i'me sure this has been brought up multiple times. but i have been watching all the star trek movies and shows. and i've noticed in the time periods of the enterprise-e in nemesis and such and they have far more weapons capability then the we have in game. in nemesis i would have to say. the sovereign had at least three forward torpedos. two to three pairs of phaser cannons on the front. and at least four single phaser banks. it also had two rear mounted phaser cannons at least one torpedo bay. and four more phasers. there also seemed to be various side mounted phaser arrays.
anyways what i'me trying to say is. i think we should get more than eight weapons mounted max. and even get the ability to add weapons to the sides not just the front of our ships of course this would probably mess with the balance but i feel that the ships in the game lack firepower. at least in visuals and we should be able to mount cannons on some of the later federation ships. some tier fours. and most tier fives.
What is everyone elses opinions on this?
0
Comments
Personally, I would have preferred if the game were designed with more banks doing less damage per weapon, but I understand why they did things they way they did. Imagine doing Crystaline with 10 ships firing 16 beam banks each. The old STO graphics engine could never render all of it.
Changing the system would require a complete overhaul not only of the combat system, but probably the game engine as well. I just don't see it happening.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
How much firepower a ship actually has would probably depend only on its class and the mark and rarity of the items.
It's mainly because they get the actual harpoints incorrect!
Pretty much agreed!
Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!
We come in peace, SHOOT TO KILL!
well, its even more stupid to see torpedoes firing from parts of the ship that are even smaller than the torpedoes emselves.. or piloting a shuttle firing phasers bigger than the ship itself (not to mention torpedoes, its ridiculous lol), and other dozens of things.. it is not so easy as you think lol. They will need to revamp not only the beam spots, but the torpedo ones , in every ship that is A LOT of work.. ende, never gonna happen. Well, if you give them money everytime they do that on one ship maybe they will think about it.. lol.
The problem with this is that STO is set up as a "1vs1" type of game. No matter what kind of ship you choose, be it a massive star cruiser or a nimble raider, the encounter is always balanced to be able to duke it out 1 vs 1 or in other terms you can play the entire game in either of those ships but you are facing the exact same content artificially setting to equal levels what never should be equal to begin with.
Play a 1vs1 in a game like Klingon Academy and pit a B'Rel against a Excelsior. Without pulling really insane tactics this should not even be worth a second thought. Players wanting to use a B'Rel had to play the game massively different, especially since their choice of ship is one that relies on pack tactics. In STO, however, the both ships are basically completely identical, can carry the same weapons and are just superficially different.
Mind you, of course power creep and all do make them different today, but the basic principle in STOs design is that they are interchangeable.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I think I know what the OP means, but the same effect can be gained not by adding more weapons to a ship - more by adding more weapon hardpoints to a ship model. And when a beam for example fires it's shots per cycle, have them use numerous hardpoints instead of just the one.
Spread out the fire to give the effect of more weapons being fired from the ship. It's for this reason that my typical cannon build uses a single DC up front. Combined with DHCs and turret fire it makes it more visually pleasing since all the forward facing hardpoints get used.
Yeah, let's have one melee weapon, one pistol/shotgun (15-25 meter range), and one rifle (30+ meter range).
And I strongly agree with this, because that whole weapon scheme of STO seems wrong to me too. They should have gone with SFC3 model instead as it is more plausible and not complicated at all as some like to think. And all that balance thing kinda ruins the game too. Nobody should be able to destroy Sovereign class with B'Rel for example, but due to that balance system people can actually do that. It is simply not right. In SFC3 a Sovereign class could probably take out 3 or more B'Rels, and several ships were required to defeat Borg Cube. So yeah, balance in this game is not welcome for me. If you want some balance you can always play strategy games like Starcraft and Command & Conquer where balance is necessary.
SUPPORTING PLAYABLE CARDASSIAN AND DOMINION FACTIONS!