Bridge Officer Training

jivedutch

Currently on Holodeck it is possible to have " craft" all available training manuals on one character per class.
It was feasible to skill a toon so all class-specific manuals are craftable, and still have some points left to improve character viability.

In the new system it seems to be required to make 3 characters per class to be able to craft all available manuals because of the high investment per track per class required to craft the higher tier training manuals.

Would need to test 9 different charbuilds on tribble when available, but now it seems odd to actually play the endgame content with chars that are specced completely different from the main track.

I do hope this gets a look at ,

mhall85

Yes, fully agree. I really want to hear @borticuscryptic explain the rationale behind this. He almost did on his P1 interview, but I'm afraid many are overlooking this.

While it is true that some of a captain's profession-specific BOFF manuals are located in other professions' spec tree... the OP is correct that, if a captain so chooses, they can easily obtain the unlocks for all available BOFF manuals. This is impossible in the new system. I see a few problems with this:

1. No captain will max out a tree outside of their profession. There is the debate about whether or not players will max out their own profession's skill tree... and many are already saying they won't. If this is the case, what exactly leads one to think that a player will max out the tree of another profession? What tactical captain will fly around with the majority of their points in science?
2. The push for "build diversity" is not a good reason for this. I'm not a DPSer. I want my ships to perform well, and I take nods from some high-performance builds, but I kinda do my own thing. This is why I'm excited about this skill revamp... given the mix of new skills and unlocks, there is already enough incentive to create diverse builds. Locking BOFF skills behind other trees is a step too far. Not only is this taking away an ability we had with the old system...
3. This will impact the player economy in a bad way. I love the fact that this system will add new BOFF manual recipes. This is good. The fact that a tactical captain has to spend 17 points in science to gain BFAW3, however, makes no sense. This will cause many manuals to skyrocket in price on the exchange. Some of them are bad already, but this will likely cause more to become this way, especially if I have to make FOUR characters in one profession to mitigate this.

The UI isn't terrible, and the mechanic is fine... it's just the spread of powers is the problem. This new system will make the acquisition of some manuals nearly impossible for some players. My solution: simply make every BOFF power unlock 3 manuals of that given profession, instead of 1-of-3 for every profession. This will still encourage players to experiment with new builds, and give a little more incentive to strive for the new Ultimates.

valethar

Taking manuals away was a poor design decision. Cryptic/PWE already takes a lot of flak for being greedy and P2W, and now they do something that lends credence to that by doing something that appears to be designed to encourage sales of character slots.

I don't see any real benefit to taking things like this away to be honest. The skill system needed to be looked at, but this wasn't one of the parts that needed to be fixed. Changing things for the sake of change is never a good idea, especially when it's going to have such a negative impact on the players and the economy, which is already inflated out of control.

alcyoneserene

In addition, how do we craft Type 3 of these ground Boff training manuals in the new system? Unlocks only go as far as this:

Sci - Nanite Health Monitor II
Sci - Dampening Field II
ENG - Combat Supply II
ENG - Support Drone Fabrication II

asindar1

Well, outside of the lockbox skills like Kemocite, you currently on Holodeck have 3 ways to get BOFF skills.

1. BOFF trainer: sells rank 1 and 2 of most skills.
2. Captain Skills: can use R&D to craft manuals that they have unlocked due to unlocking certain skills to 6.
3. BOFF Recruitment: BOFF gained from doff missions, episode missions, etc., can be converted to manuals. These have some of the rank 3 skills that Captain can't currently train like Torpedo Spread III. (Which I believe you get in the new skill revamp but lose High Yield III)

So any missing skills can be put of the BOFF trainer or be allowed to be placed on the random BOFF you acquire over time.

nebfab

The current system (after Bort pushed all the manuals down on the unlock tracks) isn't actually all that bad. You can unlock all but 1 space manual with a fairly sensible build, which is actually better than the current system on holo, which may require a "mule" build for sci...

I wasn't happy with it before this change, but I'm OK with the new system now.

seaofsorrows

This is an enormous fault in the new system.

As a Tactical Captain, I shouldn't have to put 17 points in Science so that I can make Beam Fire At Will III Manuals, it's extremely limiting, narrows build choices and just overall makes no sense. I prefer a build that's heavier in Tactical and Engineering and fairly light on Science. Under the current system, I either have to sacrifice my ability to train officers or play a build I don't want just to get the manuals.

I have already started crafting extra manuals on my Holodeck characters to get them in storage before they're taken away. This is definitely one part of the new system that I don't think works. Tactical Skill manuals should all be in the Tactical tree. Honestly, the entire thing feels like a way to force me to purchase respec tokens. You have to respec to a build you don't want, make the manuals and then spec back into what you actually want. It's a very counter intuitive system.

nikeix

Only if you think that a single character should be entirely self sufficient. It might be an effort to encourage selling them on the exchange or rewarding a wider variety of captains in your character stable.

meimeitoo

seaofsorrows wrote: »

This is an enormous fault in the new system.

As a Tactical Captain, I shouldn't have to put 17 points in Science so that I can make Beam Fire At Will III Manuals, it's extremely limiting, narrows build choices and just overall makes no sense. I prefer a build that's heavier in Tactical and Engineering and fairly light on Science. Under the current system, I either have to sacrifice my ability to train officers or play a build I don't want just to get the manuals.

I have already started crafting extra manuals on my Holodeck characters to get them in storage before they're taken away. This is definitely one part of the new system that I don't think works. Tactical Skill manuals should all be in the Tactical tree. Honestly, the entire thing feels like a way to force me to purchase respec tokens. You have to respec to a build you don't want, make the manuals and then spec back into what you actually want. It's a very counter intuitive system.

100% Agreed! Tactical Captains (at Lv. 60) should be able to craft all Tactical manuals (sans maybe a few lockboxs skills, like KLW; but who wants the latter anyay, after Bort killed that too?! But I digress). Same for Engineers: I shouldn't need 17 points in Science, in order to be able to craft my own Profession's skills.

This is an aspect about the new revamp I missed, so thanks for bringing it to my attention.

P.S. Please tell me I can still buy manuals on exhange, right?!

turbomagnus

nikeix wrote: »

Only if you think that a single character should be entirely self sufficient. It might be an effort to encourage selling them on the exchange or rewarding a wider variety of captains in your character stable.

Or it could be to try and convince players to break out of 'comfort zones' and experiment more - Tac captains with Science focus, Eng captains with a twist of Tactical, Science captains with a grounding in Engineering, things like that.

seaofsorrows

nikeix wrote: »

Only if you think that a single character should be entirely self sufficient. It might be an effort to encourage selling them on the exchange or rewarding a wider variety of captains in your character stable.

How would that make me self sufficient?

As a Tactical Officer, if I want to train my Boffs in Directed Energy Modulation III, Gravity Well 3, etc.. I have to find a character of that profession or buy them off the exchange. We're not suggesting that a Tactical Officer should be able to craft every manual, but they should be able to craft all Tactical Skills. Engineers should be able to make all the Engineering modules, etc.

There is absolutely no logical reason to say that only a hybrid character can craft certain manuals. No one is asking to 'do it all' themselves, but we should be able to 'do what we do.'

quepan

i agree , i was taking my engineer thru the tree to see what he needed to have in order to continue to make the manuals to put certain build together like he was a new character , and WOW skills all over the place in order to get those unlocks . O_0 this whole system doenst seem to take actual players consideration , i think certain devs need to acutally play there game instead of just testing a component of it . this is a players perspective. while it might look ok from a systems perspective not from a player

samt1996

This isn't a concern for me with how the market works... it's just an added bonus/incentive to skill a certain way. I highly doubt training manuals will EVER be in short supply on the exchange.

nebfab

Proposed fix (only half-kidding:) Rename sci, eng and tac skills to foo, bar and baz skills.

Why would anyone want a build without shields, power, engines, flowcaps or EPS? "'cause I'm a tac captain and should pick only tac skills?" The old system didn't work that way either, most popular skill builds were actually fairly balanced, and no one complained... And if you pick all those things under the new system, you will get most manuals easily. (Again, with the current requirements, the original ones were horrible.)

seaofsorrows

nebfab wrote: »

Proposed fix (only half-kidding:) Rename sci, eng and tac skills to foo, bar and baz skills.

Why would anyone want a build without shields, power, engines, flowcaps or EPS? "'cause I'm a tac captain and should pick only tac skills?" The old system didn't work that way either, most popular skill builds were actually fairly balanced, and no one complained... And if you pick all those things under the new system, you will get most manuals easily. (Again, with the current requirements, the original ones were horrible.)

Again, someone that doesn't understand the problem.

No one is saying they want to put all their points in 1 tree, frankly.. that would be downright stupid.

But for example, Beam Fire At Will III. Obviously, an important skill for Tactical Captains right?

In order for my Tactical Captain to be able to train in that top tier Tac Ability, I have to put 17 points in Science. 17.

Of course I'm going to put some points in Science. I spec into shield capacity, hardness and regen, I also spec into Drain for my leech. I also use Engineering for Hull strength/repair, EPS, and power boosts. But with 46 total points to go around, and knowing I need to put the bulk of my points in Tactical followed by Engineering, there is no way I can afford 17 points toward science. If I put those points in, I would have to sacrifice things like Warp Core Potential to divert those points to Science and put them into skills I don't want or need.

There is no reason at all that a Tier 3 Tactical skill should take 17 points specced into Science. Having this requirement is intended to encourage build diversity and instead does the exact opposite.

samt1996

Just because I can...

Shield enhancement skills - 12
Damage drop off reduction for energy weapons - 3
Flow caps - 2

That's 17 right there and a few others exist you might wanna look into like the cooldown one (soon to be increased to 20%) and the one that negates critical hits and reflects damage.

Point being I think you'll find more In science worth using than you seem to think.

rmy1081

seaofsorrows wrote: »

nebfab wrote: »

Proposed fix (only half-kidding:) Rename sci, eng and tac skills to foo, bar and baz skills.

Why would anyone want a build without shields, power, engines, flowcaps or EPS? "'cause I'm a tac captain and should pick only tac skills?" The old system didn't work that way either, most popular skill builds were actually fairly balanced, and no one complained... And if you pick all those things under the new system, you will get most manuals easily. (Again, with the current requirements, the original ones were horrible.)

Again, someone that doesn't understand the problem.

No one is saying they want to put all their points in 1 tree, frankly.. that would be downright stupid.

But for example, Beam Fire At Will III. Obviously, an important skill for Tactical Captains right?

In order for my Tactical Captain to be able to train in that top tier Tac Ability, I have to put 17 points in Science. 17.

Of course I'm going to put some points in Science. I spec into shield capacity, hardness and regen, I also spec into Drain for my leech. I also use Engineering for Hull strength/repair, EPS, and power boosts. But with 46 total points to go around, and knowing I need to put the bulk of my points in Tactical followed by Engineering, there is no way I can afford 17 points toward science. If I put those points in, I would have to sacrifice things like Warp Core Potential to divert those points to Science and put them into skills I don't want or need.

There is no reason at all that a Tier 3 Tactical skill should take 17 points specced into Science. Having this requirement is intended to encourage build diversity and instead does the exact opposite.

I have to disagree. I have a tac/tac character that won't be able to unlock FAW3 but I do have a tac/sci character that will. We shouldn't be able to do it all on one character. That's the build diversity.

markhawkman

seaofsorrows wrote: »

nebfab wrote: »

Proposed fix (only half-kidding:) Rename sci, eng and tac skills to foo, bar and baz skills.

Why would anyone want a build without shields, power, engines, flowcaps or EPS? "'cause I'm a tac captain and should pick only tac skills?" The old system didn't work that way either, most popular skill builds were actually fairly balanced, and no one complained... And if you pick all those things under the new system, you will get most manuals easily. (Again, with the current requirements, the original ones were horrible.)

Again, someone that doesn't understand the problem.

No one is saying they want to put all their points in 1 tree, frankly.. that would be downright stupid.

But for example, Beam Fire At Will III. Obviously, an important skill for Tactical Captains right?

In order for my Tactical Captain to be able to train in that top tier Tac Ability, I have to put 17 points in Science. 17.

Of course I'm going to put some points in Science. I spec into shield capacity, hardness and regen, I also spec into Drain for my leech. I also use Engineering for Hull strength/repair, EPS, and power boosts. But with 46 total points to go around, and knowing I need to put the bulk of my points in Tactical followed by Engineering, there is no way I can afford 17 points toward science. If I put those points in, I would have to sacrifice things like Warp Core Potential to divert those points to Science and put them into skills I don't want or need.

There is no reason at all that a Tier 3 Tactical skill should take 17 points specced into Science. Having this requirement is intended to encourage build diversity and instead does the exact opposite.

Umm.... since you only get 46 points to spend, it also means it's impossible for a single character to have enough points in each field to craft everything(you'd need 17*3= 51 when you only have 46).,... probably by design.

alcyoneserene wrote: »

In addition, how do we craft Type 3 of these ground Boff training manuals in the new system? Unlocks only go as far as this:

Sci - Nanite Health Monitor II
Sci - Dampening Field II
ENG - Combat Supply II
ENG - Support Drone Fabrication II

Did these ever have a tier 3?

markhawkman

seaofsorrows wrote: »

nebfab wrote: »

Proposed fix (only half-kidding:) Rename sci, eng and tac skills to foo, bar and baz skills.

Why would anyone want a build without shields, power, engines, flowcaps or EPS? "'cause I'm a tac captain and should pick only tac skills?" The old system didn't work that way either, most popular skill builds were actually fairly balanced, and no one complained... And if you pick all those things under the new system, you will get most manuals easily. (Again, with the current requirements, the original ones were horrible.)

Again, someone that doesn't understand the problem.

No one is saying they want to put all their points in 1 tree, frankly.. that would be downright stupid.

But for example, Beam Fire At Will III. Obviously, an important skill for Tactical Captains right?

In order for my Tactical Captain to be able to train in that top tier Tac Ability, I have to put 17 points in Science. 17.

Of course I'm going to put some points in Science. I spec into shield capacity, hardness and regen, I also spec into Drain for my leech. I also use Engineering for Hull strength/repair, EPS, and power boosts. But with 46 total points to go around, and knowing I need to put the bulk of my points in Tactical followed by Engineering, there is no way I can afford 17 points toward science. If I put those points in, I would have to sacrifice things like Warp Core Potential to divert those points to Science and put them into skills I don't want or need.

There is no reason at all that a Tier 3 Tactical skill should take 17 points specced into Science. Having this requirement is intended to encourage build diversity and instead does the exact opposite.

Umm.... since you only get 46 points to spend, it also means it's impossible for a single character to have enough points in each field to craft everything(you'd need 17*3= 51 when you only have 46).,... probably by design.

alcyoneserene wrote: »

In addition, how do we craft Type 3 of these ground Boff training manuals in the new system? Unlocks only go as far as this:

Sci - Nanite Health Monitor II
Sci - Dampening Field II
ENG - Combat Supply II
ENG - Support Drone Fabrication II

Did these ever have a tier 3?

seaofsorrows

markhawkman wrote: »

Umm.... since you only get 46 points to spend, it also means it's impossible for a single character to have enough points in each field to craft everything(you'd need 17*3= 51 when you only have 46).,... probably by design.

And again, for the 3rd time in this thread.. no one is talking about crafting everything.

No Captain should be able to craft every manual and that's not what anyone is asking for. The issue is skills being in the wrong tree. Fire At Will is a Tactical Skill, putting heavy specialization into that school should grant it's training unlock, not science.

All Tactical Manuals should be in the Tactical Tree, all Engineering Module should be in Engineering and all Science in Science. No one is saying that one character should get everything, but a Captain putting the bulk of his points in Tactical Skills should be able to make any Tactical Manual. Requiring 17 points of Science to make a Tactical Manual makes no sense.

Investing heavily in a school should grant all the manuals for that school, it's that simple. I agree that one captain should not be able to craft every manual, you should have to invest heavily in one school to get the Tier III manuals of that type.

nebfab

seaofsorrows wrote: »

nebfab wrote: »

Proposed fix (only half-kidding:) Rename sci, eng and tac skills to foo, bar and baz skills.

Why would anyone want a build without shields, power, engines, flowcaps or EPS? "'cause I'm a tac captain and should pick only tac skills?" The old system didn't work that way either, most popular skill builds were actually fairly balanced, and no one complained... And if you pick all those things under the new system, you will get most manuals easily. (Again, with the current requirements, the original ones were horrible.)

Again, someone that doesn't understand the problem.

No one is saying they want to put all their points in 1 tree, frankly.. that would be downright stupid.

But for example, Beam Fire At Will III. Obviously, an important skill for Tactical Captains right?

In order for my Tactical Captain to be able to train in that top tier Tac Ability, I have to put 17 points in Science. 17.

True, except that was the number from the week-old version. The current requirement is 12 picks.

This build unlocks everything, except BO3 on a tac captain, and while a bit too eng-heavy, it's not obviously gimped in any way as far as I can tell.

nebfab

Just double-checked that the next-to-last unlock is indeed BFaW3. It is.

rmy1081

seaofsorrows wrote: »

[...]

All Tactical Manuals should be in the Tactical Tree, all Engineering Module should be in Engineering and all Science in Science. No one is saying that one character should get everything, but a Captain putting the bulk of his points in Tactical Skills should be able to make any Tactical Manual. Requiring 17 points of Science to make a Tactical Manual makes no sense.

Investing heavily in a school should grant all the manuals for that school, it's that simple. I agree that one captain should not be able to craft every manual, you should have to invest heavily in one school to get the Tier III manuals of that type.

Having all tac manuals only under the tac tree will kill build diversity. Like I said in an above post. My tac/tac can't unlock FAW3 but my tac/sci character can. Moving those unlocks around will make players build out of their captain's career box which is something very unique to STO. Besides those manuals are tradeable and sellable. If one can't create a manual just buy/trade from someone else.

alcyoneserene

markhawkman wrote: »

Did these ever have a tier 3?

No, guess not, though I would have thought now would have been a good time to introduce it.

alcyoneserene

rmy1081 wrote: »

Besides those manuals are tradeable and sellable. If one can't create a manual just buy/trade from someone else.

I've been trying just that in Holodeck for days, in multiple zone chats, TTC, and fleet armada, zero luck. Exchange supply is depleted and/or way overpriced for rare craftable ones. At this point I've had to make a new character just for the engineering unlocks, and might be forced to make another Sci for that purpose alone.

meimeitoo

rmy1081 wrote: »

seaofsorrows wrote: »

[...]

All Tactical Manuals should be in the Tactical Tree, all Engineering Module should be in Engineering and all Science in Science. No one is saying that one character should get everything, but a Captain putting the bulk of his points in Tactical Skills should be able to make any Tactical Manual. Requiring 17 points of Science to make a Tactical Manual makes no sense.

Investing heavily in a school should grant all the manuals for that school, it's that simple. I agree that one captain should not be able to craft every manual, you should have to invest heavily in one school to get the Tier III manuals of that type.

Having all tac manuals only under the tac tree will kill build diversity. Like I said in an above post. My tac/tac can't unlock FAW3 but my tac/sci character can. Moving those unlocks around will make players build out of their captain's career box which is something very unique to STO. Besides those manuals are tradeable and sellable. If one can't create a manual just buy/trade from someone else.

A Tactical Captain should be able to train their own profession's abilities; and an Engineer their abilities, etc. Diversity is a good thing, but this new situation, IMHO, is just silly. Basically, we'd just be cross-traing each others' abilities.

seaofsorrows

meimeitoo wrote: »

A Tactical Captain should be able to train their own profession's abilities; and an Engineer their abilities, etc. Diversity is a good thing, but this new situation, IMHO, is just silly. Basically, we'd just be cross-traing each others' abilities.

This is exactly how I see it.

As it sits now, my Tactical Captain can make any Tactical Manual I need. If I need an Engineering or Science Module, I switch over to another character of that profession. Under this new system, there are many manuals that none of my characters will be able to craft.

I'm just going to spend the next few weeks crafting a stockpile of Tier III skill manuals and storing them in my bank. It's either that or I'm going to have to respec characters as I need manuals, and that's just not going to happen.

dareau

meimeitoo wrote: »

rmy1081 wrote: »

seaofsorrows wrote: »

[...]

All Tactical Manuals should be in the Tactical Tree, all Engineering Module should be in Engineering and all Science in Science. No one is saying that one character should get everything, but a Captain putting the bulk of his points in Tactical Skills should be able to make any Tactical Manual. Requiring 17 points of Science to make a Tactical Manual makes no sense.

Investing heavily in a school should grant all the manuals for that school, it's that simple. I agree that one captain should not be able to craft every manual, you should have to invest heavily in one school to get the Tier III manuals of that type.

Having all tac manuals only under the tac tree will kill build diversity. Like I said in an above post. My tac/tac can't unlock FAW3 but my tac/sci character can. Moving those unlocks around will make players build out of their captain's career box which is something very unique to STO. Besides those manuals are tradeable and sellable. If one can't create a manual just buy/trade from someone else.

A Tactical Captain should be able to train their own profession's abilities; and an Engineer their abilities, etc. Diversity is a good thing, but this new situation, IMHO, is just silly. Basically, we'd just be cross-traing each others' abilities.

Seaofsorrows: Contradiction alert, area I emphasized.

New system: Not every tac officer can make BFaW III manuals anymore. Only those who have paid 17 points into the Science tree. Old system - pay for whatever skills are required, train every tactical manual (ie, have it all).

Meimietoo: My read on the system is that if I take and fill in the exact same boxes on a tac and a sci, the tac will get the appropriate tactical manuals, the sci the appropriate sci manuals. What this system does do, somewhat, is "encourage" a player to go deeper into a specific tree if training that skill is so hyper-important to them. You want / "need" BFaW trainings? Tweak your build to have 17 Science points in it...

And anyway, what's the big deal behind BFaW? With cannons finally joining beams on the same damage fall-off tables, you'd think that the days of escorts online with cannons is about to make a resurgence, so set your build up with CSV III...

markhawkman

Um... wait.. 17 points in sci? when I looked at it earlier today FaW was TWELVE.... Beam Overload was 17.

2e: EptS3, HE3, and MDP:B3
2s: ES3, PS3, B:TS-W3
2t: DEM3, TachB3, MDP:A3
5: choose a bonus skill
7e: EptE3, FBP3, AP:O3
7s: RSP3, GW3, B:TS-S3
7t: EWP3, JS3, CSV3
10: bonus skill set 2
12e: EptW3, PH3, AP:B3
12s: A2SIF3, TR3, B:FaW3
12t: BoardP3, TractorB3, CRF3
15: bonus skill set 3
17e: EptA3, TSS3, APD3
17s: Aux2ID3, TBR3, B:O3
17t: AcetonB3, VM3, TS3
20: bonus skill set 4
25: ultimates:
26-28? improved ultimates

Yes, Beam Overload. IIRC we couldn't craft that one before.

seaofsorrows

dareau wrote: »

Seaofsorrows: Contradiction alert, area I emphasized.

It's only a contradiction because you completely misquoted me. Half of that statement was not typed by me.

As for the 17 points, that part was incorrect, it's 12. I think that changed, because I would swear before it was 17.

Either way, yes.. right now it's 12 points in Science, not 17. That still seems like a lot to me for a high end Tactical Skill. Beam Fire At Will would be mostly crafted by Science Officers.. that's a little strange in my opinion.

If it's not going to be under Tactical, then at least it should be moved to the Engineering Tree since most tactical builds will go heavy into Engineering to get EPS and Warp Core skills.

pwstolemyname

The solution to this, just like the solution to the 'I want pet/threat/Crt/transwarp unlocks lower' problem is simple. The training manual unlock nodes and the passive ability unlock nodes need to be multi-choice, just like the ultimate abilitie unlock nodes are.

We have been told that cryptic want to encourage diversity, well putting us on rails isn't very conducive to that.

Just put all the abilities and training manuals (excluding ultimate's) on each unlock bar into a multi-choice option at each point along them and all the 'I think this should be more accessible because I want it but I don't want that' arguments suddenly go away.