I would argue that the biggest issue with engineering powers isn't their effectiveness, its there rank requirement.
The engineering field has fewer available powers than the other two and most of those at only in the ltc cmdr region.
I mean it only has 5 ensign level powers and 4 of those are on a shared cd..
I would suggest first moving the aux to powers down to start at ensign.
I would then change a2b to simply grant the cd reduction but not the power level increase. Then I would move the cd reduction to a timer allowing you to reduce all your cd,s by x% for x seconds and draining your aux power accordingly.
I would move aceton beam to the Lt ltc slots only much like grav well. I would also double its radiation damage.
No.
You got dem and aux2x which is available at lt, eptx which is available in ens, et at ens.
If we are going to use feliseans scimitar build, all the eng Bo's are offensive(dual eptw1, dem 1)while the sci Bo's are limited to he1 and either a tbr1 or tr1 at lt. That's an optimal Dps scenario.
If we are going to base the optimum eng Bo capabilities with aux2batt and aceton beam, I am going to tell you those abilities ain't optimal Dps/eng Bo damage abilities, which is the whole point of this thread - players complaining the lack of damage capabilities of eng bo abilities or should I say their lack understanding of eng Bo abilities.
The only time that eng bo is less useful if a player doesn't know how to optimize eng Bo abilities nor create a good eng base build.
Eh. There's tradeoff's either way. I could slap a tac or sci in a Guardian or Command Cruiser or Sheshar and probably make an effective tank out of it. I know I couldn't fit either in a Scimitar or Recluse and make it a tank. It's a question of where you get your survivability and where you get your damage.
Oh, absolutely. That was my point - an Engineering captain adds survivability (and power management), not the ability to tank.
For a newbie, an Engineer in an escort or a Tactical in a cruiser is likely to give better results than a Tactical in an escort or an Engineer in a cruiser. The former two give more balanced results, with the captain making up for the shortcomings of the ship, while the latter two go into extremes which require knowledgeable, experienced players to mitigate the shortcomings.
How many Engineer-in-cruiser "tanks" have we seen ask for help with DR content because they can't actually kill anything anymore? How many Tactical-in-escorts have we seen ask for help with DR content because they keep getting destroyed?
Of course, this thread isn't actually about Engineering captains, but I just couldn't leave dareau's statements unaddressed. Tying the Engineer career to threat is an unacceptable restriction on what they can do.
With regards to Eng BOff abilities, I think most of them are fine - the problem is the deceptive and worthless options.
I mean, just look at the Cdr options. For me, Cdr Eng seat automatically means AtSIF3 or DEM3. Aceton Beam 3 and Boarding Party 3 immediately come to mind as terrible alternatives to those, and until I looked at the list I didn't even recall RSP3 was an option since you'd only ever need RSP1.
Oh, absolutely. That was my point - an Engineering captain adds survivability (and power management), not the ability to tank.
For a newbie, an Engineer in an escort or a Tactical in a cruiser is likely to give better results than a Tactical in an escort or an Engineer in a cruiser. The former two give more balanced results, with the captain making up for the shortcomings of the ship, while the latter two go into extremes which require knowledgeable, experienced players to mitigate the shortcomings.
How many Engineer-in-cruiser "tanks" have we seen ask for help with DR content because they can't actually kill anything anymore? How many Tactical-in-escorts have we seen ask for help with DR content because they keep getting destroyed?
Of course, this thread isn't actually about Engineering captains, but I just couldn't leave dareau's statements unaddressed. Tying the Engineer career to threat is an unacceptable restriction on what they can do.
With regards to Eng BOff abilities, I think most of them are fine - the problem is the deceptive and worthless options.
I mean, just look at the Cdr options. For me, Cdr Eng seat automatically means AtSIF3 or DEM3. Aceton Beam 3 and Boarding Party 3 immediately come to mind as terrible alternatives to those, and until I looked at the list I didn't even recall RSP3 was an option since you'd only ever need RSP1.
I have nothing of value to add to this, since you were succinct and accurate, so I'll just say yup.
SCM - Crystal C. (S) - [00:12] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 8.63M(713.16K) - Fed Sci
Oh, absolutely. That was my point - an Engineering captain adds survivability (and power management), not the ability to tank.
For a newbie, an Engineer in an escort or a Tactical in a cruiser is likely to give better results than a Tactical in an escort or an Engineer in a cruiser. The former two give more balanced results, with the captain making up for the shortcomings of the ship, while the latter two go into extremes which require knowledgeable, experienced players to mitigate the shortcomings.
How many Engineer-in-cruiser "tanks" have we seen ask for help with DR content because they can't actually kill anything anymore? How many Tactical-in-escorts have we seen ask for help with DR content because they keep getting destroyed?
Of course, this thread isn't actually about Engineering captains, but I just couldn't leave dareau's statements unaddressed. Tying the Engineer career to threat is an unacceptable restriction on what they can do.
With regards to Eng BOff abilities, I think most of them are fine - the problem is the deceptive and worthless options.
I mean, just look at the Cdr options. For me, Cdr Eng seat automatically means AtSIF3 or DEM3. Aceton Beam 3 and Boarding Party 3 immediately come to mind as terrible alternatives to those, and until I looked at the list I didn't even recall RSP3 was an option since you'd only ever need RSP1.
Tactical in a escort I'm going to have to disagree, even in a defiant.You can tank just fine with lt engineering and lt science with current gear. While the same can not be said about a engineer in a cruiser, as far as dps goes. Not to say you can't get ok dps in galaxy class with a engineer, it's likely to have much less then even a science in a nebula.
Engineer's just lack any abilities that haven't been replaced by doff's, gear or traits. While alpha strike has not been marginalized nor have really has any science ability...
Oh, absolutely. That was my point - an Engineering captain adds survivability (and power management), not the ability to tank.
For a newbie, an Engineer in an escort or a Tactical in a cruiser is likely to give better results than a Tactical in an escort or an Engineer in a cruiser. The former two give more balanced results, with the captain making up for the shortcomings of the ship, while the latter two go into extremes which require knowledgeable, experienced players to mitigate the shortcomings.
How many Engineer-in-cruiser "tanks" have we seen ask for help with DR content because they can't actually kill anything anymore? How many Tactical-in-escorts have we seen ask for help with DR content because they keep getting destroyed?
Of course, this thread isn't actually about Engineering captains, but I just couldn't leave dareau's statements unaddressed. Tying the Engineer career to threat is an unacceptable restriction on what they can do.
With regards to Eng BOff abilities, I think most of them are fine - the problem is the deceptive and worthless options.
I mean, just look at the Cdr options. For me, Cdr Eng seat automatically means AtSIF3 or DEM3. Aceton Beam 3 and Boarding Party 3 immediately come to mind as terrible alternatives to those, and until I looked at the list I didn't even recall RSP3 was an option since you'd only ever need RSP1.
First off, I understand that all but the last 10% of a "true min-maxxer's DPS" comes from the ship/gear/BOffs/etc. That last 10% is Attack Pattern - Alpha and Go Down Fighting. Therefore, I am not trying to "pigeonhole" engineers (or cruisers) into tanks - they can hop escorts or fly a ship with enough tac slots to abuse BFaW - AP-B, and rack up the DPS numbers. Etc. etc.
Because Science captains can do the exact same thing, and put out exactly the same DPS as an engineer, perhaps a touch more because of sensor scan debuffing things, and subnuking away defenses.
However, the purpose of this thread (to me at least) is to attempt a move away from "escorts online aka weapon-oriented DeePS fest" and into something where, if the end-all-be-all is DPS, at least have a variety of ways to accumulate it.
As I said, Tacticals / Escorts have "ruled the DPS roost" with their weapons and damage buffs. Sciences are starting to close in with things like this "radiation" damage, Sci Crafting L15 particle manipulator trait, combined with the abilty to slot nigh-400 Part Gens (so 100% exotic damage crit rate) - aka "DeePS via magic", instead of the tactical's DeePS via weapons enhanced with the pile o'buffs.
So, if that's the case, what should the Engineer's / Cruiser's "trick" be to catch up to the Joneses in the DPS race?
If you at least want to pay lip service to the trinity system STO almost wants to implement, then find a way to fit "tank" into the game. Since half of "tanking" is being the most survivable, and the other half revolves around Aggro (threat) management, well, wouldn't an obvious solution be "fix tanking, and reward engineers that tank?"
If you want, you can make the engineer's DPS catch-up system be related instead to the power management aspects of the Engineer class and/or cruisers. Basically, give engies a built-in AMP to go with AMP warp cores.
We could attempt yet another batch of DOff powers - this time drawing inspiration from say command abilities - so that these "underperforming powers" like Aceton Beam and Boarding Parties suddenly get abilities like "torps which hit during the aceton beam effect do massive amounts of shield damage" or "boarding party shuttles escort the cruiser until a target gets within 3km at which point the shuttles begin their attack".
I'm just trying to bat ideas around, not to convert from "Escorts Online" cookie-cutterism to "Lip Service Trinity" cookie-cutterism.
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
Trying to shoehorn the game into a Trinity style no longer works in STO. It stopped existing once the first Escort got a LtCdr ENG station... The C-Store Akira. That was a groundbreaking event in the game, IMHO, because it broke all the rules. Before, Escorts, Cruisers, Science Vessels did not have anything more than Lt outside the primary skill slots. Until the Akira came out, no Cruiser had LtCdr TAC/SCI, only the Prometheus had LtCdr SCI as an Escort, but that's not quite the same as a LtCdr ENG station. No Science Vessel had LtCdr TAC/SCI. Once the Akira came out, Trinity died in STO. We now had an Escort that could take the punishment. And it got worse from that point on.
It's impossible for there to be classic Trinity play when at T6, it's commonplace to have LtCdr TAC outside the primary skillslots of a ship. Hell, we have for example the Guardian, that has LtCdr TAC *and* SCI to complement its Cmdr ENG.
In STO, the Glass Cannons can Tank and the Tanks can DPS like a mother****er.
However, the purpose of this thread (to me at least) is to attempt a move away from "escorts online aka weapon-oriented DeePS fest" and into something where, if the end-all-be-all is DPS, at least have a variety of ways to accumulate it.
It's about Engineering Bridge Officer Abilities (though the OP called them skills), which is entirely different and independent of captain careers.
I take issue with your casual linking of the Tactical career to Escort ship types and Engineer career to Cruiser ship types. There is no relation there, and as I explicitly stated - newbies will do better with a Tactical Cruiser or Engineer Escort than either, simply by virtue of balancing offense with defense.
In STO, the Glass Cannons can Tank and the Tanks can DPS like a mother****er.
Glass cannons can tank if you can consider Top DPS Scimitar using valdore a glass cannon, which they are not. Because once you have the ability to tank like a Top DPS scimitar using a valdore, you aint a glass cannon.
However, a dedicated tank in ISA is really not needed. Although one way another someone will tank/take aggro due to DPS or the threat they have in their build. Of course that is if you limit yourself to very easy missions like ISA. The reason why there are more easy missions because a lot whine and make a big deal about it when the devs make harder missions. So in a sense, the whining playerbase is the reason why we have so easy missions like ISA and people play more of ISA than HSE.
I have seen dedicated build tanks take away from mid to high DPS. The tanks themselves deal DPS, It is expected considering once piloting is polished, a tank should be doing more than 30k+ DPS in ISA. You can say tanks are not noob friendly ships due to the requirement of understanding the level of game mechanics.
Going back to your trinity, in practice in game, the Damage dealer and support have a role in ISA. While tanks depending of your definition of tanks exists, except they belong to the damage dealer category. While in elite missions like HSE, a tank regardless if it is a tac scimitar/eng scimitar/eng sheshar, with the most threat taking majority of the incoming damage.
Hey, don't forget ground. My engineering officer is off my away team until such time that they suck less. Four tac and one science officer is superior to something 'balanced'.
This x1000, I have 1 engineer on my away team who is kitted out only with command powers only. Engineers are needed less on the ground than in space imo, it's a syptom of the games difficulty, why do i need heals when i can just zerg through 90% of the content?
On the rare occasions i need a heal a small hypo is plenty
Comments
No.
You got dem and aux2x which is available at lt, eptx which is available in ens, et at ens.
If we are going to use feliseans scimitar build, all the eng Bo's are offensive(dual eptw1, dem 1)while the sci Bo's are limited to he1 and either a tbr1 or tr1 at lt. That's an optimal Dps scenario.
If we are going to base the optimum eng Bo capabilities with aux2batt and aceton beam, I am going to tell you those abilities ain't optimal Dps/eng Bo damage abilities, which is the whole point of this thread - players complaining the lack of damage capabilities of eng bo abilities or should I say their lack understanding of eng Bo abilities.
The only time that eng bo is less useful if a player doesn't know how to optimize eng Bo abilities nor create a good eng base build.
Oh, absolutely. That was my point - an Engineering captain adds survivability (and power management), not the ability to tank.
For a newbie, an Engineer in an escort or a Tactical in a cruiser is likely to give better results than a Tactical in an escort or an Engineer in a cruiser. The former two give more balanced results, with the captain making up for the shortcomings of the ship, while the latter two go into extremes which require knowledgeable, experienced players to mitigate the shortcomings.
How many Engineer-in-cruiser "tanks" have we seen ask for help with DR content because they can't actually kill anything anymore? How many Tactical-in-escorts have we seen ask for help with DR content because they keep getting destroyed?
Of course, this thread isn't actually about Engineering captains, but I just couldn't leave dareau's statements unaddressed. Tying the Engineer career to threat is an unacceptable restriction on what they can do.
With regards to Eng BOff abilities, I think most of them are fine - the problem is the deceptive and worthless options.
I mean, just look at the Cdr options. For me, Cdr Eng seat automatically means AtSIF3 or DEM3. Aceton Beam 3 and Boarding Party 3 immediately come to mind as terrible alternatives to those, and until I looked at the list I didn't even recall RSP3 was an option since you'd only ever need RSP1.
I have nothing of value to add to this, since you were succinct and accurate, so I'll just say yup.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
Tactical in a escort I'm going to have to disagree, even in a defiant.You can tank just fine with lt engineering and lt science with current gear. While the same can not be said about a engineer in a cruiser, as far as dps goes. Not to say you can't get ok dps in galaxy class with a engineer, it's likely to have much less then even a science in a nebula.
Engineer's just lack any abilities that haven't been replaced by doff's, gear or traits. While alpha strike has not been marginalized nor have really has any science ability...
First off, I understand that all but the last 10% of a "true min-maxxer's DPS" comes from the ship/gear/BOffs/etc. That last 10% is Attack Pattern - Alpha and Go Down Fighting. Therefore, I am not trying to "pigeonhole" engineers (or cruisers) into tanks - they can hop escorts or fly a ship with enough tac slots to abuse BFaW - AP-B, and rack up the DPS numbers. Etc. etc.
Because Science captains can do the exact same thing, and put out exactly the same DPS as an engineer, perhaps a touch more because of sensor scan debuffing things, and subnuking away defenses.
However, the purpose of this thread (to me at least) is to attempt a move away from "escorts online aka weapon-oriented DeePS fest" and into something where, if the end-all-be-all is DPS, at least have a variety of ways to accumulate it.
As I said, Tacticals / Escorts have "ruled the DPS roost" with their weapons and damage buffs. Sciences are starting to close in with things like this "radiation" damage, Sci Crafting L15 particle manipulator trait, combined with the abilty to slot nigh-400 Part Gens (so 100% exotic damage crit rate) - aka "DeePS via magic", instead of the tactical's DeePS via weapons enhanced with the pile o'buffs.
So, if that's the case, what should the Engineer's / Cruiser's "trick" be to catch up to the Joneses in the DPS race?
If you at least want to pay lip service to the trinity system STO almost wants to implement, then find a way to fit "tank" into the game. Since half of "tanking" is being the most survivable, and the other half revolves around Aggro (threat) management, well, wouldn't an obvious solution be "fix tanking, and reward engineers that tank?"
If you want, you can make the engineer's DPS catch-up system be related instead to the power management aspects of the Engineer class and/or cruisers. Basically, give engies a built-in AMP to go with AMP warp cores.
We could attempt yet another batch of DOff powers - this time drawing inspiration from say command abilities - so that these "underperforming powers" like Aceton Beam and Boarding Parties suddenly get abilities like "torps which hit during the aceton beam effect do massive amounts of shield damage" or "boarding party shuttles escort the cruiser until a target gets within 3km at which point the shuttles begin their attack".
I'm just trying to bat ideas around, not to convert from "Escorts Online" cookie-cutterism to "Lip Service Trinity" cookie-cutterism.
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
It's impossible for there to be classic Trinity play when at T6, it's commonplace to have LtCdr TAC outside the primary skillslots of a ship. Hell, we have for example the Guardian, that has LtCdr TAC *and* SCI to complement its Cmdr ENG.
In STO, the Glass Cannons can Tank and the Tanks can DPS like a mother****er.
It's about Engineering Bridge Officer Abilities (though the OP called them skills), which is entirely different and independent of captain careers.
I take issue with your casual linking of the Tactical career to Escort ship types and Engineer career to Cruiser ship types. There is no relation there, and as I explicitly stated - newbies will do better with a Tactical Cruiser or Engineer Escort than either, simply by virtue of balancing offense with defense.
Glass cannons can tank if you can consider Top DPS Scimitar using valdore a glass cannon, which they are not. Because once you have the ability to tank like a Top DPS scimitar using a valdore, you aint a glass cannon.
However, a dedicated tank in ISA is really not needed. Although one way another someone will tank/take aggro due to DPS or the threat they have in their build. Of course that is if you limit yourself to very easy missions like ISA. The reason why there are more easy missions because a lot whine and make a big deal about it when the devs make harder missions. So in a sense, the whining playerbase is the reason why we have so easy missions like ISA and people play more of ISA than HSE.
I have seen dedicated build tanks take away from mid to high DPS. The tanks themselves deal DPS, It is expected considering once piloting is polished, a tank should be doing more than 30k+ DPS in ISA. You can say tanks are not noob friendly ships due to the requirement of understanding the level of game mechanics.
Going back to your trinity, in practice in game, the Damage dealer and support have a role in ISA. While tanks depending of your definition of tanks exists, except they belong to the damage dealer category. While in elite missions like HSE, a tank regardless if it is a tac scimitar/eng scimitar/eng sheshar, with the most threat taking majority of the incoming damage.
This x1000, I have 1 engineer on my away team who is kitted out only with command powers only. Engineers are needed less on the ground than in space imo, it's a syptom of the games difficulty, why do i need heals when i can just zerg through 90% of the content?
On the rare occasions i need a heal a small hypo is plenty
My 2 cents.