The line between fun and being effective

nikephorus

I saw a conversation the other day between a few people after a rather questionable build got posted in a STO Facebook group. This particular group is mainly for people to post builds and ask for help. The original poster posted a build for his ship which was very much a hodge podge of basically everything. There were dual heavy cannons, beam arrays, dual beam banks, and I believe a torpedo and all his console slots were filled with universals. One of the first people to post said the build was a mess and offered some pretty standard suggestions. Pick one type of weapon, use tactical consoles in your tactical slots, romulan plasma consoles for science...stuff of that nature. This person was immediately attacked by another member for giving suggestions without knowing what the original posters build goals were and also asserted that the current build was fine if fun was being had. I can see the validity of both people since this is a game after all and you should be having fun, but I can also understand the frustration of having someone in an advanced queue running a build as unfocused as the one that was posted.

Personally, I think a balance of fun and effectiveness should try to be maintained. I don't want to be dead weight on my team when doing queues, but I also want to have fun as well. I think I always believed, naively, that this was the goal of most players. Have fun and be effective, but that isn't really the case it seems. I would seem that some people are okay just using a random build and letting other people carry them through content. That doesn't sound like fun to me personally, but I guess it's a thing.

Another thing I don't understand is why someone would post there build looking for help, but then ignore the suggestions posted by others and defend said build tooth and nail.

I guess my question is what is the line between fun and effectiveness? Is fun paramount over anything else even if you are perhaps impacting the fun of other players by being dead weight in a queue?

mustrumridcully0

There is no "balance" between them. We are playing computer games to have fun. Some people have more fun if they are effective, some have more fun when they have a certain style.

The difficulties only start when you enter the multiplayer parts of play, and one person's fun starts getting detrimental to that of someone else. Ideally, game designers try to avoid this by providing a form of game balance. If they can't achieve that, it will be up to players to find compromises.

avoozuul

I haven't actually found fun from the game in quite a long time now, but I am not really that good at it either.

nikephorus

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

There is no "balance" between them. We are playing computer games to have fun. Some people have more fun if they are effective, some have more fun when they have a certain style.

The difficulties only start when you enter the multiplayer parts of play, and one person's fun starts getting detrimental to that of someone else. Ideally, game designers try to avoid this by providing a form of game balance. If they can't achieve that, it will be up to players to find compromises.

STO is kind of a unique game in that you can just throw random gear onto a ship and basically go do anything you want. Once you are 60 everything is open to you and you are only restricted by who else will randomly queue up for that mission. That is not generally the case in most other MMO type games. If you run a subpar build you won't get on a team to run a dungeon/mission.

sisteric

My line is fun until I am taking fun away for the majority of others. If we are doing a queue, and one person is complaining about, that's nothing. But three of them are complaining about me, then I am impacting the team to much and need to rethink what I am doing.

As for the person defending their build, they are defending the concept of their build, they want help to tweaking what is there without altering it completely. SO maybe looking at what will help the build as it is, would be better advise than having it conform to conventional wisdom. Just my thoughts.

tygerzz

Personally I have a few space centric characters and a few ground cenrtic. I try to run only elite level content on the well equipped ones but at the same time I have never hesitated to announce I am on an alt and my group might have to work harder if they accept my current persona. To the best of my knowledge I have never been turned down on an alt.
When it comes to pugs well, they say live by the pug die by the pug, then again pugs only get iffy on the weekend because of inexperience and trolls.
As for the rest of STO do whatever you want to do, have fun how you want to have fun, and if there are haters, let the haters, hate

davefenestrator

I could see becoming defensive if the "correct build" poster was a jerk about it, and if they insisted that all the universal consoles must go. With diminishing returns you don't really "need" 5 tac consoles on an escort to do decent DPS even though they will help a little.

Contrast that with a response that explained that 1 beam tac console would give over +30% damage, that it would only buff the beams so mixing beams and cannons would hurt damage. And that offered ways to keep the universals in the set, like by using fleet and crafted consoles to get double effects (resist + turn, EPG + shields, etc.).

shadowwraith

I tend to experiment a lot with different builds as new equipment becomes available to see what synergises well and what does not, the fun part about this is that you learn new things along the way which can help you to get better in the game and have fun at the same time.

tl;dr do what YOU think is fun and create your character/ship builds the way YOU want

lordsteve1

I welcome all sorts of builds personally, because it's only through this sort of crazy off-meta experimentation that new tricks are discovered.
If everyone just went along with the usual advice of BFAW + plasma exploders + coalition disruptors it would be a dull game indeed.
There are definitely some combinations that really don't work, but those are rare and not seen too often.

One massive issue with the whole affair though is that the single player leveling experience just does absoutely nothing to teach you what will and will not work. Mainly because it's so easy and also because there is literally zero guidance on basic mechanics and build ideas. Even the basic gear a ship comes with when first bought is pretty random and sub-par and teaches you nothing about how to put together an effective build.
A ship that blasts though the SP episode will probably struggle in the PVE queues if the player has never really encountered that sort of thing in game yet. They won't know that cannons aren't affected by BFAW, or that certain consoles have diminishing returns because the game wont tell them.

warpangel

I don't know, my builds are all more or less style-based these days and they all still curbstomp the piece of cake content in this game 10-0.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

nephitis

If you ask me playing STFs/Queues is not the beginning or end of STO MMO gaming. It is just "one" method of acquiring the marks needed for reputation gear, one that you truly don't really need to use. And this along with Battlezones are the only two places where you actually meet and "play" with other players.

And if you ask me most MMOs are like this. You can play 95% of the games solo if you want with only the last 5% being raids, instances and the likes that require forming groups. Some games may require you to party up with a friend but normally you know that person well enough to syncronize your interpretation of fun and efficiency.

So to this I would say that fun is far more important because it determines and plays a role in your "investment" into the game. Efficiency may contribute to that fun factor, but it is not the key ingredient to reaching a high fun factor. The more fun you have playing the game, the more efficient you will or should automatically be. Not just mentally (as in concentration) but also in your effort in pursuing in overcoming your weaknesses and improving your strengths.

If you have fun you are more likely to try, even if you should lack the adequate knowledge to tackle a certain scenario. But that is easily remedied through experience and learning the specific scenario you have yet to master. But a player who lacks that fun will simply not play at all (they remain AFK) or they will play half-assedly, as in their attention and playstyle drifts away to being extra baggage than help.

I think it is very important to separate and distinguish two players whose performance is less because of lack of build efficiency, and whose performance is less because of bad attitude. In the Tzenkethi STF, I would rather have a weak but attentive player follow my lead and go to the space station I just cleared out for him or her, than someone who has a very good build buy flies in the opposite direction to the enemy infested areas.

Play the way you want because it counts toward that 95% with only 5% requiring you to be truly efficient.

nikeix

I'm willing to sacrifice about 20% effectiveness for fun. My Tholian Dreadnought could probably be better, but using both Nukara sets (and the antichroniton infused set) seems appropriate. I have a unified all-beams refracting (and hyper-refracting) tetryon set-up, I have the unique Tholian torpedo and the web cannon console, and elite Webweaver frigates in its one hanger. The Tac-consoles are 4x Vulnerability Locator (Tetryon) and all of my gear is XIV, most of it ultra rare.

Its not the best it could be, but it radiates "I am Tholian force projection incarnate" and if I'm doing 60k instead of 75k because of that, so be it.

But some stuff is just so EASY to set up in terms of upgrading and picking suitable [tags].

warmaker001b

I used to love doing Build Help for different people, putting in considerable time to tweak someone's build to make it better, then offering explanations why that build was done that way as well as how to effectively run it. Not too keen on offering up builds with no explanations why, how things work for it. The recipient needs to know so he can learn and take care of his builds in the future. I also don't like the build suggestions of "Gold Plated Gear Everywhere" like that's feasible for Capt Average Joe in this game.

When asking for build help you need to state what you're trying to do. It also helps to let people know what kind of gear you got on hand, because sometimes you can get a vastly improved build with stuff you already have.

mustrumridcully0 wrote: »

There is no "balance" between them. We are playing computer games to have fun. Some people have more fun if they are effective, some have more fun when they have a certain style.

The difficulties only start when you enter the multiplayer parts of play, and one person's fun starts getting detrimental to that of someone else. Ideally, game designers try to avoid this by providing a form of game balance. If they can't achieve that, it will be up to players to find compromises.

Very much so. When I do my instanced queues, I want want Perfect Runs. Anything less is a waste of time and a failure. Seeing some crazy things out there will hinder that. I also know from build help experience guys running around with BO3 despite having no Beam weaponry.

"Because it sounded awesome."

I remember way back in LOR and the release of the Romulans, helping a fleetmate when she was complaining her D'D was blowing up all the time in one of the faction campaign missions. I helped her clear it and saw what was going on. The D'D has issues but sturdiness is not one of them, but hers was being blown up in Normal difficulty quite a bit. After we cleared the mission I went the roundabout, polite way to find out exactly the problem and what the build was. The gear alignment was okay for an average player. Almost all build abilities were fine except she has no repair abilities at all. No EPTW to kill things before they kill you nor EPTS instead to keep the shields up no matter what. No Hazard Emitters, a killer against the Borg. No ASIF. No Tac Team, no Sci Team, no Eng Team, NOTHING. The build was easy to fix but the thing was she was a player of 2 years in STO...

That's the kind of stuff that's out there in this game's playerbase. And people wonder how ISA can be f--ked up.

Thankfully, bridging the gap for a fun and effective build isn't too difficult. You also don't necessarily need to break the bank in doing it. Is that effective build going to net you 50k+ DPS for Capt Avg Joe? Not necessarily, but to do the majority of this game's content you don't even need to break 10k.

If I had to choose between a player that knows how to play the instance but has a s--t build due to poor resources, or a player that has a Gold Plated Build with proper abilities, traits, doffs, etc, but plays the instance like s--t and is a cause for failure or mission trouble, I'd rather have the former on my team.

shockwave85

I think if you're going into a queue or battlezone where you are taking up space in the instance, and other people's success/failure depends somewhat on you, you should do your best to at least have a sensible build. That isn't to say you need to keep up with the latest meta, but it should be following basic common sense. Weapons that match your tac consoles, making sure you're set up for either broadside or head on to maintain time on target, not having powers or consoles that aren't really doing anything, etc.

Most of the time though, when I'm doing story missions, I'm in a deliberately hobbled ship. My Sovereign has a canon phaser/quantum torp setup with NO rep, fleet, lockbox or special crafted gear. Just regular gear I crafted and upgraded. That setup slows the combat down considerably, and just winds up feeling more like Star Trek ship combat, which I find to be fun. I also use phaser stun pistols on the ground for me and my Boffs.

Some people enjoy the DPS rat race, that's fun for them. It's fun for me, to a point, but everyone needs to strike their own balance. Just as long as you're not dead weight in co-op content because what you're doing is pants-on-head crazy, I say do whatever you want.

nikephorus

nephitis wrote: »

If you ask me playing STFs/Queues is not the beginning or end of STO MMO gaming. It is just "one" method of acquiring the marks needed for reputation gear, one that you truly don't really need to use. And this along with Battlezones are the only two places where you actually meet and "play" with other players

And if you ask me most MMOs are like this. You can play 95% of the games solo if you want with only the last 5% being raids, instances and the likes that require forming groups. Some games may require you to party up with a friend but normally you know that person well enough to syncronize your interpretation of fun and efficiency..

I disagree slightly...while there is a lot to do in STO the entire end game is queued content or the battlezones which require you to play with other people. So your characters build quality...or lack thereof will directly affect the people you are playing with.

So to this I would say that fun is far more important because it determines and plays a role in your "investment" into the game. Efficiency may contribute to that fun factor, but it is not the key ingredient to reaching a high fun factor. The more fun you have playing the game, the more efficient you will or should automatically be. Not just mentally (as in concentration) but also in your effort in pursuing in overcoming your weaknesses and improving your strengths.

This I disagree with this completely based on the comments I've read here. Clearly most people seem to be more invested in the idea of having fun in the game, which makes total sense it is a game after all, then efficiency. The fun factor does not however directly correlate to becoming more efficient at the game.

If you have fun you are more likely to try, even if you should lack the adequate knowledge to tackle a certain scenario. But that is easily remedied through experience and learning the specific scenario you have yet to master. But a player who lacks that fun will simply not play at all (they remain AFK) or they will play half-assedly, as in their attention and playstyle drifts away to being extra baggage than help.

I don't think players lack of knowledge or skill has led them to avoid certain scenarios. The pug queues in STO are evidence of that. In fact just a few weeks ago after the Tzenkethi Front was released. I encountered a player in Tzenkethi Front Advanced who got a bomb and then asked "I have a bomb what do I do with it?" My first thought to the question was "what are you doing in advanced if you don't even know what you're doing?" I didn't have my parser on or anything like that so I have no idea how great his dps was or how good his build was or any of that, but I do know that a player that had no clue about a mission was willing to enter an advanced queue with the hopes that the rest of the team would lead him to victory. Conversations back and forth with one of the other members in the queue revealed this as well as the fact that he didn't read the initial briefing because he didn't feel like it.

I think it is very important to separate and distinguish two players whose performance is less because of lack of build efficiency, and whose performance is less because of bad attitude. In the Tzenkethi STF, I would rather have a weak but attentive player follow my lead and go to the space station I just cleared out for him or her, than someone who has a very good build buy flies in the opposite direction to the enemy infested areas.

I suppose that was the type of player I encounterd in the Tzenkethi front... the ones that don't care.

Play the way you want because it counts toward that 95% with only 5% requiring you to be truly efficient.

Depends I suppose... if you are playing queues I think you need to be a little more efficient then 5%.

staq16

One point I think bears mentioning; RP or themed builds (which is what I assume most people mean by "fun") and effectiveness do not have to be exclusive. I tend to build that way and most of my alts are in the 40-60K range. You can lay down ground rules on what your parameters are - eg phasers with photons fore and aft - and by building intelligently, still get a decent result. My AoY toon still seems to regularly place high on CCEs, and he's sporting random-upgrade mods on just such a canon build in a T5 Ranger.

alcyoneserene

RP builds do matter to me as well, but it is just disappointing that having say a Scimitar with 3-piece T5 console set will gimp it and then some when using battle cloak to escape with shields up, cloaked barrage, thalaron pulse, and a secondary shielding console, and the high price of owning the set and then re-buying them as T6 for the extra bit of performance.

I get that it's a business whose aim is to maximize profit by making both ST canon and Cryptic variants equally attractive for role play versus gaming performance, but really, I find the difference in effectiveness between the two excessive. It doesn't make sense that using some of the best canon hero ships in the way they were portrayed on screen like Defiant's cloak or Prometheus' ship separation or the planet-killing thalaron pulse Scimitar or Birds of Prey taking time to ambush-raider flank means doing something gimmicky and hindering performance for yourself and for team mates.

jslyn

You can do Fun and Effective. I've said before that I have an Alt that flies a 10-Turrent Galaxy-X. It's not an optimal build by any means, but it is both and can hold its own.

You can do Elite Queues in a T1. I've done some in a shuttle before (although, granted, it was because I had been on a ground map when signed up and forgot that I had been using the shuttle). A great pilot in a crappy ship can punish a crappy pilot in a great ship. You can have a whole mess of stuff equipped if you know how to use it. You can build around diversity. Again, it's not optimal but that does not mean that it is either useless or wrong.

warmaker001b wrote: »

I used to love doing Build Help for different people, putting in considerable time to tweak someone's build to make it better, then offering explanations why that build was done that way as well as how to effectively run it. Not too keen on offering up builds with no explanations why, how things work for it.

That's what I do when people ask about wanting to try a Torpedo Boat. Need like a two page post help them understand the in's and the out's.

alcyoneserene wrote: »

It doesn't make sense that using some of the best canon hero ships in the way they were portrayed on screen like Defiant's cloak or Prometheus' ship separation or the planet-killing thalaron pulse Scimitar

The Defiant's cloak I can understand as being gimmicky. It was gimmicky. It was jury-rigged in to a ship that was not designed to take it. The Prometheus and the Scimitar, on the other hand, should have those abilities built-in to them. They were made specifically to do those things.

jorantomalak

Obi Wan : Theres a disturbance in the force

Jar Jar : Meesa sorry i ated beans last night

captainperkins

I've played since launch & I have no idea about builds and synergies.

My builds are style based.
My current flagship is a fleet T6 Excelsior with wratch of khan pulse phasers a aft omni pulse phaser and kinnetic cutting beam. For torps I use gravimetric fore and either a temporal torp or vaaduar tricobalt mine aft.
All my tac consoles are fleet phaser boosters. I made everything epic. I only use epic stuff.

Still in spite of all that I dont think I get 20k damage. When i activate red matter capacitor and divert all power to weapons my tray reads only 1900 or so dps per beam bank. Unless im miscalculating... I dont know how others get such high dps.

I dont like non-canon builds and I dont much care for non starfleet beams, but the orange and blue phasers got boring... I was thrilled with the new pulse phasers.

I believe fun outweighs effectiveness. I seem to hold my weight in pve queues pretty well. I think if a player sucks IN a pve they will either learn to get epic builds or theyll stick to easier queues...

nickodaemus

I think the threshold is this - as long as one meets the generally accepted baseline for participation for the level at which one is attempting to play, then everything else is "fun."

I would never go into an elite queue with questionable build, as I am sure it wouldn't be fun for me or any one I inconvenience in there as a result. Advanced is kinda "meh" when it comes to this. I often go into Infected Space Advanced to test, but usually only after hitting CCA.

I'm not a super DPS person, but I do like pushing my own limits for my own fun. And to me, nothing is as much fun as seeing those huge numbers flash up when everything hits like I have been working to build it.

tobiashirt

nikephorus wrote: »

I saw a conversation the other day between a few people after a rather questionable build got posted in a STO Facebook group. This particular group is mainly for people to post builds and ask for help. The original poster posted a build for his ship which was very much a hodge podge of basically everything. There were dual heavy cannons, beam arrays, dual beam banks, and I believe a torpedo and all his console slots were filled with universals. One of the first people to post said the build was a mess and offered some pretty standard suggestions. Pick one type of weapon, use tactical consoles in your tactical slots, romulan plasma consoles for science...stuff of that nature. This person was immediately attacked by another member for giving suggestions without knowing what the original posters build goals were and also asserted that the current build was fine if fun was being had. I can see the validity of both people since this is a game after all and you should be having fun, but I can also understand the frustration of having someone in an advanced queue running a build as unfocused as the one that was posted.

Personally, I think a balance of fun and effectiveness should try to be maintained. I don't want to be dead weight on my team when doing queues, but I also want to have fun as well. I think I always believed, naively, that this was the goal of most players. Have fun and be effective, but that isn't really the case it seems. I would seem that some people are okay just using a random build and letting other people carry them through content. That doesn't sound like fun to me personally, but I guess it's a thing.

Another thing I don't understand is why someone would post there build looking for help, but then ignore the suggestions posted by others and defend said build tooth and nail.

I guess my question is what is the line between fun and effectiveness? Is fun paramount over anything else even if you are perhaps impacting the fun of other players by being dead weight in a queue?

If you're doing it intentionally to be dead weight because that's how you have fun, I would hesitate to say 'to each their own'. Since the build you talk about having seen sounds like the default weapon mixture ships are comissioned with, the person may have been trying to see how effective that could be. As for the all-universal console setup, some could be set bonuses, others lobi or rep, and they could be part of a cohesive plan to see how many sets you could have on one ship. Since, with the personal/rep/ship traits available now and the relatively low requirement for damage needed to not be dead weight, its entirely possible to do sufficient damage with almost any configuration, the poster might well have been both having fun and being effective.

One other note...the 'standard' suggestions you talk about are only 'standard' for energy weapon AoE damage builds, and are far from the best/only options for other archetypes. That's why it'd be good to know the faction/career/ship/intended role.

tobiashirt

captainperkins wrote: »

I've played since launch & I have no idea about builds and synergies.

My builds are style based.
My current flagship is a fleet T6 Excelsior with wratch of khan pulse phasers a aft omni pulse phaser and kinnetic cutting beam. For torps I use gravimetric fore and either a temporal torp or vaaduar tricobalt mine aft.
All my tac consoles are fleet phaser boosters. I made everything epic. I only use epic stuff.

Still in spite of all that I dont think I get 20k damage. When i activate red matter capacitor and divert all power to weapons my tray reads only 1900 or so dps per beam bank. Unless im miscalculating... I dont know how others get such high dps.

I dont like non-canon builds and I dont much care for non starfleet beams, but the orange and blue phasers got boring... I was thrilled with the new pulse phasers.

I believe fun outweighs effectiveness. I seem to hold my weight in pve queues pretty well. I think if a player sucks IN a pve they will either learn to get epic builds or theyll stick to easier queues...

Generally, by being tactical officers in ships with 4-5 tac consoles. A lot of the dps nowadays comes from adding haste and other additional effects, rather than pure tooltip damage. I had an ISA last night using my fed Andorian engineer (~1300/beam) and managed to get an above-average (for that build) 168k.

tribbulater

Regardless of what opinions we all have, the 'right' of anyone to play in whatever way they want is controlled by the game mechanics. If anyone can enter an RA or STF with any gear, then people will do so. Whether to 'have fun', grief others, or simply from ignorance or inexperience.

Since we can't control what others may do, and the game doesn't much limit them, the only thing we can control is our own reaction. In my case, I try to make it "ah well, that's 10 minutes with nothing much achieved, but hey, it still beats watching TV".

limonenwolf

nikephorus wrote: »

I saw a conversation the other day between a few people after a rather questionable build got posted in a STO Facebook group.

Ah yes i remember you. Hi
You are the one who said my setup was a mess and garbage.

nikephorus wrote: »

The original poster posted a build for his ship which was very much a hodge podge of basically everything.
There were dual heavy cannons, beam arrays, dual beam banks, and I believe a torpedo and all his console slots were filled with universals.

It is not a DPS build which i clearly stated. 4 universals are not all console slots, that would be 11.

nikephorus wrote: »

One of the first people to post said the build was a mess and offered some pretty standard suggestions. Pick one type of weapon, use tactical consoles in your tactical slots, romulan plasma consoles for science...stuff of that nature.

Why are you talking about yourself in the third person? I mean i could be wrong here but your characters name is a pretty good giveaway when compared to your last name on FB.

nikephorus wrote: »

This person was immediately attacked by another member for giving suggestions without knowing what the original posters build goals were and also asserted that the current build was fine if fun was being had.

I dont see any attacks as response to your suggestion. The person responding to your suggestion just said Quote:"Doesn't have to be. It helps, though."

nikephorus wrote: »

Personally, I think a balance of fun and effectiveness should try to be maintained. I don't want to be dead weight on my team when doing queues, but I also want to have fun as well. I think I always believed, naively, that this was the goal of most players. Have fun and be effective, but that isn't really the case it seems. I would seem that some people are okay just using a random build and letting other people carry them through content. That doesn't sound like fun to me personally, but I guess it's a thing.

Look what you just said is somewhat rude.
Just because you dont understand the reason behind the build doesnt mean its random stuff put together. It just isnt.
There went considerable thought into this.
Why should every player use a maximum dps build? Many players do such insane amounts of damage that they trivialize most parts of the game.
Whats wrong with a more defensive build that includes support for the group.
There arent many players that lend support these days. With the build i posted i can still do at least decent dps and i can support group members with shield and hull healing or drawing fire if needed as the build gives the ship good hull,shield values.
I think its just awful that if you dont have a dps build you are basically called a slacker and a person that others carry through the content. Remember that next time some player supports you and saves your butt in the game.

nikephorus wrote: »

Another thing I don't understand is why someone would post there build looking for help, but then ignore the suggestions posted by others and defend said build tooth and nail.

I did not ignore helpful advice at all i was thankful for it and even stated that. Alternative facts?
I defended my build because of people like you coming in calling it a mess and garbage.
Thats not the help i need.

nikephorus wrote: »

I guess my question is what is the line between fun and effectiveness? Is fun paramount over anything else even if you are perhaps impacting the fun of other players by being dead weight in a queue?

The assumption alone.....nevermind i said enough.

odinforever20000

limonenwolf wrote: »

nikephorus wrote: »

I saw a conversation the other day between a few people after a rather questionable build got posted in a STO Facebook group.

Ah yes i remember you. Hi
You are the one who said my setup was a mess and garbage.

nikephorus wrote: »

The original poster posted a build for his ship which was very much a hodge podge of basically everything.
There were dual heavy cannons, beam arrays, dual beam banks, and I believe a torpedo and all his console slots were filled with universals.

It is not a DPS build which i clearly stated. 4 universals are not all console slots, that would be 11.

nikephorus wrote: »

One of the first people to post said the build was a mess and offered some pretty standard suggestions. Pick one type of weapon, use tactical consoles in your tactical slots, romulan plasma consoles for science...stuff of that nature.

Why are you talking about yourself in the third person? I mean i could be wrong here but your characters name is a pretty good giveaway when compared to your last name on FB.

nikephorus wrote: »

This person was immediately attacked by another member for giving suggestions without knowing what the original posters build goals were and also asserted that the current build was fine if fun was being had.

I dont see any attacks as response to your suggestion. The person responding to your suggestion just said Quote:"Doesn't have to be. It helps, though."

nikephorus wrote: »

Personally, I think a balance of fun and effectiveness should try to be maintained. I don't want to be dead weight on my team when doing queues, but I also want to have fun as well. I think I always believed, naively, that this was the goal of most players. Have fun and be effective, but that isn't really the case it seems. I would seem that some people are okay just using a random build and letting other people carry them through content. That doesn't sound like fun to me personally, but I guess it's a thing.

Look what you just said is somewhat rude.
Just because you dont understand the reason behind the build doesnt mean its random stuff put together. It just isnt.
There went considerable thought into this.
Why should every player use a maximum dps build? Many players do such insane amounts of damage that they trivialize most parts of the game.
Whats wrong with a more defensive build that includes support for the group.
There arent many players that lend support these days. With the build i posted i can still do at least decent dps and i can support group members with shield and hull healing or drawing fire if needed as the build gives the ship good hull,shield values.
I think its just awful that if you dont have a dps build you are basically called a slacker and a person that others carry through the content. Remember that next time some player supports you and saves your butt in the game.

nikephorus wrote: »

Another thing I don't understand is why someone would post there build looking for help, but then ignore the suggestions posted by others and defend said build tooth and nail.

I did not ignore helpful advice at all i was thankful for it and even stated that. Alternative facts?
I defended my build because of people like you coming in calling it a mess and garbage.
Thats not the help i need.

nikephorus wrote: »

I guess my question is what is the line between fun and effectiveness? Is fun paramount over anything else even if you are perhaps impacting the fun of other players by being dead weight in a queue?

The assumption alone.....nevermind i said enough.

So...were you flyin a wells too? :P

nikephorus

limonenwolf wrote: »

nikephorus wrote: »

I saw a conversation the other day between a few people after a rather questionable build got posted in a STO Facebook group.

Ah yes i remember you. Hi
You are the one who said my setup was a mess and garbage.

nikephorus wrote: »

The original poster posted a build for his ship which was very much a hodge podge of basically everything.
There were dual heavy cannons, beam arrays, dual beam banks, and I believe a torpedo and all his console slots were filled with universals.

It is not a DPS build which i clearly stated. 4 universals are not all console slots, that would be 11.

nikephorus wrote: »

One of the first people to post said the build was a mess and offered some pretty standard suggestions. Pick one type of weapon, use tactical consoles in your tactical slots, romulan plasma consoles for science...stuff of that nature.

Why are you talking about yourself in the third person? I mean i could be wrong here but your characters name is a pretty good giveaway when compared to your last name on FB.

nikephorus wrote: »

This person was immediately attacked by another member for giving suggestions without knowing what the original posters build goals were and also asserted that the current build was fine if fun was being had.

I dont see any attacks as response to your suggestion. The person responding to your suggestion just said Quote:"Doesn't have to be. It helps, though."

nikephorus wrote: »

Personally, I think a balance of fun and effectiveness should try to be maintained. I don't want to be dead weight on my team when doing queues, but I also want to have fun as well. I think I always believed, naively, that this was the goal of most players. Have fun and be effective, but that isn't really the case it seems. I would seem that some people are okay just using a random build and letting other people carry them through content. That doesn't sound like fun to me personally, but I guess it's a thing.

Look what you just said is somewhat rude.
Just because you dont understand the reason behind the build doesnt mean its random stuff put together. It just isnt.
There went considerable thought into this.
Why should every player use a maximum dps build? Many players do such insane amounts of damage that they trivialize most parts of the game.
Whats wrong with a more defensive build that includes support for the group.
There arent many players that lend support these days. With the build i posted i can still do at least decent dps and i can support group members with shield and hull healing or drawing fire if needed as the build gives the ship good hull,shield values.
I think its just awful that if you dont have a dps build you are basically called a slacker and a person that others carry through the content. Remember that next time some player supports you and saves your butt in the game.

nikephorus wrote: »

Another thing I don't understand is why someone would post there build looking for help, but then ignore the suggestions posted by others and defend said build tooth and nail.

I did not ignore helpful advice at all i was thankful for it and even stated that. Alternative facts?
I defended my build because of people like you coming in calling it a mess and garbage.
Thats not the help i need.

nikephorus wrote: »

I guess my question is what is the line between fun and effectiveness? Is fun paramount over anything else even if you are perhaps impacting the fun of other players by being dead weight in a queue?

The assumption alone.....nevermind i said enough.

I'm sorry to say I'm not actually the one that said your build was bad, but I did agree with his assessment. I'm a member of that group, but I don't generally post. I just use it as reference for when good information/builds are posted. The entire conversation on fb got me thinking about...well about the title of this thread... the balance between fun and effectiveness. I've played several different mmo's over the years of which sto is definitely a different kind of beast. It was actually one of the main reasons I asked the questions I did in this thread. Most mmo's require you to use certain effective builds if you want to participate in end game raids/missions, ...etc. Mostly because other players won't stand for carrying someone using some random build. STO though is different. You can tell from the responses in this thread. Most people are okay using sub-par builds even if they hurts their performance or that of the overall team STO is such an easy game, even in the Advanced and Elite difficulties, that this is actually a viable style of play.

Now you claim I don't understand the point of this build and you might be right. I have a logical mind and to me STO is basically about overwhelming your enemies with dps while being able to survive. Unlike many classic mmo's there is no trinity of class. There is no need for a tank or a healer because the players can basically do everything on their own. Additionally, healing other players that look like they are in danger of being destroyed can actually be undesirable if you considering gdf.

Looking at the build in question there is most definitely a lack of focus which I why I called it a hodge podge and one of the posters on facebook called it a mess or something similar. I won't go into why that is because it isn't really relevant to the thread. My goal posting this wasn't to smash builds or name and shame which is why I didn't point to the facebook post to name or shame either the op or the respondent who called the build messed up, but to get opinions on the balance between fun and effectiveness.

lucho80

nikephorus wrote: »

I guess my question is what is the line between fun and effectiveness? Is fun paramount over anything else even if you are perhaps impacting the fun of other players by being dead weight in a queue?

Frankly, to each his own. I don't use FAW, BO, but have a beam boat with the Quantum Phase Torp on front with TS3/TS2. I don't have a single tac cosnole or damage boost, yet I can do 40K DPS with ease. That is my PvE drain boat build which goes way over the top on drain. Then there is the full drain PvP build that has much lower DPS, but is still surprisingly effective. If the guy can use his boff abilites and pilot that thing and do well, then good for him. Personally, I don't find the fun in making a cookie cutter tac DPS build and blowing everything up by pressing the spacebar a couple of times. Probably why I only use my main for accolade hunting and sometimes PvE, but get bored quickly of the monotony. I prefer seeing ships get drawn in from everywhere with gravity wells or drained dry by Tyken's.

nikephorus wrote: »

STO is basically about overwhelming your enemies with dps while being able to survive.

^
Definitively not the point of the game if you want to have fun.

nikephorus

lucho80 wrote: »

nikephorus wrote: »

I guess my question is what is the line between fun and effectiveness? Is fun paramount over anything else even if you are perhaps impacting the fun of other players by being dead weight in a queue?

Frankly, to each his own. I don't use FAW, BO, but have a beam boat with the Quantum Phase Torp on front with TS3/TS2. I don't have a single tac cosnole or damage boost, yet I can do 40K DPS with ease. That is my PvE drain boat build which goes way over the top on drain. Then there is the full drain PvP build that has much lower DPS, but is still surprisingly effective. If the guy can use his boff abilites and pilot that thing and do well, then good for him. Personally, I don't find the fun in making a cookie cutter tac DPS build and blowing everything up by pressing the spacebar a couple of times. Probably why I only use my main for accolade hunting and sometimes PvE, but get bored quickly of the monotony. I prefer seeing ships get drawn in from everywhere with gravity wells or drained dry by Tyken's.

nikephorus wrote: »

STO is basically about overwhelming your enemies with dps while being able to survive.

^
Definitively not the point of the game if you want to have fun.

Well as always fun is a subjective thing, but one thing that isn't subjective is that nearly all end game content in sto requires you to destroy the enemy. Now admittedly my comment about overwhelming enemies with dps was a little rudimentary. People can go about destroying enemies in various ways, but you will still need some form of damage to destroy them. Your drain boat for instance is one way. I don't have a problem with builds other then dps builds...maybe that's how my opinion has looked thus far?

Lets change gears a little. Do you remember the mission A Step Between the Stars? It's the mission where you need to fly the Dyson destroyer. The build on that ship is nonsensical. I haven't ever heard a single good thing from anyone who has had fly that ship in that mission as it is configured. The ship has no focus on really anything. Do you agree that the Dyson destroyer in this mission is poorly set up?

tobiashirt

nikephorus wrote: »

Lets change gears a little. Do you remember the mission A Step Between the Stars? It's the mission where you need to fly the Dyson destroyer. The build on that ship is nonsensical. I haven't ever heard a single good thing from anyone who has had fly that ship in that mission as it is configured. The ship has no focus on really anything. Do you agree that the Dyson destroyer in this mission is poorly set up?

I'll chime in and say 'yes', although inefficiently might be a better descriptor. Same thing with the Enterprise-C, and flying the obelisk in it's introduction mission was mostly about the cool special powers rather than a effective build.

Edit: Something I thought of, as a more direct response to this thread's premise...for me, a fun build is one in which the gear all works toward the goal of the ship. My flagship, for example, is the one I use when I feel like taking a stab at the meta, and it thus has coalition/ttd/herald beams, gilded iconian set, embassy consoles, flagship consoles + leech and dynamic power redistributor. My drain ship has polaron beams, nukara mines, temporal shields/delta core/[Damp] engines, and assorted consoles, with the only thing in common being boosts to [DrainX].

If the goal were to balance healing/support and damage, we'd move to stuff like 'sustained radiant field', the console(s) from the steamrunner and Thrai, embassy consoles with a shield healing buff, and universals to complete sets.