I say no to capping dps. But they could make it so you had to have front and rear torp on ship. What star trek ship have you ever seen with just beams lol or even torps. When I play I have at least 1 torp on front.
I say no, but there's a bigger issue: HOW would you actually do this?
DPS output is a very complicated product of numerous factors - gear (an even more complicated aspect in STO than in most MMOs because of how significantly weapons affect firing patterns), skills and traits (spread over all of STOs numerous branching progression system), relative positioning, and skill activation on both sides. Two identical ships on identical internet connections can respectively do 10k and 30k just based on skill activation efficiency.
So, how do you hard cap that?
Because of the complexity, you can't do it up front. Two identical ships, on identical internet connections, can be put out the difference between 10k and 50k just based on efficient skill activation. Giving both the same up front penalty completely defeats the intent of the cap.
You could just cut people off after 20,000 damage in any given second, but this creates a major handicap for players who hit that cap from a crit or burst, because it now creates a break in incoming damage on their target, allowing an exploitable healing window. An opposing healing cap has the same flaw. This is of course in addition to creating a nonsensical flow of gameplay.
You could try to average it, but the problem here is just how complex damage output is. You can't predict how much damage will happen in a second that hasn't happened yet. If you base this on previous seconds, this creates another significant flaw in burst based builds (all builds really, but it's worst in builds that do the most damage in the shortest times), where they get the highest penalty on their lowest damage output (unfairly penalizing them), and the lowest penalty on their highest damage output (completely defeating the point).
Horrible idea. Not only would the players hate it but it would hurt Cryptic's income too. Balance needs to happen but it has been left unchecked for way too long. It is going to be a huge under taking and there is no simple solution. It has to start with a well defined concept of how they want the game to play out. Trinity? all DPS? New roles? Right now there is no direction and the numbers have gotten silly out of control.
Lets say my fleet excelsior has hit the 20k dps mark, and i still have not upgraded all my ship stuff. I will think to myself "well.. no point spending more dil to upgrade all that, i can save money now!"
Yeah... there will never be a DPS limit in this game...it will cost Cryptic in the long run.
Then you actually start equipping and using defensive consoles?
Most RPGs have points where any value or stat is no longer worth pursuing and you have to shift your focus to other ones.
Theres nothing wrong with min/max designs in a game, but on the battlefield there could be unintended consequences (just like code updates in STO).
I propose the following:
1.) If a weapon exceeds it's design threshold, there's a chance it goes offline for 60 seconds.
Starfleet never intended that weapon to do what you're attempting. All the engineering prowess and sheer luck can't keep that weapon operating at it's new peak efficiency without something going wrong. This would allow for new consoles which would lower the % chance for failure. Zen store only of course.
Gun barrels overheat. The Marines carry extra to swap them out. Basic analogy here, but why not for overused weapons operating well beyond their design models?
2.) If the total damage output exceeds a maximum tolerance for the ship, power systems drop to 20% for 60 seconds.
It's one thing to keep a single specialized weapon online in the midst of a battle - but eight and shields, and warp drive etc. etc. Given that your crew is so focused, theres a chance that a system-wide failure could catch you off guard.
3.) If an NPC faces a combined damage output in excess of 'X', 100% feedback impulse for 30 seconds.
The Borg are known to adapt. This failsafe move severely damages the borg, but gives it time to call in reinforcements of the new class Assault Sphere to deal with you.
My intention here isn't to penalize the smart players. Want extreme DPS - have at it. The goal is to provide a realistic environment so that they temper their abilities to deal with a variety of incoming threats.
My Two Bits
Admiral Thrax
I absolutely love these ideas.
I've said before that the solution for players who want challenge isn't to create content that few players will ever see; it's to make the player's own ship more challenging at the extremes.
MMOs that utilize "rage"/"fury" as a power source often have penalties if you don't vent that off somehow.
This entire idea is ludicrous. How can you even "hard cap" dps? Add in something that says, oh sorry.. you did 20k damage over the last 1 seconds. That's over the cap, so now your weapons are going offline for a second? Or, oh.. now you get to hit for zero damage until you're under the "cap"?
DPS is controlled via limits on character stats - and all that entails. The devs have provided us with a very complex system with hundreds of doffs and many, many possible choices in our setup. Some care enough to learn what is good and what isn't. Others don't. It's not the good player's "fault" that they worked within the confines of the game's mechanics to construct the most effective system possible. It's the bad player's fault for doing nearly the opposite.. as most players have come up with setups that are so hideously bad as to be worse than the result of letting a blind monkey put their boat together.
If they would like to see a mass exodus of there best players again then they should go ahead and implement something this stupid. I didn't quit over them stealing my spec points, allot did, this one I would quit over.
The problem in this game is that the player base has in large part chosen not to better themselves and that cryptic has chosen to, or is not able to, design content that actually makes a tank or healer/controller build useful. Hard capping DPS will not solve either of those problems, will just make those of us who have taken the time to learn the game mechanics and better ourselves quit.
You know what, I was sympathetic on the Tau Dewa/spec system nerf. But if players are in a game to be superior to other players to a point where they function better at everything and with a gap so high that the weak cannot function? Let them go. A game with no skilled players is better than a game which worships achievement.
I've said before that the solution for players who want challenge isn't to create content that few players will ever see; it's to make the player's own ship more challenging at the extremes.
And severely punish 99% of the STO populus in the process, who isn't in that select 1% highest DPS pool. If you 50k+ peeps want a challenge again, give me your Scimitar, and I'll nerf the sh*t out of it for you.
Personally, I love the new power creep. I paid thru my nose to get all these increased power skills, and now I want to keep them -- color me silly.
I say no, but there's a bigger issue: HOW would you actually do this?
DPS output is a very complicated product of numerous factors - gear (an even more complicated aspect in STO than in most MMOs because of how significantly weapons affect firing patterns), skills and traits (spread over all of STOs numerous branching progression system), relative positioning, and skill activation on both sides. Two identical ships on identical internet connections can respectively do 10k and 30k just based on skill activation efficiency.
So, how do you hard cap that?
Because of the complexity, you can't do it up front. Two identical ships, on identical internet connections, can be put out the difference between 10k and 50k just based on efficient skill activation. Giving both the same up front penalty completely defeats the intent of the cap.
You could just cut people off after 20,000 damage in any given second, but this creates a major handicap for players who hit that cap from a crit or burst, because it now creates a break in incoming damage on their target, allowing an exploitable healing window. An opposing healing cap has the same flaw. This is of course in addition to creating a nonsensical flow of gameplay.
You could try to average it, but the problem here is just how complex damage output is. You can't predict how much damage will happen in a second that hasn't happened yet. If you base this on previous seconds, this creates another significant flaw in burst based builds (all builds really, but it's worst in builds that do the most damage in the shortest times), where they get the highest penalty on their lowest damage output (unfairly penalizing them), and the lowest penalty on their highest damage output (completely defeating the point).
So... how?
You'd cap damage (and regen) received per second as a percentage of health.
In any given second, say, only 25% of my (or any enemy's) maximum hull is susceptible to damage. The other 75% receives 100% immunity.
If I have 50k hull? All damage beyond 12.5k in any given second is shrugged off. All health improvement is capped at, say, 6.25k per healing source is shrugged off, meaning it requires multiple heals to surpass that.
I say no, but there's a bigger issue: HOW would you actually do this?
DPS output is a very complicated product of numerous factors - gear (an even more complicated aspect in STO than in most MMOs because of how significantly weapons affect firing patterns), skills and traits (spread over all of STOs numerous branching progression system), relative positioning, and skill activation on both sides. Two identical ships on identical internet connections can respectively do 10k and 30k just based on skill activation efficiency.
So, how do you hard cap that?
Well , since you've asked (mind you this is all theory crafting) , here are the stages I would use :
1) Talk to the players .
Explain what I want to do , why I do it , why the game needs me to do it , what the shortcomings and the benefits would be and how long do I expect the whole process to take .
2) I'd make the enemies "register" X amount of maximum damage . (this would be the hardcap)
Anything above that (even as at this point there would be a whole lot on top of that) would not register .
The result of this would be that STF "dancing with Ferengi" would take a pre-determined 10 minutes -- and nobody could do it faster then 10 minutes .
3) I would lay out a plan to reduce the overall damage ability of the players , so that reaching the proverbial "X" damage would be an effort ... -- be that through not stacking consoles , reducing whatever that needs to be reduced to in order to make reaching "X" a challenge with the available gear & skills -- while at the same time , I'd try to ensure that the Easy , Medium , Hard level content stay just that .
Plus as I said , I'd up the hardcap every year to let that feeling of "progression" in , but in a controlled manner .
All in all , the idea of the cap is to create content that then you can balance the game for .
That is the issue that I see , when I hear ppl asking the devs to "fix the game" , because as long as the difference in player DPS is between 3K and 20-30-50K , then that is not what I call ballance , and I have no idea how I would realistically program a challenging and fun environments for a playerbase with such disparity .
Things were good when we had Mk X and Mk XI .
All that the Devs had to program / ballance for was then were a few powers that even then they had issues with balancing properly (Sci powers & Viral Matrix anyone ?) .
Mk XII , Doffs , Boffs , Reps & now whatever came with DR have turned this game into a virtual circus ... , and even players who don't know the "numbers" are sensing it through their performance as well as seeing the performance of others .
I also understand why so many here said "no" , even if I think they did so for the wrong reason (don't nerf me bro ) .
The right reason (from my POV) is because there is a good chance the Devs would / could not make this work .
That , and there are (I'm sure) monetary issues , Dev team size issues that would need to be delegated to ... redoing the game basically , plus this game's life expectancy issues (I remember ppl once saying here that 8 years is the average lifecycle of an MMO) .
I don't think the idea should be dismissed out of hand, but, it's never going to happen.
People spend lots of $$ in order to improve their boats, and to do that AFTER a DPS cap is put in place? I doubt Cryptic is that silly.
99% of the people who spend money would still never hit a reasonably set cap. 75k DPS isn't something that any amount of money will get you. The vast majority of players could spend thousands or tens of thousands of dollars and never get close to that.
You know what, I was sympathetic on the Tau Dewa/spec system nerf. But if players are in a game to be superior to other players to a point where they function better at everything and with a gap so high that the weak cannot function? Let them go. A game with no skilled players is better than a game which worships achievement.
There will *always* be players "superior to other players to a point where they function better at everything." That is simply the way humanity works. But there's no alleged "gap so high that the weak cannot function." For one, because the two groups are not competing with each other. John and his gang fly in strata so far beyond my comprehension, I cannot even fathom it. What they do there doesn't hinder me in the least. Like, ever.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say this group of elite players you'd rather see go, you may want to rethink that, as pretty much every now common tactic was once advanced knowledge, trickled down from the higher DPS echelons in this game. A2B? Yeah, now everyone has a cookie-cutter template for it: but, at some point, some very clever folks figured out the mechanics, and told the rest of us.
Much like you can't cure stupid, you can't nerf smart. So, don't.
And severely punish 99% of the STO populus in the process, who isn't in that select 1% highest DPS pool. If you 50k+ peeps want a challenge again, give me your Scimitar, and I'll nerf the sh*t out of it for you.
Personally, I love the new power creep. I paid thru my nose to get all these increased power skills, and now I want to keep them -- color me silly.
I'm not a 50k player. The fact that 50k players exist punishes 99% of STO players.
Without the worry of virtually unlimited DPS from skilled players, Cryptic would be freer to release and develop content that is legitimately social and sell more cool power boosts, which they can't do if skill allows some people to make such exponential gains that they need their own specially tuned content.
Heck, the timegates we have on so much of play are there for two basic reasons. Managing how often people play increases receptiveness to sales pitches. But without timegating, the most hardcore dominate in all progression.
A game where 10% of players do 1000% the damage of the other 90% is a huge part of why we have time gates, clunky currencies, slow content, stagnant improvements, and longstanding bugs that have to take a backburner to patching out whatever reward excess skill generates.
There will *always* be players "superior to other players to a point where they function better at everything." That is simply the way humanity works. But there's no alleged "gap so high that the weak cannot function." For one, because the two groups are not competing with each other. John and his gang fly in strata so far beyond my comprehension, I cannot even fathom it. What they do there doesn't hinder me in the least. Like, ever.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say this group of elite players you'd rather see go, you may want to rethink that, as pretty much every now common tactic was once advanced knowledge, trickled down from the higher DPS echelons in this game. A2B? Yeah, now everyone has a cookie-cutter template for it: but, at some point, some very clever folks figured out the mechanics, and told the rest of us.
Much like you can't cure stupid, you can't nerf smart. So, don't.
Of course there is. If you have 100k DPS players and you have 1k DPS players, you can't care adequately for the training, documentation, and care that those 1k DPS players need to improve.
Caring for stupid and nerfing smart is probably the most important thing we as humans can do in life. Smart is fine, actually, but smart doesn't have to be so self-interested.
Of course there is. If you have 100k DPS players and you have 1k DPS players, you can't care adequately for the training, documentation, and care that those 1k DPS players need to improve.
I see that exactly from the opposite angle. This *entire* game is built around the casual player! The 50k+ peeps don't need documentation: they're the ones *writing* it. :P Same for gear: the 50k+ peeps do fine in a blue Console, if need be: the rest of us merrily spend cash getting the latest and shiniest.
Caring for stupid and nerfing smart is probably the most important thing we as humans can do in life. Smart is fine, actually, but smart doesn't have to be so self-interested.
Again, I see that exactly from the opposite angle. A 2nd-Grader is not at all affected by what a 6th-Grader does: they're simply too far apart. In fact, I'll even up you one! As soon as the two groups reach comparable levels, THAT is when competion starts playing into it again! To wit, that 2nd-Grader is blissfully unaware of what that 6th-Grader is up to; and he doesn't care either. But he feels the (social) competition of those, say, in 3rd Grade. That is basic sociology. To translate that to STO: I couldn't care less about someone doing 50k; but if I'm doing 22k, and my neighbor does 23k, *then* I'm interested!
That , and there are (I'm sure) monetary issues , Dev team size issues that would need to be delegated to ... redoing the game basically , plus this game's life expectancy issues (I remember ppl once saying here that 8 years is the average lifecycle of an MMO) .
I've got your back on the basic idea here but don't put much stock in the "Average Lifecycle of an MMO."
Most of the greatly successful ones have yet to close or closed for reasons independent of their popularity or profitability. There is no standard lifecycle.
EQ is still running. WoW is still running. There are MUDs that have been running since the 80s and 90s. Some games that have been running for over 20 years have been non-profit or (small) money losers. Some profitable games died and many promising games never were given a chance to recoup investment due to other problems at a parent company or simply conflicting strategies.
Some have had facelifts. Some have been replaced by sequels. Some have run alongside sequels. Some have changed parent companies.
On a long enough timeline, games will probably tend to close or last past the point where you are interested in them.
Looking offline, you have something like Star Trek CCG. It lasted 8 years in its first edition form and another 5 in second edition (which included some backwards compatible elements; 1st edition continued on alongside 2nd edition for a total of 13 years of supported play). And now, 20 years after the launch, you have people continuing to host STCCG tournaments and a fan group releasing new fan cards.
I see that exactly from the opposite angle. This *entire* game is built around the casual player! The 50k+ peeps don't need documentation: they're the ones *writing* it. :P Same for gear: the 50k+ peeps do fine in a blue Console, if need be: the rest of us merrily spend cash getting the latest and shiniest.
Again, I see that exactly from the opposite angle. A 2nd-Grader is not at all affected by what a 6th-Grader does: they're simply too far apart. In fact, I'll even up you one! As soon as the two groups reach comparable levels, THAT is when competion starts playing into it again! To wit, that 2nd-Grader is blissfully unaware of what that 6th-Grader is up to; and he doesn't care either. But he feels the (social) competition of those, say, in 3rd Grade. That is basic sociology. To translate that to STO: I couldn't care less about someone doing 50k; but if I'm doing 22k, and my neighbor does 23k, *then* I'm interested!
A 2nd grader can't get an education if the teachers have to teach to a 6th grade level.
I don't find a cap to be the most eloquent solution but its unpopularity doesn't really factor into why... Nor do I really accept any of the arguments I've seen against a cap. That aside, I am getting myself into an argument over this thing because I think the reasons for ruling it out are wrong, not because I think it is the right move.
I think the problem it sets out to address is where the productive conversation could be had. But you have to be ready to set aside everything you enjoy about the game and try to look at this purely in terms of resources.
The devs ultimately did the right thing with the Klingons and the Klingon War for the most part, over the objections of many Klingon players, but it took them forever to get to where things are now. It should have been done sooner... and honestly, the game shouldn't have even had Klingons at launch. And I'm afraid the same is playing out with achievement-oriented gamers now.
I feel that old impulse coming back to say, "Cryptic, this relationship you have with this group isn't healthy. You need to stop leading them on and tell them that there are boundaries on how much you'll support what they're here for. Give them a reasonable framework and cap their importance as a development priority to something more reasonable."
It's not just a DPS problem. It's that ACHIEVEMENT has allowed to grow to an unhealthy level of influence in the community and design. A skill and achievement focus falls outside what the game's core competencies are and expends a lot of resources on a very few.
Against. And seriously, it would not be possible to do. "DPS" is a consequence of many factors that are not so easily controlled. Damage Reduction, Range, Timing, procs, they all play into what your final DPS will be, so where could you possibly start adding limits to hardcap DPS?
It would be wiser to find ways to create more viable builds, fixing subpar powers so they don't end up being "traps" for inexperienced players that have not studied combat log parses to figure out their optimums. Some powers may need to be rebalanced indeed because they are too mandatory. For example, Tactical Team's auto-shield distribution could be removed or weakened and instead the manual redistribution could be made much faster than t is now.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Just firing 8 White Mk XI beams at close range at 125 weapons power is a minimum of 6k DPS - as in, base damage after 125 weapons power level of minimum. Fill out the rest of the gear to a typical player specification, and 6k becomes between 7 and 9k DPS.
This is your 1.5x average player point - we have only got as far as just putting 8 beams and some equipment on a Cruiser.
With current DR powercreep, a Fleet Galaxy Retrofit (you know, the ship dismissed due to its lack of Tac anything) has been taken to 40k DPS.
Even if you capped at ten times the average player it is still too harsh a cap.
Normally, I'd say "Whatever, shove the OP players into their own hidey-hole somewhere in game to crotch-wave at each other", but there's been an awful lot of instances lately in normal queues and in the Mirror Event where the high DPS of some is both grotesque, and highly unfair. I've done many MI runs with just one person somehow managing to tear around the map taking everything out in a mere blink of an eye -- some times quite literally. That is simply not fair at all to the others on the team. Perhaps in these instances of all DPS types pugging a queue like MI for example, it would be beneficial to auto-scale the higher DPSers down to a more fair range.
I'd be much more for a DPS downscale in some queues than a cap. It's more fair to both sides.
Normally, I'd say "Whatever, shove the OP players into their own hidey-hole somewhere in game to crotch-wave at each other", but there's been an awful lot of instances lately in normal queues and in the Mirror Event where the high DPS of some is both grotesque, and highly unfair. I've done many MI runs with just one person somehow managing to tear around the map taking everything out in a mere blink of an eye -- some times quite literally. That is simply not fair at all to the others on the team. Perhaps in these instances of all DPS types pugging a queue like MI for example, it would be beneficial to auto-scale the higher DPSers down to a more fair range.
I'd be much more for a DPS downscale in some queues than a cap. It's more fair to both sides.
The reason why high DPSers are tearing through your Normal content is because it offers the most reward for the time spent.
Don't worry, after the nerfs they did to enemy HP all the high DPSers will migrate to Advanced and Elite where they can get 720 and 1440 dilithium.
Plus, limiting DPS is ridiculous because far too many factors play into DPS for it to be viable.
Not to mention limiting DPS is a kick in the nuts for people that like to min/max. Probably not going to happen, nor should it.
I'm more in favor of boosting the useless Boff abilities so that non-min/maxers won't be caught in the "that ability is for bloody idiots" trap.
Normally, I'd say "Whatever, shove the OP players into their own hidey-hole somewhere in game to crotch-wave at each other", but there's been an awful lot of instances lately in normal queues and in the Mirror Event where the high DPS of some is both grotesque, and highly unfair. I've done many MI runs with just one person somehow managing to tear around the map taking everything out in a mere blink of an eye -- some times quite literally. That is simply not fair at all to the others on the team. Perhaps in these instances of all DPS types pugging a queue like MI for example, it would be beneficial to auto-scale the higher DPSers down to a more fair range.
I'd be much more for a DPS downscale in some queues than a cap. It's more fair to both sides.
Someone makes your daily grind easier and you complain at them.
My bet is the breakdown for playerbase vs dps is something like
25% of the players do less then 3k dps
50% of the players do 3k-6k dps
23% of the players do 6k-10k
2% of the players do more then 10k dps.
From all the runs i have done in the old pug elites you would normaly have 1 player doing 3k or less dps, 2 or 3 doing 3-6k and then the last one most likly being a 6-10k player but sometimes a 10k+.
The 3k or below group is not even trying i am sure you could do this much dps in a free tier 5 ship using autofiring mk 11 green weapons without using boff skills.
The 3-6k group is trying but usually has major build or piloting issue holding them back.
The 6-10k group usually has a good build but is either held back by really bad gear or piloting issues.
The above 10k group tends to stick to premades but these people have a good build ok gear and don't have major piloting issues.
For reference all of my new alts i have created and used free tier 5 ships or mirror ships with mk 11 blue or green gear have done near or over 10k dps right away at level 50.
So if your in the 3k or under group gear is not the issue same goes for the 3-6k group and even somewhat for the 6-10k group.
Just as with the parses from the DPS faction, these guesses are meaningless.
The DPS crew is a selective group and it doesn't even come close to representing the community as a whole, just as the dude with the 1.2K Scimitar doesn't represent the low end.
At best we're talking best guesses.
My first runs at normals 'back in the day' were pathetic at 1200 dps. But in those days anyone who could break 10K was thought of as an exploiter. That was 2 years ago.
Enter the Jem Hadar Bug. Subtle changes to cannons. Console stacking. Duty officers.
10K bega 15K and so on.
30K was a miracle a year ago. Laughed at by more than a few. Remember the never ending threads on the 10K Vesta build?
My point is this. In 1940, the largest destructive force paled in comparison to 1945.
Power creep is inevitable (insert Team America's Kim Jun Ill).
Theres nothing wrong with it.
Just don't alter the game for the 1%'ers and the expense of everyone else.
In the 100K dps video we got a glimpse of what he had on hand. A glimpse. This guy spends a TRIBBLE-load of cash, or he's a shut-in that plays 24/7.
Don't build the game just for him. It kills the player base. If the queues in the past 2 weeks are any indication, there won't be enough players to support it soon enough.
It prompted action this week. Communication on a scale we have not seen in years. Reminds you of the last time they tried to tale away dil from the stfs in LoR.
Theres a way to go, and I'm suspecting they're listening now. The numbers don't lie. Only parsers built to subtract time to boost your output do.
The needs of the many outway the needs of the DPS'ers.
My two bits,
Admiral Thrax
PS. Are there any ultra high dps videos that are not a bunch of guys in scimitars?
This way, it will be fair for everyone, and mostly, players can focus on other build additions instead of the same routine.
let's say a 20,000 dps cap, this way you can focus on your engineering/science buffs as well.
:P Imagine that! A shield happy, plate armored escort, I give it a 3 thumbs up! :P
This, is the goal, of narrheehaw It's mission, to destroy new worlds and civilizations
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] And to boldly ruin, what no one has ruined before.
1. Some people enjoy ship builds that are designed to push the limits of DPSs, others enjoy using certain bridge officer abilities, some enjoy being healers, others love to do crowd control, some love to fly the ships from their favourite shows. No one should be forced to go down a path they dont want to. People should be free to play how they want, this is a game after all, not a job. I come here to unwind and have fun but also be challenged. How other people play is none of business as long as they dont troll a mission or act rude to others (which hardly ever happens).
2. One of the things I enjoy about pugging is that you never know what your team is going to be like. Sometimes you are with a team with high dps and the STF is a breeze. Other times the overall teals dps is lower and you have to think on your feet and adapt to how the situation unfolds. Both types of teams are fun, variety is what makes STFs so addictive to me.
3. How would you cap DPS? Do you mean the DPS in the overall STF or the DPS in the tool tips? I have two ships that have managed above 20k in ISA.
Dps is not only dependent on the gear but also on the pilot. My Aventine uses aux cannons, I get way higher dps by using gravity well and being close to my targets. Also my Guramba siege destroyers dps goes up when Im on a team with gravity wells and if someone heals me I can stay in the fight longer and my dps goes higher. You cant always guess the dps of a ship just by looking at it, it depends on the pilot and on the team. Also completing the STF quicker will give everyone a higher dps rating. When Im on a strong team my dps goes up.
How would you cap the dps in the situation? Would my weapons stop firing when i get to a certain threshold or would my weapons just become a lot weaker to make up for the fact that Ive done too much dps?
I suppose you could just cap the amour of dps that weapons show in the tooltip but then some people enjoy pushing the limits of their ships. If you cap the DPS of weapons a lot of people will switch to beam arrays with fire at will because although the dps of beam arrays shown in the tool tips is lower then cannons, overall they do more damage because they hit more targets. Therefore capping the DPS of weapons will achieve nothing .
4. I really dont care how other people play the game as long people treat each other decently and enjoy themselves. I think the minimum individual dps for ISA is about 8k now. I suppose its a good idea that people who want to play ISA at least try to hit for that but even then Ive been in loads of pugs where someone was doing about 3k. In my first pug playing ISA (back when you needed 13k minimum) someone did about 900dps but I dont care because we finished, got the optional and had fun.
Ive also being in pugs with a couple people getting 30k and above, I dont get why this would upset someone, so someone is doing more damage then you, so what? I suppose everyone likes to feel that they have contributed to the battle but artificially capping dps seems like a silly way to do it. I think any ship can contribute in a variety of ways, its great to hammer away at the borg while someone else is the tanking and they draw the aggro away from you, its also great to receive heals so I can stay in the fight longer.
Ultimately its about having fun and I would never berate someone for having lower dps or feel upset that someone has higher dps then me. The only time I get a bit annoyed is when someone lets a probe through in Khitomer but then I remind myself its a game and it doest matter.
Comments
DPS output is a very complicated product of numerous factors - gear (an even more complicated aspect in STO than in most MMOs because of how significantly weapons affect firing patterns), skills and traits (spread over all of STOs numerous branching progression system), relative positioning, and skill activation on both sides. Two identical ships on identical internet connections can respectively do 10k and 30k just based on skill activation efficiency.
So, how do you hard cap that?
Because of the complexity, you can't do it up front. Two identical ships, on identical internet connections, can be put out the difference between 10k and 50k just based on efficient skill activation. Giving both the same up front penalty completely defeats the intent of the cap.
You could just cut people off after 20,000 damage in any given second, but this creates a major handicap for players who hit that cap from a crit or burst, because it now creates a break in incoming damage on their target, allowing an exploitable healing window. An opposing healing cap has the same flaw. This is of course in addition to creating a nonsensical flow of gameplay.
You could try to average it, but the problem here is just how complex damage output is. You can't predict how much damage will happen in a second that hasn't happened yet. If you base this on previous seconds, this creates another significant flaw in burst based builds (all builds really, but it's worst in builds that do the most damage in the shortest times), where they get the highest penalty on their lowest damage output (unfairly penalizing them), and the lowest penalty on their highest damage output (completely defeating the point).
So... how?
And I'll be there when you learn that.
Then you actually start equipping and using defensive consoles?
Most RPGs have points where any value or stat is no longer worth pursuing and you have to shift your focus to other ones.
I absolutely love these ideas.
I've said before that the solution for players who want challenge isn't to create content that few players will ever see; it's to make the player's own ship more challenging at the extremes.
MMOs that utilize "rage"/"fury" as a power source often have penalties if you don't vent that off somehow.
DPS is controlled via limits on character stats - and all that entails. The devs have provided us with a very complex system with hundreds of doffs and many, many possible choices in our setup. Some care enough to learn what is good and what isn't. Others don't. It's not the good player's "fault" that they worked within the confines of the game's mechanics to construct the most effective system possible. It's the bad player's fault for doing nearly the opposite.. as most players have come up with setups that are so hideously bad as to be worse than the result of letting a blind monkey put their boat together.
You know what, I was sympathetic on the Tau Dewa/spec system nerf. But if players are in a game to be superior to other players to a point where they function better at everything and with a gap so high that the weak cannot function? Let them go. A game with no skilled players is better than a game which worships achievement.
And severely punish 99% of the STO populus in the process, who isn't in that select 1% highest DPS pool. If you 50k+ peeps want a challenge again, give me your Scimitar, and I'll nerf the sh*t out of it for you.
Personally, I love the new power creep. I paid thru my nose to get all these increased power skills, and now I want to keep them -- color me silly.
You'd cap damage (and regen) received per second as a percentage of health.
In any given second, say, only 25% of my (or any enemy's) maximum hull is susceptible to damage. The other 75% receives 100% immunity.
If I have 50k hull? All damage beyond 12.5k in any given second is shrugged off. All health improvement is capped at, say, 6.25k per healing source is shrugged off, meaning it requires multiple heals to surpass that.
Well , since you've asked (mind you this is all theory crafting) , here are the stages I would use :
1) Talk to the players .
Explain what I want to do , why I do it , why the game needs me to do it , what the shortcomings and the benefits would be and how long do I expect the whole process to take .
2) I'd make the enemies "register" X amount of maximum damage . (this would be the hardcap)
Anything above that (even as at this point there would be a whole lot on top of that) would not register .
The result of this would be that STF "dancing with Ferengi" would take a pre-determined 10 minutes -- and nobody could do it faster then 10 minutes .
3) I would lay out a plan to reduce the overall damage ability of the players , so that reaching the proverbial "X" damage would be an effort ... -- be that through not stacking consoles , reducing whatever that needs to be reduced to in order to make reaching "X" a challenge with the available gear & skills -- while at the same time , I'd try to ensure that the Easy , Medium , Hard level content stay just that .
Plus as I said , I'd up the hardcap every year to let that feeling of "progression" in , but in a controlled manner .
All in all , the idea of the cap is to create content that then you can balance the game for .
That is the issue that I see , when I hear ppl asking the devs to "fix the game" , because as long as the difference in player DPS is between 3K and 20-30-50K , then that is not what I call ballance , and I have no idea how I would realistically program a challenging and fun environments for a playerbase with such disparity .
Things were good when we had Mk X and Mk XI .
All that the Devs had to program / ballance for was then were a few powers that even then they had issues with balancing properly (Sci powers & Viral Matrix anyone ?) .
Mk XII , Doffs , Boffs , Reps & now whatever came with DR have turned this game into a virtual circus ... , and even players who don't know the "numbers" are sensing it through their performance as well as seeing the performance of others .
I also understand why so many here said "no" , even if I think they did so for the wrong reason (don't nerf me bro
The right reason (from my POV) is because there is a good chance the Devs would / could not make this work .
That , and there are (I'm sure) monetary issues , Dev team size issues that would need to be delegated to ... redoing the game basically , plus this game's life expectancy issues (I remember ppl once saying here that 8 years is the average lifecycle of an MMO) .
99% of the people who spend money would still never hit a reasonably set cap. 75k DPS isn't something that any amount of money will get you. The vast majority of players could spend thousands or tens of thousands of dollars and never get close to that.
There will *always* be players "superior to other players to a point where they function better at everything." That is simply the way humanity works. But there's no alleged "gap so high that the weak cannot function." For one, because the two groups are not competing with each other. John and his gang fly in strata so far beyond my comprehension, I cannot even fathom it. What they do there doesn't hinder me in the least. Like, ever.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say this group of elite players you'd rather see go, you may want to rethink that, as pretty much every now common tactic was once advanced knowledge, trickled down from the higher DPS echelons in this game. A2B? Yeah, now everyone has a cookie-cutter template for it: but, at some point, some very clever folks figured out the mechanics, and told the rest of us.
Much like you can't cure stupid, you can't nerf smart. So, don't.
I'm not a 50k player. The fact that 50k players exist punishes 99% of STO players.
Without the worry of virtually unlimited DPS from skilled players, Cryptic would be freer to release and develop content that is legitimately social and sell more cool power boosts, which they can't do if skill allows some people to make such exponential gains that they need their own specially tuned content.
Heck, the timegates we have on so much of play are there for two basic reasons. Managing how often people play increases receptiveness to sales pitches. But without timegating, the most hardcore dominate in all progression.
A game where 10% of players do 1000% the damage of the other 90% is a huge part of why we have time gates, clunky currencies, slow content, stagnant improvements, and longstanding bugs that have to take a backburner to patching out whatever reward excess skill generates.
Of course there is. If you have 100k DPS players and you have 1k DPS players, you can't care adequately for the training, documentation, and care that those 1k DPS players need to improve.
Caring for stupid and nerfing smart is probably the most important thing we as humans can do in life. Smart is fine, actually, but smart doesn't have to be so self-interested.
I see that exactly from the opposite angle. This *entire* game is built around the casual player! The 50k+ peeps don't need documentation: they're the ones *writing* it. :P Same for gear: the 50k+ peeps do fine in a blue Console, if need be: the rest of us merrily spend cash getting the latest and shiniest.
Again, I see that exactly from the opposite angle. A 2nd-Grader is not at all affected by what a 6th-Grader does: they're simply too far apart. In fact, I'll even up you one! As soon as the two groups reach comparable levels, THAT is when competion starts playing into it again! To wit, that 2nd-Grader is blissfully unaware of what that 6th-Grader is up to; and he doesn't care either. But he feels the (social) competition of those, say, in 3rd Grade. That is basic sociology. To translate that to STO: I couldn't care less about someone doing 50k; but if I'm doing 22k, and my neighbor does 23k, *then* I'm interested!
I've got your back on the basic idea here but don't put much stock in the "Average Lifecycle of an MMO."
Most of the greatly successful ones have yet to close or closed for reasons independent of their popularity or profitability. There is no standard lifecycle.
EQ is still running. WoW is still running. There are MUDs that have been running since the 80s and 90s. Some games that have been running for over 20 years have been non-profit or (small) money losers. Some profitable games died and many promising games never were given a chance to recoup investment due to other problems at a parent company or simply conflicting strategies.
Some have had facelifts. Some have been replaced by sequels. Some have run alongside sequels. Some have changed parent companies.
On a long enough timeline, games will probably tend to close or last past the point where you are interested in them.
Looking offline, you have something like Star Trek CCG. It lasted 8 years in its first edition form and another 5 in second edition (which included some backwards compatible elements; 1st edition continued on alongside 2nd edition for a total of 13 years of supported play). And now, 20 years after the launch, you have people continuing to host STCCG tournaments and a fan group releasing new fan cards.
Or at least it used to be, pre Geko-nerf.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
A 2nd grader can't get an education if the teachers have to teach to a 6th grade level.
I don't find a cap to be the most eloquent solution but its unpopularity doesn't really factor into why... Nor do I really accept any of the arguments I've seen against a cap. That aside, I am getting myself into an argument over this thing because I think the reasons for ruling it out are wrong, not because I think it is the right move.
I think the problem it sets out to address is where the productive conversation could be had. But you have to be ready to set aside everything you enjoy about the game and try to look at this purely in terms of resources.
The devs ultimately did the right thing with the Klingons and the Klingon War for the most part, over the objections of many Klingon players, but it took them forever to get to where things are now. It should have been done sooner... and honestly, the game shouldn't have even had Klingons at launch. And I'm afraid the same is playing out with achievement-oriented gamers now.
I feel that old impulse coming back to say, "Cryptic, this relationship you have with this group isn't healthy. You need to stop leading them on and tell them that there are boundaries on how much you'll support what they're here for. Give them a reasonable framework and cap their importance as a development priority to something more reasonable."
It's not just a DPS problem. It's that ACHIEVEMENT has allowed to grow to an unhealthy level of influence in the community and design. A skill and achievement focus falls outside what the game's core competencies are and expends a lot of resources on a very few.
It would be wiser to find ways to create more viable builds, fixing subpar powers so they don't end up being "traps" for inexperienced players that have not studied combat log parses to figure out their optimums. Some powers may need to be rebalanced indeed because they are too mandatory. For example, Tactical Team's auto-shield distribution could be removed or weakened and instead the manual redistribution could be made much faster than t is now.
It really is this simple to do DPS.
I'd be much more for a DPS downscale in some queues than a cap. It's more fair to both sides.
The reason why high DPSers are tearing through your Normal content is because it offers the most reward for the time spent.
Don't worry, after the nerfs they did to enemy HP all the high DPSers will migrate to Advanced and Elite where they can get 720 and 1440 dilithium.
Plus, limiting DPS is ridiculous because far too many factors play into DPS for it to be viable.
Not to mention limiting DPS is a kick in the nuts for people that like to min/max. Probably not going to happen, nor should it.
I'm more in favor of boosting the useless Boff abilities so that non-min/maxers won't be caught in the "that ability is for bloody idiots" trap.
Someone makes your daily grind easier and you complain at them.
Just as with the parses from the DPS faction, these guesses are meaningless.
The DPS crew is a selective group and it doesn't even come close to representing the community as a whole, just as the dude with the 1.2K Scimitar doesn't represent the low end.
At best we're talking best guesses.
My first runs at normals 'back in the day' were pathetic at 1200 dps. But in those days anyone who could break 10K was thought of as an exploiter. That was 2 years ago.
Enter the Jem Hadar Bug. Subtle changes to cannons. Console stacking. Duty officers.
10K bega 15K and so on.
30K was a miracle a year ago. Laughed at by more than a few. Remember the never ending threads on the 10K Vesta build?
My point is this. In 1940, the largest destructive force paled in comparison to 1945.
Power creep is inevitable (insert Team America's Kim Jun Ill).
Theres nothing wrong with it.
Just don't alter the game for the 1%'ers and the expense of everyone else.
In the 100K dps video we got a glimpse of what he had on hand. A glimpse. This guy spends a TRIBBLE-load of cash, or he's a shut-in that plays 24/7.
Don't build the game just for him. It kills the player base. If the queues in the past 2 weeks are any indication, there won't be enough players to support it soon enough.
It prompted action this week. Communication on a scale we have not seen in years. Reminds you of the last time they tried to tale away dil from the stfs in LoR.
Theres a way to go, and I'm suspecting they're listening now. The numbers don't lie. Only parsers built to subtract time to boost your output do.
The needs of the many outway the needs of the DPS'ers.
My two bits,
Admiral Thrax
PS. Are there any ultra high dps videos that are not a bunch of guys in scimitars?
This way, it will be fair for everyone, and mostly, players can focus on other build additions instead of the same routine.
let's say a 20,000 dps cap, this way you can focus on your engineering/science buffs as well.
It's mission, to destroy new worlds and civilizations
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
And to boldly ruin, what no one has ruined before.
20k is just picking a half decent ship and putting a half decent build on it. The current system is fair to everyone as is, no need to alter it.
2. One of the things I enjoy about pugging is that you never know what your team is going to be like. Sometimes you are with a team with high dps and the STF is a breeze. Other times the overall teals dps is lower and you have to think on your feet and adapt to how the situation unfolds. Both types of teams are fun, variety is what makes STFs so addictive to me.
3. How would you cap DPS? Do you mean the DPS in the overall STF or the DPS in the tool tips? I have two ships that have managed above 20k in ISA.
Dps is not only dependent on the gear but also on the pilot. My Aventine uses aux cannons, I get way higher dps by using gravity well and being close to my targets. Also my Guramba siege destroyers dps goes up when Im on a team with gravity wells and if someone heals me I can stay in the fight longer and my dps goes higher. You cant always guess the dps of a ship just by looking at it, it depends on the pilot and on the team. Also completing the STF quicker will give everyone a higher dps rating. When Im on a strong team my dps goes up.
How would you cap the dps in the situation? Would my weapons stop firing when i get to a certain threshold or would my weapons just become a lot weaker to make up for the fact that Ive done too much dps?
I suppose you could just cap the amour of dps that weapons show in the tooltip but then some people enjoy pushing the limits of their ships. If you cap the DPS of weapons a lot of people will switch to beam arrays with fire at will because although the dps of beam arrays shown in the tool tips is lower then cannons, overall they do more damage because they hit more targets. Therefore capping the DPS of weapons will achieve nothing .
4. I really dont care how other people play the game as long people treat each other decently and enjoy themselves. I think the minimum individual dps for ISA is about 8k now. I suppose its a good idea that people who want to play ISA at least try to hit for that but even then Ive been in loads of pugs where someone was doing about 3k. In my first pug playing ISA (back when you needed 13k minimum) someone did about 900dps but I dont care because we finished, got the optional and had fun.
Ive also being in pugs with a couple people getting 30k and above, I dont get why this would upset someone, so someone is doing more damage then you, so what? I suppose everyone likes to feel that they have contributed to the battle but artificially capping dps seems like a silly way to do it. I think any ship can contribute in a variety of ways, its great to hammer away at the borg while someone else is the tanking and they draw the aggro away from you, its also great to receive heals so I can stay in the fight longer.
Ultimately its about having fun and I would never berate someone for having lower dps or feel upset that someone has higher dps then me. The only time I get a bit annoyed is when someone lets a probe through in Khitomer but then I remind myself its a game and it doest matter.