to get them repaired, because they would just take too long to do in space without the proper manpower/tools/etc.

    But the thing to remember, and I thought about this later, is the following:

    Server Name: Holodeck

    We're just replaying things, even if we're playing it for the first time. A new mission comes out - it's still just a historic thing that already took place.

    So time...well...time isn't normal in STO. When exactly is the "now" in STO - does it even exist? Is everything just some...

    Hrmm...are we just figments of a certain Lieutenant Reginald Endicott Barclay III?

    Oh well, I'm off to save the Princess...the same Princess, mind you - as saved by hundreds of thousands before me and likely hundreds of thousands after me...
  • sandormen123sandormen123 Member Posts: 862 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    Since the topic is still about torpedos...

    I have always seen torpedos as a ' niche' weapon, or in another term, a secondary weapon. -I find that term more fitting. Except in submarines and certain exeptions, torpedos are not something you should be able to win a war with by mainly using them. On top of that. They are supposed to be costly and sparingly distributed due to storage (or the lack thereof).

    That people fear that torpedos will become a 'niche' item, tells me the focus on torpedos over beams and cannons is already skewed.

    By limiting the use of torpedo, they way i imagine it, would actually crate more tactical play, instead of one time superbuffing, releasing everything of alphastrike-effects, and being done for the day.

    Imagine how a team could use some brain to distribute their torps, instead of pushing all the button at once. I guess working against the dream of a 'win'-button is as futile as telling a blind man what colours are.
    /Floozy
  • amalefactoramalefactor Member Posts: 511 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    stofsk wrote: »
    Explain how beam array strips and cannons that are afixed and integrated into the spaceframe like they are on the Enterprise's saucer or the Defiant and the Klink's Bird of Prey can be 'easily moved'. Those things aren't just plugged into the ship-wide power network, they are built into the ship, like weapon systems are in real life. And behind them unseen because they would be entirely internal to the spaceframe are complicated electronics and power relay systems (and probably things like capacitors and heat sinks) that are designed to channel some heavy-duty wattage into them in order for the weapon system to actually do its job.

    Everything you've just written about torpedo launchers being hardpoints can just as easily be written about directed energy weapons with a bit of tweaking. It's certainly no justification for adding a mechanic to STO that is, frankly, not required.

    It was only one facet advocating for torpedoes having a more regular presence on STO ships, and it was an appeal to setting, even if the premise can, yes, be turned around.

    This can be approached from many valid angles:

    Just about every ship needs energy weapons and skill points invested in them, and that's not the case with torpedoes. Energy can be used on its own at present with virtually no downside, and that's not the case with torpedoes.

    Torpedoes cost an additional chunk of skillpoints beyond what just about everyone already invests in energy weapons, whether torpedoes are present or not. There seems to be little overall benefit to this compared to putting points elsewhere.

    Boating torpedoes in all but one very exceptional build (the b'rel retrofit) is a very bad idea and even the exception is a little marginal in when it's useful. Boating energy is all the rage and even BranFlakes and his team did nothing but energy boating.

    Trek has almost always had a torpedo and energy blend on its ships. The Defiant had torpedoes, as did all other ships I can think of, even little survey vessels and even some shuttlecraft. The setting feels weird in STO where they are not only not useful/needed, but a detriment compared with energy spam.

    Good enough reasons to me.
  • virusdancervirusdancer Member Posts: 18,687 Arc User
    edited January 2014
    What i'd like to see regarding torpedos, is the use of a limited amount.
    Now, everyone can blare of TS upon TS. Lets say a ship only have access to 10 torpedos.
    The autofire would not be used, unless to stupid to understand the consequence of firing off torpedos randomly. The TS would be the; "Yahrr! Their shield are down! Fire all tubes, naow!" A button Saved, savoured, and used with a much greater satisfaction, than zombiehitting it, and cursing the CD. Being conservative in the use of torpedos, a player could get in two TS, before the ship would be out of torps.

    After a battle, the ship would be automagically be restocked, so no expenses to worry about, alternatively, torps must be bought. Afterall, they are in the shops. Lets use their purpose for this.

    This way torpedos mayhaps become unnerfed, and sweetly powerful with a blast and some suger on top.
    Since the topic is still about torpedos...

    I have always seen torpedos as a ' niche' weapon, or in another term, a secondary weapon. -I find that term more fitting. Except in submarines and certain exeptions, torpedos are not something you should be able to win a war with by mainly using them. On top of that. They are supposed to be costly and sparingly distributed due to storage (or the lack thereof).

    That people fear that torpedos will become a 'niche' item, tells me the focus on torpedos over beams and cannons is already skewed.

    By limiting the use of torpedo, they way i imagine it, would actually crate more tactical play, instead of one time superbuffing, releasing everything of alphastrike-effects, and being done for the day.

    Imagine how a team could use some brain to distribute their torps, instead of pushing all the button at once. I guess working against the dream of a 'win'-button is as futile as telling a blind man what colours are.

    Okay, I've got to ask...cause, I've read those a few times now (more than a few times)...

    ...is my sarcasm meter broken? I mean, you're joking...right? Right?
Sign In or Register to comment.