test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

T7 ship suggestion

Hi, firstly I apologise if this is in the wrong section of the forum, its just the closest I could find to a 'suggestion box' on my own.

I had an idea for tier 7 ships which I think would be awesome for the game:

It goes like this: A tier 7 ship will be completely balanced with T6 ships in terms of stats and overall capacity for weapons items and modules relative to the ships class (I.E. escort/cruiser/science ship... ect)
The big difference is that players can customise the layout of the ship not just the build.

so when we purchase a T7 ship we have a pool of points for weapons, consoles, and bridge officers with respect to the maximum provided to T6 ships. so for example a T6 ship may have a maximum of 11 consoles, 6 - 8 weapons (depending on class), and 12 bridge officer abilities.
This translates to:
  • 6 to 8 weapon points which the player can distribute between fore and aft weapons to their taste. (obviously some minimum caps should be in place like minimum of 1 aft weapon just so we dont have T7 being completely unbeatable in terms of DPS but it can get high (its a higher tier after all)
  • 10 - 11 console points for the player to allot to preference, again with a minimum of 1 per console type (science, tactical, engineering)
  • 11 to 12 bridge officer points with a minimum of 1 science 1 tactical and 1 engineering (but 0 for universal because universal is a little redundant and potentially overpowered in this scenario so it should be scrubbed completely from T7 ships.
In terms of specialist bridge officers there will simply be a 1 to 2 specialist points and no more. This way it wont provide more specialist slots than other ships can provide but it would be more flexible in terms of which class and specialisation combinations we can create for our personal builds.

One final note in terms of keeping t5-U and T6 still relevant with my concept of a T7 ship there would be one drawback, unlike T6 ships there wont be a starship trait unlock at the end of the ship mastery, so we will still have T6 ships to turn to for that, it kinda makes sense because customizability is the best perk in my opinion!

Finally, Aesthetics... since these are so custom there would be no sense creating role variants, just create 3 drastically different skins, hell I'd be happy if existing models were used... nothing would be more fun than mixing and matching ships for example: the hull of the intrepid, the saucer section of the galaxy and the nacelles of the thunderchild... why not? since this concept means we are essentially designing our own ship... this in my opinion would honestly be awesome!

Comments

  • grendelthewise#0990 grendelthewise Member Posts: 640 Arc User
    I wish this would happen. I think if there is a T7 ship coming down the pike. I would say it will be on a smaller scale.
    Fleet Admiral of the U.S.S. ATTILA KHAN-CDA (NX-921911).
  • This content has been removed.
  • legionexxodlegionexxod Member Posts: 21 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Umm...yeah no. We have enough power creep thanks....

    I'm aware of this, as you can see I was trying to find ways to balance it off by stating limiting factors, quite frankly I just want the ability to fully build a ship to the exact way that I would like to play and for all players to have that option, but by no means do i think it should outstrip the other options, so if they did this i would actually welcome further restrictions (in terms of the build) if it meant having the ability to build my ship around a completely unique skill set/skill build. What this would mean is that each of us could be piloting a ship that is completely and utterly unique to our own tastes a ship that lends itself to our own creativity and not just down the path of the old cookie cutters... but whilst i mention that, with any ship even T5-U and T6 there will be cookie cutter builds, there are just some people who always do that, no matter what it wont stop, but I'm hoping that my idea of T7 ships will allow those like me who refuse to use cookie cutter builds to be able to be comparatively competitive in our own ways. But I do appreciate what you're saying completely. It needs to be balanced and should not completely outshine T6 or T5-U
  • This content has been removed.
  • jslynjslyn Member Posts: 1,790 Arc User
    I seem to remember this coming up before and the Devs said that ships are like paper dolls. You can add weapons and consoles in any order you want like changing clothes on a paper doll but where the items fit was set. It was something like the game engine was not designed to allow for modular hardpoints. The ship's paper doll had to have its hardpoints specified when each one was coded.
  • legionexxodlegionexxod Member Posts: 21 Arc User
    jslyn wrote: »
    I seem to remember this coming up before and the Devs said that ships are like paper dolls. You can add weapons and consoles in any order you want like changing clothes on a paper doll but where the items fit was set. It was something like the game engine was not designed to allow for modular hardpoints. The ship's paper doll had to have its hardpoints specified when each one was coded.

    Thats a fair point Jslyn

  • legionexxodlegionexxod Member Posts: 21 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Umm...yeah no. We have enough power creep thanks....

    I'm aware of this, as you can see I was trying to find ways to balance it off by stating limiting factors, quite frankly I just want the ability to fully build a ship to the exact way that I would like to play and for all players to have that option, but by no means do i think it should outstrip the other options, so if they did this i would actually welcome further restrictions (in terms of the build) if it meant having the ability to build my ship around a completely unique skill set/skill build. What this would mean is that each of us could be piloting a ship that is completely and utterly unique to our own tastes a ship that lends itself to our own creativity and not just down the path of the old cookie cutters... but whilst i mention that, with any ship even T5-U and T6 there will be cookie cutter builds, there are just some people who always do that, no matter what it wont stop, but I'm hoping that my idea of T7 ships will allow those like me who refuse to use cookie cutter builds to be able to be comparatively competitive in our own ways. But I do appreciate what you're saying completely. It needs to be balanced and should not completely outshine T6 or T5-U

    So...your idea of balance is letting some munchkin make a 7 fore, 1 aft weapon ship with 5 sci and tact console and 1 engineer one so they can blow things up in .5 seconds instead 2 now? Yeah stay out of game design...you have no idea.

    Coldnapalm, I'm cool with you criticising the idea, that's why I posted it on the forums, ideas can work or they can fail, and I actually appreciate your input. That last line though was a little personal though, so I just want to be clear, I'm at no point pretending to be a game designer, I just exercised the ability that we all have as players of this game to contribute an idea. As Jslyn said it has been talked about before. A point that I was not aware of. My point... Chill its just a conversation.
  • This content has been removed.
  • cidjackcidjack Member Posts: 2,017 Arc User
    No comment, to much effort.
    Armada: Multiplying fleet projects in need of dilithium by 13."
    95bced8038c91ec6f880d510e6fd302f366a776c4c5761e5f7931d491667a45e.jpgvia Imgflip Meme Generator
  • grendelthewise#0990 grendelthewise Member Posts: 640 Arc User
    null
    Don't mind coldnapalm. He just needs hugs all the time.
    Fleet Admiral of the U.S.S. ATTILA KHAN-CDA (NX-921911).
  • br3akingforcebr3akingforce Member Posts: 106 Arc User
    the idea is cool, but will likely never happen. much of the way the game makes money is based on selling ships with varying layouts. if they did this, each player would only need to buy one t7 ship. unless they made each t7 ship like 15000 zen, it wouldn't be worth it for them, just from a development effort to income perspective.
  • jslynjslyn Member Posts: 1,790 Arc User

    Thats a fair point Jslyn

    Why thank you. But I was simply passing along the information. Twasn't my point to take credit for. :)
Sign In or Register to comment.