test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Some thoughts about the balance changes.

I only recently came back after a 3 month break. Now first of all, I think that adding actual resistance to physical damage has saved PVP entirely. I made an in-depth thesis couple of months ago on the imbalance of space PVP... but really, all there was to it is that the lack of physical res caused the 'pizza cutter' ships to instagib other ships, but that's bygone. Now healer/tanks can actually stay alive without being one-shotted by some tiny ship. I noticed a thread about proton-damage being overpowered, but with enough resistance, my tank build isn't really bothered by it. So I'm neutral on that one.

Yet I disagree with the brutal nerf on abilities like BFAW and Gravity Well (which has a miserable pull effect in most cases, and shares CD with Tyken). Completely uncalled for. These things weren't a problem in PVP at all, and certainly not in PVE.

Also I think Sci's are a bit too strong in ground atm, spamming Cold Fusion flash, Exothermic, Hyperonic and other DoTs at the same time will definitely ensure a nuclear holocaust that would make even the most dps-obsessed tac jealous. But i'm not so uncool as to say "nerf nerf", as the trick is simply to giving other classes a bit more.

Since most PVE queues are really about fast grinding - that is about rushing and direct damage dealing, the engineers especially lag behind. There are some scenario's where engineers are great (hive and khitomer), but they overal don't perform as well. My suggestion is to reduce their cooldowns and increase their damage a bit, or something along those lines.

I like tacs exactly as they are right now though. I believe they need no changes as the spike damage experts of the game.
«1

Comments

  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 55,806 Community Moderator
    tremere12 wrote: »
    I only recently came back after a 3 month break. Now first of all, I think that adding actual resistance to physical damage has saved PVP entirely. I made an in-depth thesis couple of months ago on the imbalance of space PVP... but really, all there was to it is that the lack of physical res caused the 'pizza cutter' ships to instagib other ships, but that's bygone. Now healer/tanks can actually stay alive without being one-shotted by some tiny ship. I noticed a thread about proton-damage being overpowered, but with enough resistance, my tank build isn't really bothered by it. So I'm neutral on that one.

    People are still able to alpha strike others into oblivion instantly unless they are SPECIFICALLY BUILT for it. Some of us generalists... still get oneshot and still avoid PvP because PvE builds that work for most things STILL suffer from the Alpha Strikers.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    tremere12 wrote: »
    I only recently came back after a 3 month break. Now first of all, I think that adding actual resistance to physical damage has saved PVP entirely. I made an in-depth thesis couple of months ago on the imbalance of space PVP... but really, all there was to it is that the lack of physical res caused the 'pizza cutter' ships to instagib other ships, but that's bygone. Now healer/tanks can actually stay alive without being one-shotted by some tiny ship. I noticed a thread about proton-damage being overpowered, but with enough resistance, my tank build isn't really bothered by it. So I'm neutral on that one.

    People are still able to alpha strike others into oblivion instantly unless they are SPECIFICALLY BUILT for it. Some of us generalists... still get oneshot and still avoid PvP because PvE builds that work for most things STILL suffer from the Alpha Strikers.

    Okay, I have no problem as a tank, but I hear ya. Every build should be viable.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 55,806 Community Moderator
    Agreed. However we still have the cookie cutter "vape everything" builds out there... and people who look down on those who don't do X DPS like they shouldn't even be playing the game. Drives me up a wall.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    edited August 2017
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Agreed. However we still have the cookie cutter "vape everything" builds out there... and people who look down on those who don't do X DPS like they shouldn't even be playing the game. Drives me up a wall.

    Yes I am against the "dps everything mentality" , because it destroys gameplay diversity. Healers, tanks, damage dealers or "uncategorized" builds should all have their place.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 55,806 Community Moderator
    Right. One of the good things about STO is the diversity of options. Yet for most of these people its "Antiproton or GTFO" or "Disruptors or GTFO" or some other meta where they deny you're skill based on your gear.

    I made a pretty decent Tetryon build using the full Nukara set, 2 piece weapon/console (As its typically on a cruiser so no dual beam bank), and Krenim set. Put that same build on a Vorgon ship with the Vorgon set... holy buckets! Tetryon for DAYS!

    Yet most hardcore players look down on Tetryon because:
    • Once the shields are gone, the proc is useless
    • The best disable is a warp core breach
    • It can't hurt you if its already dead

    They fail to realize that Tetryon STILL does damage even with the shields down, and that maybe Tetryon does damage to the hull sooner because it takes shields down faster. But nope! Meta says Tetyon sucks so Tetryon sucks. GTFO N00B!

    Killjoys. >.< Use what you frickin' like and have fun doing it is what I say.
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    edited August 2017
    My main Rom t6 Scimi engineer dps/tank hybrid build uses tetryon. I've been commended on my ridiculous damage dealing ability while at the same time staying well alive. I don't let cookiecutter builds and haters detract me.
  • jaguarskxjaguarskx Member Posts: 5,945 Arc User
    Overall, the changes have not affected me very much. I basically do my own thing so I do not bother following the meta and cookie cutter builds. I don't bother with using reputation gear with the exception of some torpedoes even though I have maxed out nearly all the reputation systems. Since I am not in a fleet, I have no access to fleet gear. I also have not bothered allocating any specialization points either.

    I rely solely on mission and crafted gear that has been upgraded to Mk XIV to play Advanced space and Elite ground missions.

    The only space change that had a substantial affect on me was the nerf to the Plasmonic Leech. For Fed and KDF the nerf to the Leech is not that big of a deal, however, for Romulans commanding any Warbird that uses a singularity warp core it is a rather substantial nerf.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    "Some other players are still better than me," episode 9371. :tired_face:

    Every build should most definitely not be viable, that's complete nonsense. The whole point of having customizable equipment and skills is to find the combinations that work the best. If everything was to be equal we might as well not have builds at all.
  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    edited August 2017
    warpangel wrote: »
    "Some other players are still better than me," episode 9371. :tired_face:

    Every build should most definitely not be viable, that's complete nonsense. The whole point of having customizable equipment and skills is to find the combinations that work the best. If everything was to be equal we might as well not have builds at all.

    Yeah sure, but you know what I mean - that "dps" is not the only way to go. Intelligent planning should still be a factor.
  • risian4risian4 Member Posts: 3,711 Arc User
    tremere12 wrote: »
    I only recently came back after a 3 month break. Now first of all, I think that adding actual resistance to physical damage has saved PVP entirely. I made an in-depth thesis couple of months ago on the imbalance of space PVP... but really, all there was to it is that the lack of physical res caused the 'pizza cutter' ships to instagib other ships, but that's bygone. Now healer/tanks can actually stay alive without being one-shotted by some tiny ship. I noticed a thread about proton-damage being overpowered, but with enough resistance, my tank build isn't really bothered by it. So I'm neutral on that one.

    Yet I disagree with the brutal nerf on abilities like BFAW and Gravity Well (which has a miserable pull effect in most cases, and shares CD with Tyken). Completely uncalled for. These things weren't a problem in PVP at all, and certainly not in PVE.

    Also I think Sci's are a bit too strong in ground atm, spamming Cold Fusion flash, Exothermic, Hyperonic and other DoTs at the same time will definitely ensure a nuclear holocaust that would make even the most dps-obsessed tac jealous. But i'm not so uncool as to say "nerf nerf", as the trick is simply to giving other classes a bit more.

    Since most PVE queues are really about fast grinding - that is about rushing and direct damage dealing, the engineers especially lag behind. There are some scenario's where engineers are great (hive and khitomer), but they overal don't perform as well. My suggestion is to reduce their cooldowns and increase their damage a bit, or something along those lines.

    I like tacs exactly as they are right now though. I believe they need no changes as the spike damage experts of the game.

    Wait, it's 'uncool' to call for nerfs? :o

    Just kidding. In all seriousness, a lot of the rebalances were made undone before they ever made it to the live server. Things would have been more... interesting if all the changes from Tribble had actually been brought to Holodeck.


    Now some more specific reponses: Gravity Well can still control enemies. You may simply need to focus more on the Control skills. Besides, there are also other abilities that can slow enemies down and keep them from moving (Chronometric Inversion Field for instance, or indeed Tyken's rift). Players shouldn't expect an easy GW to attract all enemies in range when they don't specialise in it; and thus also not expect GW to be an easy solution when you want a specific enemy to be at a specific point.
    That's not how Science works, nor how any ability on its own should work. You'll have to dedicate some gear and skill points to the relevant skills.

    I do agree that some Sci offensive powers are a bit too powerful, but the same goes for some medic modules (very short cooldowns, instant full health regain in some cases) and tac (especially Strategic) modules. Then again, that's my experience. Some others might say things are just fine and that ground (with the exception of Sompek) isn't way too easy so I have no idea if further rebalancing is needed here.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    tremere12 wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    "Some other players are still better than me," episode 9371. :tired_face:

    Every build should most definitely not be viable, that's complete nonsense. The whole point of having customizable equipment and skills is to find the combinations that work the best. If everything was to be equal we might as well not have builds at all.

    Yeah sure, but you know what I mean - that "dps" is not the only way to go. Intelligent planning should still be a factor.
    As long as the main/only goal of missions is to kill enemies, doing damage is naturally going to be a requirement. That can mean spike damage or DPS, but damage nonetheless.
  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    risian4 wrote: »
    tremere12 wrote: »
    I only recently came back after a 3 month break. Now first of all, I think that adding actual resistance to physical damage has saved PVP entirely. I made an in-depth thesis couple of months ago on the imbalance of space PVP... but really, all there was to it is that the lack of physical res caused the 'pizza cutter' ships to instagib other ships, but that's bygone. Now healer/tanks can actually stay alive without being one-shotted by some tiny ship. I noticed a thread about proton-damage being overpowered, but with enough resistance, my tank build isn't really bothered by it. So I'm neutral on that one.

    Yet I disagree with the brutal nerf on abilities like BFAW and Gravity Well (which has a miserable pull effect in most cases, and shares CD with Tyken). Completely uncalled for. These things weren't a problem in PVP at all, and certainly not in PVE.

    Also I think Sci's are a bit too strong in ground atm, spamming Cold Fusion flash, Exothermic, Hyperonic and other DoTs at the same time will definitely ensure a nuclear holocaust that would make even the most dps-obsessed tac jealous. But i'm not so uncool as to say "nerf nerf", as the trick is simply to giving other classes a bit more.

    Since most PVE queues are really about fast grinding - that is about rushing and direct damage dealing, the engineers especially lag behind. There are some scenario's where engineers are great (hive and khitomer), but they overal don't perform as well. My suggestion is to reduce their cooldowns and increase their damage a bit, or something along those lines.

    I like tacs exactly as they are right now though. I believe they need no changes as the spike damage experts of the game.

    Wait, it's 'uncool' to call for nerfs? :o

    Just kidding. In all seriousness, a lot of the rebalances were made undone before they ever made it to the live server. Things would have been more... interesting if all the changes from Tribble had actually been brought to Holodeck.


    Now some more specific reponses: Gravity Well can still control enemies. You may simply need to focus more on the Control skills. Besides, there are also other abilities that can slow enemies down and keep them from moving (Chronometric Inversion Field for instance, or indeed Tyken's rift). Players shouldn't expect an easy GW to attract all enemies in range when they don't specialise in it; and thus also not expect GW to be an easy solution when you want a specific enemy to be at a specific point.
    That's not how Science works, nor how any ability on its own should work. You'll have to dedicate some gear and skill points to the relevant skills.

    I do agree that some Sci offensive powers are a bit too powerful, but the same goes for some medic modules (very short cooldowns, instant full health regain in some cases) and tac (especially Strategic) modules. Then again, that's my experience. Some others might say things are just fine and that ground (with the exception of Sompek) isn't way too easy so I have no idea if further rebalancing is needed here.

    I'm actually calling for a minor rebalance. Just revert GW and BFAW to their original state, and give the engineers on ground a bit more of a punch, and that's really it. If there's anything else I'm ignorant of, I'd like to hear it.
  • risian4risian4 Member Posts: 3,711 Arc User
    Oh look I'm not allowed to edit my post.

    Ok, then I'll just have to resort to spamming and make another pointless post until they finally fix that.


    Changes I wanted to make:
    - My Sci Vesta --> My Sci's Vesta
    - to use een when --> to use even when
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    risian4 wrote: »
    Oh look I'm not allowed to edit my post.

    Ok, then I'll just have to resort to spamming and make another pointless post until they finally fix that.


    Changes I wanted to make:
    - My Sci Vesta --> My Sci's Vesta
    - to use een when --> to use even when
    That would perhaps make more sense if you included the text those changes were supposed to apply to.
  • risian4risian4 Member Posts: 3,711 Arc User
    This is ridiculous... alright, retyping the whole thing but a bit shorter this time...

    It's not so much a matter of ignorance, I'm just not seeing the problems you seem to see.

    Engineers are just fine on the ground.

    BFAW was changed very logically. It's still the best ability to use in a target rich environment. I think it is reasonable to have some reduction in Accuracy for an ability that lets you shoot more often and at multiple targets. Reduced accuracy can also be countered but that might of course mean that players have to focus less on just increasing their CritD (which I feel is the real problem for some - they just want to keep their accuracy the same, while firing more often so that all other boosts can go towards CritD).
    All other changes (such as reduced damage with increasing distance) to FAW were made to bring it more in line with other abilities. I don't see what's wrong with that.


    As for GW: that ability can still be powerful. If the player is prepared to make some sacrifices to make it work, that is. Which is not an unreasonable expectation I think. You'll just have to put some more points in +control skills, or put some extra consoles on your ship. Why should Sci abilities be easily accessible, powerful and easy to use een (sic) when the player does not specialise in these type of abilities? That's basically asking for free damage, or free 'pull power' for lack of a better word right now - basically, a powerful Sci ability without dedicating your skip or skill build towards Sci powers.
    Would it be reasonable if I expected my Sci (sic) Vesta's aft polaron beam array to be very powerful, despite me not having any points in energy weapon skills or any regular (as in +polaron damage) tactical consoles?
  • risian4risian4 Member Posts: 3,711 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    risian4 wrote: »
    Oh look I'm not allowed to edit my post.

    Ok, then I'll just have to resort to spamming and make another pointless post until they finally fix that.


    Changes I wanted to make:
    - My Sci Vesta --> My Sci's Vesta
    - to use een when --> to use even when
    That would perhaps make more sense if you included the text those changes were supposed to apply to.

    Yeah just did that. I thought it was all written down - and it was - but then it suddenly disappeared. I really wish they'd finally fix that, capture the monster that's eating forum posts or seal the black hole. Or whatever it is that's causing the loss of posts :p
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    risian4 wrote: »
    This is ridiculous... alright, retyping the whole thing but a bit shorter this time...
    Agreed.

    Even more ridiculous, sometimes if you retype the eaten post and it's too similar original one, it immediately eats the new post too. This forum software is just crazy.
  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    Well, having a ton of bugs in-game isn't enough. The forum needs to be infected too, rite?
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 55,806 Community Moderator
    flood_infection_form_in_halo_3_by_victortky.jpg
    The infection spreads...
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 36,985 Arc User
    i reject your bugs and substitute my own!

    4945720388_e324f27cb2_o.jpg

    and yes, they badly over-nerfed grav well; with even a modest investment in CtrlX (i.e. the two nodes in the skill tree for a score of 100) you should see SOME slight pull from even rank 1...but you don't, nor do you see any from ranks 2 & 3 either - in fact, you don't start seeing ANY kind of noticeable effect from 3 until around 300+ CtrlX, never mind the inferior ranks​​
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • hairtrigger99hairtrigger99 Member Posts: 6 Arc User
    I have to start by saying I enjoy playing Star Trek online in limited amounts. Star Trek online is not new player friendly the grind is far too long to be enjoyable for instance a player must grind to level sixity thats not bad at all but thats really like a warm up because once the player reaches level 60 he must then start grinding reputation, to grind and reputation they must run dailies and also do group ques to obtain marks. Some group queues are not popular and can take 10 to 15 minutes in order to get into a group, iconian queues are a good example the queues can take a long time so you cannot complete a lot in a day. you must also obtaine specialty items to use in the reputation set crafting. To obtaine specialty items you must run hard mode group content or get lucky for them to drop from reputation daily rewards. Without high level gear you cannot run hard mode content without being a liability to your team. You can run end game episodes to obtaine a decent set to begin your grind this gear is level tier 12 in order to level its tier to 14 a new player must spend 10s of millions of credits at the auction house to buy R&D upgrades then spend tens of thousands of dilitium on top of teh credit cost to level an item to 14, for players each item can cost 50 to 60,000 dilitium just to get it to tier 14 this does not include the cost of increasing its rarity that can add another 25 to 50,000 dilitium and another 6-10 million credits this per item cost means it will be five months to obtaine the dilitium and credits needed to upgrade just seven or eight weapon systems for a ship to level 14 not including rarity increases. In order to upgrade a ship's navigational deflector, impulse engines, warp core and shields to level 14 without rarity increases a player will have to grind more credits and dilitium to purchase R&D upgrades and just these four items will add one or two months to equipping a ship with tier 14 not again not including rarity increases, this is due to the limit on how much dilitium you can refine and how much high level R&D upgrades cost. Then adding to the long grind is obtaining consoles for your ship the best options are purchased from fleet vendors for fleet marks and dilitium these items used to be sold at Max level forcing the player to only upgrade the rarity of the consoles. In the last couple patches, item tiers have gone up to 14 but fleet equipment is still level 12 the cost of this equipment is still as high as when this equipment was sold at Max tier for example tactical consoles cost 50,000 fleet marks and 15,000 dilitium a player must now also spend millions of credits and thousands of dilitium to level these tactical consoles to Max tier without increasing rarity. for people who have been playing for years and have Max sets they have accrued large amounts of dilitium and credits since they have nothing to spend it on, but to new players this cost represents a very large grind that must be taken in order to get one ship worthy of end game content. With the average player only able to spend 2 or 3 hours a night playing Star Trek online it can take far too long to equip one ship and without one good ship to grind hard mode group content the high level crafting materials can be out of reach for far too long adding to a player's frustration. ***(((A way to correct this is the phoenix R&D upgrades released recently these upgrades should be available from a vendor for 4500 dilitium and when used should cost 2000 dilitium there should be no upgrade cost when the item reaches a higher tier but the phoenix upgrades should not upgrade rarity they should only upgrade tier this would allow new players to upgrade one piece of gear such as tier 12 to tier 13 once per day when taking into account a player's limit on dilitium that can be refined)))***. This would make it so a player could have a ship ready for end game content in three or four months rather then eight to 12 months granted if a player can devote 6 to 8 hours a day they can equip a ship in less than eight months but for people like me that work a fulltime job and can only play 2 to 3 hours a night 2 or 3 nights a week it can take far too long to equip a ship for end game content. I am truly the kind of customer your company would like to have if you check my account even though I haven't played very much I have spent good money on your game if not for how hard it is to equip a ship I would play more and spend more on your game but because after an entire month of grinding I come to the realization that even if I grind for several months, I will only come close to equipping a ship just in time for your next patch that increases gear maximum level and you release new sets making mine obsolete. I like having to work in order to obtain items but your current system is just ridiculous. I haven't even mentioned that you also must do this stuff for ground based gear, the grind you expect people to partake is just insane. I honestly don't expect to get a response or for this to ever reach your development team but my frustration has peaked and before I stop playing I felt that I should tell you why I stopped playing, I will also say that although this has happened a few times before each time the bad taste that the endless grind leaves in my mouth the taste takes longer to remove soon enough it will be to the point where I don't come back. I like the genre of Star Trek online and your programming is good (other than not being able to do a loop in a tactical escort and enemy ships moving at ¼ impulse) the game play is very good the story lines and episodes are fun but they do not take long to complete and you must for rerun a lot of them to get sets and without being able to play high level end game content it grows old very quickly. I have thought about paying for a subscription or buying a lifetime membership but nothing in a subscription or lifetime membership will aid in equipping a ship much faster and with how much I stop playing the game due to the insane grind trying to get one good ship. I cannot justify spending a lot of money on a game that will frustrate me into quitting after 1 or 2 months. In closing you shouldn't give stuff away but, having to grind for an item than having to grind for an R&D upgrade than having to grind for the currency to use the upgrade just to gain one tier on an item is crazy. ( say i bought a level 12 fleet tactical console base cost 50,000 fleet marks 15,000 dilitium then include the cost of R&D upgrades for a good upgrade on the auction houseit costs 3 million credits and it only gives 25% towards leveling the items tier so just to get the item to 13 it will cost 12 million credits and 10,000 dilitium making that one console cost 50000 fleet marks, 12 million credits and 25000 dilitium) on most ships you need at least 9 consoles when you combine tactical, science, engineering then include the cost of weapons and there upgrades .... i mean come on how this has not been addressed is beyond me the grind for a basic end game ship not even one thats top tier end game that has level 14 items is painfull just to think about it. i can truly understand why getting new players is so hard it seems you are doing everything you can to keep new players away.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 55,806 Community Moderator
    WALL OF TEXT!
    66998372863950ee98cf7da9786e2ea9-db80k0m.png
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out a Delta Pack, Temporal Pack, and Gamma Pack
    The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • tunebreakertunebreaker Member Posts: 1,222 Arc User
    risian4 wrote: »

    BFAW was changed very logically. It's still the best ability to use in a target rich environment. I think it is reasonable to have some reduction in Accuracy for an ability that lets you shoot more often and at multiple targets. Reduced accuracy can also be countered but that might of course mean that players have to focus less on just increasing their CritD (which I feel is the real problem for some - they just want to keep their accuracy the same, while firing more often so that all other boosts can go towards CritD).
    All other changes (such as reduced damage with increasing distance) to FAW were made to bring it more in line with other abilities. I don't see what's wrong with that.
    Actually, beams are very much lagging behind cannons now - the main culprit behind this is suspected to be damage reducing modifier BFAW has. Yes, in ISA they kinda tend to equalise out due to map being adv difficulty (everything melts seriously fast) and enemies being kinda more scattered around than usual, but the contrast is very felt in HSE, for example. The reason why you don't see a widespread movement behind "go cannons" is that there are so little amount of mix/maxers left in game who actually care to run anything.
    risian4 wrote: »
    As for GW: that ability can still be powerful. If the player is prepared to make some sacrifices to make it work, that is. Which is not an unreasonable expectation I think. You'll just have to put some more points in +control skills, or put some extra consoles on your ship. Why should Sci abilities be easily accessible, powerful and easy to use een (sic) when the player does not specialise in these type of abilities? That's basically asking for free damage, or free 'pull power' for lack of a better word right now - basically, a powerful Sci ability without dedicating your skip or skill build towards Sci powers.
    Would it be reasonable if I expected my Sci (sic) Vesta's aft polaron beam array to be very powerful, despite me not having any points in energy weapon skills or any regular (as in +polaron damage) tactical consoles?
    GW3 acts just like you describe. GW1 (and allegedly GW2 as well) seem to be utterly borked though - affecting only a single enemy and having severely reduced dmg/pull values (compared to pre-S13) on top of it.
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,223 Arc User
    What the balance changes accomplished most for me were roughly another cut in half of the queue population as well as activity in DPS channels or TSC. We are really close to 0 PvE activities wherever I look.

    All those STO forum users asking for balance are happy now; If they were only enough to get maps to pop.

    Well done cryptic!
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
    Bring it on
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    wishful thinking is not really a reliable source
  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    Even prior to these changes the whole ISA cult would've eventually crumbled. At some point the whole thing would get old like a broken record.

    Leavers or not, at least the game is less embarrassingly structured now, and I prefer that over a fully populated game that's broken. Not ideal, but what's done is done, and I have no regrets.

    Yet I still blame the new STF UI to the fullest.
  • spencerb96spencerb96 Member Posts: 233 Media Corps
    edited August 2017
    tremere12 wrote: »
    Even prior to these changes the whole ISA cult would've eventually crumbled. At some point the whole thing would get old like a broken record.

    Leavers or not, at least the game is less embarrassingly structured now, and I prefer that over a fully populated game that's broken. Not ideal, but what's done is done, and I have no regrets.

    Yet I still blame the new STF UI to the fullest.

    Honestly, I don't attribute the game being "more structured" at this point due to the rebalance. The reality is what you hinted at in your first sentence. The DPS race was dying out since the massive powercreep with the Skill Tree revamp, and S13 put the nail it the coffin.

    If there were as much min-max activity as there was a year or so ago, there'd still be several records over 300k. I still think 400k+ could be possible post-S13. Issue is just nobody at that level is doing that type of stuff at all really anymore.

    We have significantly less activity in general with parses uploaded to either parser as of S13. Both SCM and CLR have seen ~60-70% less parses so far this season.

    Myself, I've swapped my DPS characters mostly over to PvP loadouts and skill trees. At this point, it's so much easier to get into PvP matches than it is to get into high end ISA or HSE runs, which is pretty sad.
    Fleet Leader @ The Breakfast Club

    DPS 10k, 75k, Elites, Prime / G-200, G-800 Admin

    Youtube - CasualSAB, formerly "SOB's Casual Corner"
  • e30erneste30ernest Member Posts: 1,794 Arc User
    GW3 acts just like you describe. GW1 (and allegedly GW2 as well) seem to be utterly borked though - affecting only a single enemy and having severely reduced dmg/pull values (compared to pre-S13) on top of it.

    Yeah that needs to be fixed. GW1's broken status limits the choices for ships that only have a Lt.Cdr Sci seating. Sci builds in general are still pretty powerful. They are up there with Cannons and Beams in terms of overall effectiveness. Their "DPS" output in advanced may be limited by cooldowns and NPC HP, but they are devastating in Elite runs.

    I'm going to put out another possibly unpopular opinion here, but in my opinion, the people who left over the S13 nerfs are overreacting. The pre-S13 levels of damage was unsustainable for the long term. The S13 rebalance was needed and was a good thing. It's unfortunate that people rage-quit rather than adapt.
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Right. One of the good things about STO is the diversity of options. Yet for most of these people its "Antiproton or GTFO" or "Disruptors or GTFO" or some other meta where they deny you're skill based on your gear.

    Players that think that way aren't as smart as they think. They fail to realize how little the various weapon procs actually mean to a build. It's only when you want that last 4% or so to top DPS charts where procs really start to matter.

    tremere12 wrote: »
    Yes I am against the "dps everything mentality" , because it destroys gameplay diversity. Healers, tanks, damage dealers or "uncategorized" builds should all have their place.

    A lot of builds became pretty competitive with S13, and that's a good thing. Even healer builds are really good particularly in Elite. Of the build archetypes, tanks probably got the short-end of the stick due to how Threat in this game works. I am hoping that with the new spec, tank builds will get some new toys to play with.
  • tremere12tremere12 Member Posts: 477 Arc User
    edited August 2017
    I forgot to mention that Feedback Pulse needs to be restored to its original setting also, or at least be a little better than it already is.

    I never really used it much myself, but I guess now it's kind of useless. This ability (for me) was never a problem in PVP, and most certainly not in PVE.

    I will repeat that failing to resist physical on entropy together with the constant immunity stacking was the real thing that was killing PVP (space pvp at least). Everything else was not that bad. Fixing this part was the best thing from the balance changes, and it had no impact on PVE. Every other change is hit and miss for me - though mostly hit.

    And yes, I agree the whining and ragequitting is so silly. You can still pull off monster-dps on mindles NPC's or whatever nowadays, so I don't see why all the butthurt.

    Any other suggestions I'm open to hear.
  • risian4risian4 Member Posts: 3,711 Arc User
    e30ernest wrote: »
    GW3 acts just like you describe. GW1 (and allegedly GW2 as well) seem to be utterly borked though - affecting only a single enemy and having severely reduced dmg/pull values (compared to pre-S13) on top of it.

    Yeah that needs to be fixed. GW1's broken status limits the choices for ships that only have a Lt.Cdr Sci seating. Sci builds in general are still pretty powerful. They are up there with Cannons and Beams in terms of overall effectiveness. Their "DPS" output in advanced may be limited by cooldowns and NPC HP, but they are devastating in Elite runs.

    I'm going to put out another possibly unpopular opinion here, but in my opinion, the people who left over the S13 nerfs are overreacting. The pre-S13 levels of damage was unsustainable for the long term. The S13 rebalance was needed and was a good thing. It's unfortunate that people rage-quit rather than adapt.
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Right. One of the good things about STO is the diversity of options. Yet for most of these people its "Antiproton or GTFO" or "Disruptors or GTFO" or some other meta where they deny you're skill based on your gear.

    Players that think that way aren't as smart as they think. They fail to realize how little the various weapon procs actually mean to a build. It's only when you want that last 4% or so to top DPS charts where procs really start to matter.

    tremere12 wrote: »
    Yes I am against the "dps everything mentality" , because it destroys gameplay diversity. Healers, tanks, damage dealers or "uncategorized" builds should all have their place.

    A lot of builds became pretty competitive with S13, and that's a good thing. Even healer builds are really good particularly in Elite. Of the build archetypes, tanks probably got the short-end of the stick due to how Threat in this game works. I am hoping that with the new spec, tank builds will get some new toys to play with.

    (Added emphasis).

    I agree. There is a lot of overreacting towards the rebalancing and changes were badly needed. The people who are complaining the most are those who are saying in in-game channels 'I went from over 100k to 60k' or things like that. While apparently not realising that that's still more than enough for most content.

    Sorry, but if only doing ridiculous amounts of damage with next-to-no effort is keeping them in the game, then I think it was only a matter of time before they moved on. One cannot seriously expect pre-S13 situations to last forever after all.


    Rewards getting nerfed? Ok I can understand why people are upset. Basic abilities that newer players also depend on getting nerfed, resulting in things getting more difficult for newer players? Again, I can understand the anger.

    But for some reason I don't feel quite as bad for players who are complaining that their damage was cut in half when the remaining portion is still more than sufficient to complete 95% of the game's content - or even solo most parts of it. I just don't see the problem, honestly. They can still play the game with great ease - instead of vaporising enemies in 2 or 3 seconds, it might take them 5 or 6. If such a minor set-back is enough reason to quit the game or quit doing something in general then I would say that the problem is with those who quit indeed. And perhaps it would be wise if those players changed their expectations cause I seriously doubt they will ever appreciate a game for long if one expects pre-S13 situations to last for very long.

    No one is entitled to doing 10 times as much damage as necessary, or twice as much as a full team would on average need. Sure, enjoy it while it lasts, I honestly hope you do, but don't be childish about it when it is finally corrected.
  • risian4risian4 Member Posts: 3,711 Arc User
    risian4 wrote: »

    BFAW was changed very logically. It's still the best ability to use in a target rich environment. I think it is reasonable to have some reduction in Accuracy for an ability that lets you shoot more often and at multiple targets. Reduced accuracy can also be countered but that might of course mean that players have to focus less on just increasing their CritD (which I feel is the real problem for some - they just want to keep their accuracy the same, while firing more often so that all other boosts can go towards CritD).
    All other changes (such as reduced damage with increasing distance) to FAW were made to bring it more in line with other abilities. I don't see what's wrong with that.
    Actually, beams are very much lagging behind cannons now - the main culprit behind this is suspected to be damage reducing modifier BFAW has. Yes, in ISA they kinda tend to equalise out due to map being adv difficulty (everything melts seriously fast) and enemies being kinda more scattered around than usual, but the contrast is very felt in HSE, for example. The reason why you don't see a widespread movement behind "go cannons" is that there are so little amount of mix/maxers left in game who actually care to run anything.
    risian4 wrote: »
    As for GW: that ability can still be powerful. If the player is prepared to make some sacrifices to make it work, that is. Which is not an unreasonable expectation I think. You'll just have to put some more points in +control skills, or put some extra consoles on your ship. Why should Sci abilities be easily accessible, powerful and easy to use een (sic) when the player does not specialise in these type of abilities? That's basically asking for free damage, or free 'pull power' for lack of a better word right now - basically, a powerful Sci ability without dedicating your skip or skill build towards Sci powers.
    Would it be reasonable if I expected my Sci (sic) Vesta's aft polaron beam array to be very powerful, despite me not having any points in energy weapon skills or any regular (as in +polaron damage) tactical consoles?
    GW3 acts just like you describe. GW1 (and allegedly GW2 as well) seem to be utterly borked though - affecting only a single enemy and having severely reduced dmg/pull values (compared to pre-S13) on top of it.

    I must admit that I'm not very familiar with GW anymore. I stopped using it a while back, going with SSV and TR instead.

    And even when I used it, I usually went with GW 3. If it's borked, then it needs to be fixed obviously. But to be fair, I've still seen people use GW and it worked well for them.

    As for FAW: I never really used it myself, except when doing missions like the Breach and you'll want to shoot multiple targets quickly. For such things it still works fine, and that's what an ability such as FAW is supposed to do imo.

    I think it's logical that more directed energy weapons (such as cannons with a narrower arc) deal more damage. It takes more effort to direct the fire after all so the player should get more out of it in return.
Sign In or Register to comment.