I have been honestly thinking more and more that they should impliment something like how we can pick and choose the abilities we slot from boffs to captain abilities. Like that you have 6-9 different an unique captain career abilities that give varying effects, but that you can only choose to have three of them active or slotted for use at a time, which gives more options for howto build your character too.
Sort of like how traits are handled?
That does sound like it would give more variety.
Yeah basically, or any of the traits really, and the boff system. I mean just looking at engineers for example of two possible abilities would be eps transfer, but than you might have more of a eps overload/amp that would instead of buffing your power levels would like I have suggested buff the bonus gained from your power levels for a duration.
it would also make sense...i mean, why are tactical officers the only ones capable of saying 'Attack Pattern Alpha!' to the guy/gal at the helm?
Not sure you mean what I suggested, but I was not so much sharing the captain abilities between the careers, but instead adding more career abilities an only having three of them active at one time. So instead of having tactical have only really dps focused abilities, you might add afew career abilities that give also more defensive and supportive aspects as an example.
Though I have always thought that the career abilities effects, and what career skill tree you progress down (being tactical, science, and engineering) would buff, or add additional effects onto the ability. I mean it would make sense that a tactical officer that puts more time an points into the science skill tree could use their abilities more effectively alongside science abilities.
Is that kinda like what SWTOR does where you choose a main class and then you can choose abilities in a certain "sub-class"? Like in STO, you could make an engineer and then go on to make it even more heal-ish or you could emphasize something else instead by choosing to follow a certain path of "skill choices" or by selecting a different sub-class from a group of option. I may have completely misread what you meant. So in theory you could make an engineer more science-y or more tactical-ish or even more heal-y. Same with the other classes.
EDIT: maybe I sorta just described specializations. lol who knows.
Not sure you mean what I suggested, but I was not so much sharing the captain abilities between the careers, but instead adding more career abilities an only having three of them active at one time. So instead of having tactical have only really dps focused abilities, you might add afew career abilities that give also more defensive and supportive aspects as an example.
Though I have always thought that the career abilities effects, and what career skill tree you progress down (being tactical, science, and engineering) would buff, or add additional effects onto the ability. I mean it would make sense that a tactical officer that puts more time an points into the science skill tree could use their abilities more effectively alongside science abilities.
Is that kinda like what SWTOR does where you choose a main class and then you can choose abilities in a certain "sub-class"? Like in STO, you could make an engineer and then go on to make it even more heal-ish or you could emphasize something else instead by choosing to follow a certain path of "skill choices" or by selecting a different sub-class from a group of option. I may have completely misread what you meant. So in theory you could make an engineer more science-y or more tactical-ish or even more heal-y. Same with the other classes.
EDIT: maybe I sorta just described specializations. lol who knows.
Yeah that is kinda what I mean by us putting points into the skill trees (specialization trees), but that it would also be a way of giving more flavor to your career specific abilities. For this suggestion I was talking about the skill trees below we have in the game. An so if you put points as a tactical into engineering at predetermined points totals your career abilities would gain an additional effect, as an example their career ability fire on my mark would gain that during it's duration you would gain a buff to your ship's power levels an transfer rate ala eps transfer gained at level 17 (just not as potent as the true eps.). Though doing this would need a revampi/balance, but could balance out the gaps in dps via allowing engineers/science captains to gain a apa like aspect to their own ability via speccing into the tactical tree.
I hope that clarified it a bit better. The first idea was more of treating the career specific abilities lie how boff abilities are, and then adding afew more of them to each career, and so allowing the player to slot which of his career's abilities he would have use of.
I will say it this way. Welcome to Blizzards Nerf Hammer. I went through this twice before, like when the game went F2P and P2W at the same time. Things will get ironed out after a while, but when the game underwent the F2P changes it took over twleve Months to get things going back in the right Direction (when so many Vet Players Stop Playing, you have really messed something up). I found it's best to just take a break, leave for a while and return refreshed and to a game that though you remember, is now somewhat new. If you are a Lifer, then you'll get Zen to spend when you return as well. But, in all honesty, it seems like STO has plans to work on the PvP system with these changes. Just my thoughts and nothing else....take them or leave them, think I am right or think I am wrong, doesn't matter as this will always be Cryptic's (and now PWE's) Galaxy, you only play in it.
So one thing I'm concerned with is the embassy plasma generating science consoles.
I just watch a Youtube vid, forget who's, (sorry it's late) who reported that these consoles received an approximately 97% nerf.
If this is true, this is not retaining the value on these consoles, like promised.
I have 5 of em I've upgraded at some cost to epic.
If this has been mentioned already, again I apologize, it's been an amazingly long day.
I love this **** backwards idea that just because you can no longer do 200k+ DPS with them that means they no longer have value.
Wow.
I just want the consoles I spent my resources on to retain "as much as the original value" they had when I committed my time and resources to them. In some cases, these resources included actual cash.
I think they feel there is a call for pvp on console and this is for that. They will probably add that new hybrid type pvp zone they were talking about were there is pve zones in it and call it done.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
One step at a time but it is the direction the whole thing aims at. DPS is not supposed to be cheap. If you want it you may pay. Lech and embassy consoles were for free but consumed slots that will now be easier to fill with the next generation of pay2win stuff.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
So one thing I'm concerned with is the embassy plasma generating science consoles.
I just watch a Youtube vid, forget who's, (sorry it's late) who reported that these consoles received an approximately 97% nerf.
If this is true, this is not retaining the value on these consoles, like promised.
I have 5 of em I've upgraded at some cost to epic.
If this has been mentioned already, again I apologize, it's been an amazingly long day.
I love this **** backwards idea that just because you can no longer do 200k+ DPS with them that means they no longer have value.
Wow.
I just want the consoles I spent my resources on to retain "as much as the original value" they had when I committed my time and resources to them. In some cases, these resources included actual cash.
Not trying to start a flame war here.
Please try to forgive a few of the peeps around here. Their STO experience the past months (years?) must have been that unsatisfying that they don’t care about your game progression if it means a slight chance to play an influential role in teamed PvE for them again.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
...(IOW there's that whole "Relevance" problem again-it's completely irrelevant under the present storyline and would require some new factional structure to work, since the old factions are all bestest pals again.)
I don't need a story hook to PvP. I need a cloak-capable ship with Temporal powers so I can vape noobs.
Jokes aside, I have not seen any PvP'ers that were concerned with story. They seemed more interested in player vs player combat, and the mechanical "imbalances" that hindered this experience. PvP'ers seem to be really interested in the new changes. I doubt they will care how out of place Kerrat 2.0 is with regards to the story.
second problem behind relevance would be rewards and reward structures-and that would require more work than the maps to make something that isn't going to be automatically abused and exploited the way the old PvP rewards were.
Players have pointed out that Cryptic is terrible at que and Battlezone rewards. It will likely continue with the "great PvP revival".
second problem behind relevance would be rewards and reward structures-and that would require more work than the maps to make something that isn't going to be automatically abused and exploited the way the old PvP rewards were.
There is no point wasting any time on something like that. If you start with the premise that player cooperation is "exploiting," the only way to prevent that is to not have PvP rewards at all.
Did some ISA runs on Tribble last night. While the overall DPS was down, we were finishing ISA much faster than normal. Even with just 1 player in the 120k range and the rest running below 100k, we were finishing ISA in just over 1min 20s.
Everyone seemed to have changed to low AOE/single target focused builds so everything is dying faster due to concentrated firepower. As it stands, we are returning to a DHC meta. At the speed things are dying in Tribble, I think we'll be seeing way more AFK penalties being handed out should this roll out as is.
second problem behind relevance would be rewards and reward structures-and that would require more work than the maps to make something that isn't going to be automatically abused and exploited the way the old PvP rewards were.
There is no point wasting any time on something like that. If you start with the premise that player cooperation is "exploiting," the only way to prevent that is to not have PvP rewards at all.
it's not "cooperation" that was the problem, it was "cooperating to throw the match."
sort of like...the owners of two football teams getting together, and agreeing that one team will basically not play and let the other team score because both teams will get paid the same as they would if they actually play the game.
a fix to the reward system could reduce or prevent that-but it's a lot of work for a marginal activity.
No, it couldn't. Regardless of reward system, it's always an advantage if players are cooperating to boost rewards instead of competing against eachother. If that's a "problem," then you can't have rewards for PvP.
Which is why Cryptic "fixed" that by nerfing the rewards to the point PvP is no longer attractive compared to other activities at all, even when boosting.
For those that don't understand all of the technical changes, what is going to be obsolete when the changes come? And what will be the new hotness?
A lot of us are trying to tinker that out at the moment. It’s going to take a bit of time though as the changes aren’t set in stone yet. It’s also likely that tomorrow’s best stuff to use isn’t that much better than tomorrow’s second to best stuff (which is cool).
I’m sure the STO League will continue to give their build recommendations in the variety they already expanded to in recent months. It is sound to check it regularly.
No matter what will be the next thing to go to it will still be fairly possible to suck at ISA with less than 10k or even get an AFK penalty there. Scrubs will be scrubs no matter how hard cryptic tries to change the game for them.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
second problem behind relevance would be rewards and reward structures-and that would require more work than the maps to make something that isn't going to be automatically abused and exploited the way the old PvP rewards were.
There is no point wasting any time on something like that. If you start with the premise that player cooperation is "exploiting," the only way to prevent that is to not have PvP rewards at all.
it's not "cooperation" that was the problem, it was "cooperating to throw the match."
sort of like...the owners of two football teams getting together, and agreeing that one team will basically not play and let the other team score because both teams will get paid the same as they would if they actually play the game.
a fix to the reward system could reduce or prevent that-but it's a lot of work for a marginal activity.
No, it couldn't. Regardless of reward system, it's always an advantage if players are cooperating to boost rewards instead of competing against eachother. If that's a "problem," then you can't have rewards for PvP.
Which is why Cryptic "fixed" that by nerfing the rewards to the point PvP is no longer attractive compared to other activities at all, even when boosting.
there's the rub, Warpangel, when the rewards are identical regardless of outcome (15-0 teamwipe rewards exactly the same as 15-14 closely fought match), and without regards to win/loss (losing pays as much as winning) you get exactly the exploit the devs rightly and correctly removed.
If rewards are higher for 15-14 (space arena), and the winner gets more than the loser, then 'cooperating' for better rewards means both teams try very hard to win (and seek out better opponents to fight), but not so much that the fight is one-sided. It favours the random match or the match between competing premades over the 'close the room and throw th e game' Private matches that were the reason the rewards were gutted to begin with.
No, it means players would cooperate to intentionally always hit 15-14 as fast as possible and take turns winning.
the only way it can work, is if the best rewards come from the hardest fought matches. Think of it as a sport-does it make sense to pit an NFL Linebacker against a team of your local lower-tier high schoolers?
no. whether it's American football, hockey, world "Futbol", your pros are paid like pros because they're playing other pros. audiences don't turn out for obviously one-sided matches that were obvous from the announcement on.
welllll...a working PvP reward system should definitely angle the rewards to favor tight, hard-fought matches over one-sided stomps. It's pretty well established that an actual handicapping system isn't in the works, and might not function correctly if it were developed-handicapping or "Matchmaking" or "BV" systems are notoriously finicky things that require constant maintenance and often STILL don't work as intended.
There is no way for the game to tell the difference between "tight, hard-fought matches" and players cooperating to hit whatever criteria it uses to assign reward.
a system where 'cooperating for the greater rewards' requires that both sides put up the best fight they can, that MIGHT work. Purple ribbons as was being abused have already proven to fail.
Comments
Is that kinda like what SWTOR does where you choose a main class and then you can choose abilities in a certain "sub-class"? Like in STO, you could make an engineer and then go on to make it even more heal-ish or you could emphasize something else instead by choosing to follow a certain path of "skill choices" or by selecting a different sub-class from a group of option. I may have completely misread what you meant. So in theory you could make an engineer more science-y or more tactical-ish or even more heal-y. Same with the other classes.
EDIT: maybe I sorta just described specializations. lol who knows.
Yeah that is kinda what I mean by us putting points into the skill trees (specialization trees), but that it would also be a way of giving more flavor to your career specific abilities. For this suggestion I was talking about the skill trees below we have in the game. An so if you put points as a tactical into engineering at predetermined points totals your career abilities would gain an additional effect, as an example their career ability fire on my mark would gain that during it's duration you would gain a buff to your ship's power levels an transfer rate ala eps transfer gained at level 17 (just not as potent as the true eps.). Though doing this would need a revampi/balance, but could balance out the gaps in dps via allowing engineers/science captains to gain a apa like aspect to their own ability via speccing into the tactical tree.
I hope that clarified it a bit better. The first idea was more of treating the career specific abilities lie how boff abilities are, and then adding afew more of them to each career, and so allowing the player to slot which of his career's abilities he would have use of.
The editing bug is abit annoying.
Wow.
I just want the consoles I spent my resources on to retain "as much as the original value" they had when I committed my time and resources to them. In some cases, these resources included actual cash.
Not trying to start a flame war here.
I construed the statement of intent, as somewhat of a promise, my bad.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
One step at a time but it is the direction the whole thing aims at. DPS is not supposed to be cheap. If you want it you may pay. Lech and embassy consoles were for free but consumed slots that will now be easier to fill with the next generation of pay2win stuff.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Please try to forgive a few of the peeps around here. Their STO experience the past months (years?) must have been that unsatisfying that they don’t care about your game progression if it means a slight chance to play an influential role in teamed PvE for them again.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Jokes aside, I have not seen any PvP'ers that were concerned with story. They seemed more interested in player vs player combat, and the mechanical "imbalances" that hindered this experience. PvP'ers seem to be really interested in the new changes. I doubt they will care how out of place Kerrat 2.0 is with regards to the story.
Players have pointed out that Cryptic is terrible at que and Battlezone rewards. It will likely continue with the "great PvP revival".
You stole my line! Besides, I called it first
Fleet Defiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support | Fleet Manticore Kinetic Strike Ship | Tactical Command Kinetic Siege Refit | Fleet Defiant Quantum Phase Escort | Fleet Valiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support
Turning the Galaxy-X into a Torpedo Dreadnought & torpedo tutorial, with written torpedo guide.
"A good weapon and a great strategy will win you many battles." - Marshall
I knew using Kinetics would be playing the game on hard mode, but what I didn't realize was how bad the deck is stacked against Kinetics.
Everyone seemed to have changed to low AOE/single target focused builds so everything is dying faster due to concentrated firepower. As it stands, we are returning to a DHC meta. At the speed things are dying in Tribble, I think we'll be seeing way more AFK penalties being handed out should this roll out as is.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Been there and done that in the Escort Online days. It doesn't sound appealing to me... not that faw sounds much better.
Which is why Cryptic "fixed" that by nerfing the rewards to the point PvP is no longer attractive compared to other activities at all, even when boosting.
A lot of us are trying to tinker that out at the moment. It’s going to take a bit of time though as the changes aren’t set in stone yet. It’s also likely that tomorrow’s best stuff to use isn’t that much better than tomorrow’s second to best stuff (which is cool).
I’m sure the STO League will continue to give their build recommendations in the variety they already expanded to in recent months. It is sound to check it regularly.
No matter what will be the next thing to go to it will still be fairly possible to suck at ISA with less than 10k or even get an AFK penalty there. Scrubs will be scrubs no matter how hard cryptic tries to change the game for them.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
My character Tsin'xing
http://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/startrekonline/#/discussion/1229771/tribble-maintenance-and-release-notes-march-23-2017
Fleet Defiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support | Fleet Manticore Kinetic Strike Ship | Tactical Command Kinetic Siege Refit | Fleet Defiant Quantum Phase Escort | Fleet Valiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support
Turning the Galaxy-X into a Torpedo Dreadnought & torpedo tutorial, with written torpedo guide.
"A good weapon and a great strategy will win you many battles." - Marshall
I knew using Kinetics would be playing the game on hard mode, but what I didn't realize was how bad the deck is stacked against Kinetics.
There is no way for the game to tell the difference between "tight, hard-fought matches" and players cooperating to hit whatever criteria it uses to assign reward.
No such system can possibly exist.