Sure nerf it all as long as any items I've purchased with real money that have their performance and value devalued are refunded in full.
So answer is no.
Hello rubber banding my old friend, time to bounce around the battlezone again, where are all my bug reports going?, out of love with this game I am falling, As Cryptic fail to acknowledge a problem exists, Shakes an angry fist, And from Support all I'm hearing are the sounds of silence.
The question is flawed. By asking "do you accept big nerfs" you already use a negatively associated term in this community,
^^ This.
Asking "do you accept big nerfs" already assumes nerfs are the only way to restore balance. Instead, Engineers should be buffed.
One thing I am looking out for is how widespread buffs to players will affect a certain type of gameplay. What I mean by this is if players are buffed, NPCs will be even easier than they already are. NPCs are not buffed often, and when they are it's just an increase in HP. If players are to be buffed considerably, we need to look at how this will affect combat versus NPCs and if just bumping up HP is enough.
Edit: I do agree engineers need to be buffed, I'm just wondering if other things need to be nerfed on top of a major buff to engineers in order to enhance class balance.
The question is flawed. By asking "do you accept big nerfs" you already use a negatively associated term in this community,
^^ This.
Asking "do you accept big nerfs" already assumes nerfs are the only way to restore balance. Instead, Engineers should be buffed.
One thing I am looking out for is how widespread buffs to players will affect a certain type of gameplay. What I mean by this is if players are buffed, NPCs will be even easier than they already are. NPCs are not buffed often, and when they are it's just an increase in HP. If players are to be buffed considerably, we need to look at how this will affect combat versus NPCs and if just bumping up HP is enough.
Edit: I do agree engineers need to be buffed, I'm just wondering if other things need to be nerfed on top of a major buff to engineers in order to enhance class balance.
Why, as long as Engineers are seriously underperforming, compared to Tacts, anything wihich would bring Engineers on-par even with Tacts, DPS-wise, would, by definition almost, be justified. Not actually saying Engineers should do as well as Tacts, DPS-wise, but only saying "What's good for the goose, is good for the gander." Aka, unless Engineers would start doing better than Tacts, I don't see how gameplay would be adversely affected by buffing Engineers.
The question is flawed. By asking "do you accept big nerfs" you already use a negatively associated term in this community,
^^ This.
Asking "do you accept big nerfs" already assumes nerfs are the only way to restore balance. Instead, Engineers should be buffed.
One thing I am looking out for is how widespread buffs to players will affect a certain type of gameplay. What I mean by this is if players are buffed, NPCs will be even easier than they already are. NPCs are not buffed often, and when they are it's just an increase in HP. If players are to be buffed considerably, we need to look at how this will affect combat versus NPCs and if just bumping up HP is enough.
Edit: I do agree engineers need to be buffed, I'm just wondering if other things need to be nerfed on top of a major buff to engineers in order to enhance class balance.
Why, as long as Engineers are seriously underperforming, compared to Tacts, anything wihich would bring Engineers on-par even with Tacts, DPS-wise, would, by definition almost, be justified. Not actually saying Engineers should do as well as Tacts, DPS-wise, but only saying "What's good for the goose, is good for the gander." Aka, unless Engineers would start doing better than Tacts, I don't see how gameplay would be adversely affected by buffing Engineers.
That's true, since Engineers (as I try to point out to many people) are not primarily about DPS in space. Engineering is indeed under-performing, but many people think so for the wrong reason.
Yeah; and the problem is, that it's really hard, apparently, to come up with a good way to buff Engineers. I think because, either way you slice it, this game is simply inherently about DPS. So, anything buffed in the Engineering department, which does not involve increased DPS, I dunno, I don't see how it would solve matters. I *do* know, that when I play as a Tact Captain, my Captain powers are extremely, well, that, powerful! And my Engi Captain powers, yawn.
I feel like I just spammed a ton of replies to your comment. Every time I hit post, nothing appears. Like I can't see the post that you just replied to, even though it's mine.
I feel like I just spammed a ton of replies to your comment. Every time I hit post, nothing appears. Like I can't see the post that you just replied to, even though it's mine.
Yeah, I noticed that too: your last two post seem missing. Weird.
no. not until a way can be found to "balance" without nerfing a lot of hard earned money. as a thought, maybe implement non-stacking of buffs. for example if you have a trait or a power or ability that buffs say, energy weapons power/damage (BFAW?) and you use another power/ability (APA?) only the more powerful buff would be in effect. like the tribble powers. you cant have more than one tribble buff at a time.
I feel like I just spammed a ton of replies to your comment. Every time I hit post, nothing appears. Like I can't see the post that you just replied to, even though it's mine.
Yeah, I noticed that too: your last two post seem missing. Weird.
Yeah, me and my glitches. They follow me wherever I go.
The question is flawed. By asking "do you accept big nerfs" you already use a negatively associated term in this community, essentially asking "do you want everything to be ****" which of course is most likely answered with "no". The kind of rebalancing this game needs cannot be grasped with terms like "nerf" and "buff", it'd be a fundamental change in the games' rules.
So if you'd ask "would you accept rebuilding your characters following a (hypothetical) revising of the games' rules for a balanced gameplay" I would probably say "yes", however there is no saying what these changes would encompass and not two people could find a common ground on this anyway. Like this I can't answer the question.
Exactly...to this day, one of my favorite ideas is to make things other than damage merit a reward. Like how CCA tracks healing, which can end up in somebody far down the dps table taking first place.
With the (at least some) planned changes I have seen on Tribble so far, I am hopeful the game will actually show (at least some) more parity between the professions. However, it is still too early for me to support what hasn't even been announced yet regarding ALL the changes they plan to make for the sake of "balance".
Waiting and seeing what happens before throwing my hat in the ring either way. At least right now, we are only seeing a small amount of their planned changes.
-AoP- Warrior's Blood (KDF Armada) / -AoP- Qu' raD qulbo'Degh / -AoP- ProjectPhoenix Join Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Regarding the above, I've taken first place in CCA with only one weapon equipped on the ship and second place with none. Tactics that deliberately make the game harder for the team should never be rewarded.
As for the title question, yes, I'd be willing to get nerfed if it meant an objectively better balanced game as the end result. So far the changes haven't been very promising: one sub-optimal, situationally useful ability was gutted into a useless and horrible version that serves no purpose at all (Stealth Module), cooldowns were added and teamplay reduced (Tactical Initiative). Granted, the most recent Tribble notes suggest it might turn out alright, but it's too early to see the big picture yet. The tears won't really start flowing until the nerf axe reaches space game.
Theres a bunch of things to 'balance': new enemies and old, newer being more powerful; captain professions, looks like they are trying to do this, though not sure people are that bothered; newer, lockbox and specialisation ships vs more vanilla and older alternative, thats never going to happen as its the business model; powers, abilities, kits and weapons that when used together allow for some players to do 10 times the damage of casual players, even with some balancing the good players will always stomp through the content and there is generally a minimal penalty for respawning so speccing for resistance is more of an option than necessity.
I'd be amazed if they can make the game fun again, like when STFs could become pretty epic battles and fights against the clock, these days you can demolish pretty much any level with decent gear once the level has been learned.
Some time ago people thought the way to balance was to let NPCs have some more abilities, and what we get are these new chaps that make themselve invulnerable, when the response is so crude I find it hard to think that any change will be significant in terms of gameplay.
Since I'm not a min-maxer I doubt a cross the board nerf-fest would affect me like others. I don't stack 5 of one console, for example. Just so long as the NPCs also are moderated accordingly.
Sometimes I think I play STO just to have something to complain about on the forums.
I don't understand the "vibe" I get from certain players that once a character has reached a "optimum" they expect this to simply stay true however. Look at Diablo 2, which essentially is the same base genre as STO (hack & slay). Blizzard has not only updated the game over the years but also resets it wiping all character records from the server from time to time. The old characters still exist and can be played, but they aren't "official" any more and you have to reroll them if you want to stay "current". Now, a character that was the flavour of the season once could be pushed off the top in another update, but was still capable of playing the game and finishing it. The same would happen, I assume, in a base overhaul of STO, of course you can still use your old builds and probably succeed, but the perception of "value" would simply shift. Aside from the psychological trauma some people suffer from not being "the best" any more nothing happens aside from more diversity and rewards for the players.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
If its more fun to me then yes otherwise no. Tell you after the balancing.
Archiving the perfect balance in a game is as boring as impossible. Its gets fun if its a bit dirty here and there and leads you to think outside the box. And with a bit I mean a bit; devs need to find a good balance between balanced and unbalanced to get the true goal: a fun game
They didn't tie people down to real money for upgrading gear, they only made it an option. If people decided to spend cash money to do so then thats their choice and to blame someone else for how they choose to spend their money is daft. The majority of games, not just mmo genre, all face the possibility of becoming unplayable either when servers die, hardware or OS stops being compatible. Every new console release has people in a pointless tizzy over backwards compatibility because they choose to ditch the old for the new. Hell if steam died how many thousands of pounds worth of collections would effectively be wasted.
Back on topic a bit more.
It would really depend if the balancing was done well or if it was closer to a blind man throwing darts at a board to pick the numbers. Or worse they choose the fat kid and seesaw approach where you just pile on more stuff to the opposite side til things eventually become out of balance in otherways before repeating the process.
I don't understand the "vibe" I get from certain players that once a character has reached a "optimum" they expect this to simply stay true however.
I agree, but I'd hate to see builds destroyed, because they get nerfed to uselessness.
Some of these builds took a lot of time and dilithium to optimize. They shouldn't be rendered useless with one swing of a nerf bat, my opinion.
But I know It's Cryptic's sandbox and I only play in it, so I'll adapt -
I don’t see you complaining around here that often, quite the opposite actually. Sure you play for fun (as do I by the way) but you seem to win you’re in game fights as I do mine and are eager to do so or otherwise you would not be around with that attitude anymore.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
hell yeah..It needs balance alot..But its up to the devs to really do it well..PvE's are becoming or already are a massive joke where they ae done in less than 4 mins..Also Why do you think the ques are empty? Its because the player Vs NPC balnce is so bad that the engine before processing anything is already TRIBBLE wiped by the players leading to the PvE becoming boring leading to PvE becoming a dead zone..Yes it could be a direction of the engine being improved (Which is needed!!!) But damn since that is way outta reach as someone mentioned..I mean yeah you need to rebalance the player abilities on a different level if the game engine aint gonna be touched much upon..
You cant just keep scaling the player abilities to a ludacrious level and complain that the game isint good because the opponet/NPC is bad..
To sum it up a plaer abilities balance is needed if the game engine aint goona be touched to bring some form of leveled gameplay instead of mindless, Damn I got the big gun and wipe the area clean attitude.
Comments
^^ This.
Asking "do you accept big nerfs" already assumes nerfs are the only way to restore balance. Instead, Engineers should be buffed.
So answer is no.
Hello rubber banding my old friend, time to bounce around the battlezone again, where are all my bug reports going?, out of love with this game I am falling, As Cryptic fail to acknowledge a problem exists, Shakes an angry fist, And from Support all I'm hearing are the sounds of silence.
One thing I am looking out for is how widespread buffs to players will affect a certain type of gameplay. What I mean by this is if players are buffed, NPCs will be even easier than they already are. NPCs are not buffed often, and when they are it's just an increase in HP. If players are to be buffed considerably, we need to look at how this will affect combat versus NPCs and if just bumping up HP is enough.
Edit: I do agree engineers need to be buffed, I'm just wondering if other things need to be nerfed on top of a major buff to engineers in order to enhance class balance.
Why, as long as Engineers are seriously underperforming, compared to Tacts, anything wihich would bring Engineers on-par even with Tacts, DPS-wise, would, by definition almost, be justified. Not actually saying Engineers should do as well as Tacts, DPS-wise, but only saying "What's good for the goose, is good for the gander." Aka, unless Engineers would start doing better than Tacts, I don't see how gameplay would be adversely affected by buffing Engineers.
Yeah; and the problem is, that it's really hard, apparently, to come up with a good way to buff Engineers. I think because, either way you slice it, this game is simply inherently about DPS. So, anything buffed in the Engineering department, which does not involve increased DPS, I dunno, I don't see how it would solve matters. I *do* know, that when I play as a Tact Captain, my Captain powers are extremely, well, that, powerful! And my Engi Captain powers, yawn.
Let me guess...Tac characters only?
Yeah, I noticed that too: your last two post seem missing. Weird.
Yeah, me and my glitches. They follow me wherever I go.
Exactly...to this day, one of my favorite ideas is to make things other than damage merit a reward. Like how CCA tracks healing, which can end up in somebody far down the dps table taking first place.
Waiting and seeing what happens before throwing my hat in the ring either way. At least right now, we are only seeing a small amount of their planned changes.
Join Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010
As for the title question, yes, I'd be willing to get nerfed if it meant an objectively better balanced game as the end result. So far the changes haven't been very promising: one sub-optimal, situationally useful ability was gutted into a useless and horrible version that serves no purpose at all (Stealth Module), cooldowns were added and teamplay reduced (Tactical Initiative). Granted, the most recent Tribble notes suggest it might turn out alright, but it's too early to see the big picture yet. The tears won't really start flowing until the nerf axe reaches space game.
I'd be amazed if they can make the game fun again, like when STFs could become pretty epic battles and fights against the clock, these days you can demolish pretty much any level with decent gear once the level has been learned.
Some time ago people thought the way to balance was to let NPCs have some more abilities, and what we get are these new chaps that make themselve invulnerable, when the response is so crude I find it hard to think that any change will be significant in terms of gameplay.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Archiving the perfect balance in a game is as boring as impossible. Its gets fun if its a bit dirty here and there and leads you to think outside the box. And with a bit I mean a bit; devs need to find a good balance between balanced and unbalanced to get the true goal: a fun game
Back on topic a bit more.
It would really depend if the balancing was done well or if it was closer to a blind man throwing darts at a board to pick the numbers. Or worse they choose the fat kid and seesaw approach where you just pile on more stuff to the opposite side til things eventually become out of balance in otherways before repeating the process.
I'm not a fan of the knee jerk, nerf first, then evaluate things later mentality.
Science per example was nerfed, only to be buffed again. da f@ck ?
Why not buff things to counter/balance something else for a change?
MAYBE make NPC's THINK/react - better, rather than just nerf player powers ?
I agree, but I'd hate to see builds destroyed, because they get nerfed to uselessness.
Some of these builds took a lot of time and dilithium to optimize. They shouldn't be rendered useless with one swing of a nerf bat, my opinion.
But I know It's Cryptic's sandbox and I only play in it, so I'll adapt -
Bringing them into a position to decide what’s "best for STO" (lol) would leave a joke of a game, if one at all.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
I suck, why even try? I doubt that’s you!
I don’t see you complaining around here that often, quite the opposite actually. Sure you play for fun (as do I by the way) but you seem to win you’re in game fights as I do mine and are eager to do so or otherwise you would not be around with that attitude anymore.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
You cant just keep scaling the player abilities to a ludacrious level and complain that the game isint good because the opponet/NPC is bad..
To sum it up a plaer abilities balance is needed if the game engine aint goona be touched to bring some form of leveled gameplay instead of mindless, Damn I got the big gun and wipe the area clean attitude.
Adu-Uss Firefox NCC-93425-F (LVL 65 FED AoY ENG) UR/VR MKXV Fleet Intel Assault Cruiser (July 2016)
Jean-Uss Seratoga Ravenna (LVL 60 FED Delta ENG) UC/R MKVI Bajoran Escort (April 2018)
Dubsa-RRW Mnaudh (LVL 50 FED allied ROM Delta ENG) Warbird (May 2018)
Marop-IKS Orunthi (LVL 50 KNG Delta ENG) BoP (May 2018)
Kanak'lan-TRIBBLE (LVL 65 DOM Gamma ENG) TRIBBLE (June 2018)