DPS-Challenge (yes I looked at the URLs in your SIG) has nothing to do with it. You and your DPS-Challenge organizers have excluded themselves from this challenge, it says. So nothing is holding you back to do a TAC run which parses higher then the current SCI record, which can easily be done according to your words.
It are your words that TAC should be able to do 322K currently (60K more then SCI). Well untill done so, it just are words. Highscores stand until broken.
We decided to postpone any new Tac records and play Eng and Sci instead. Here are some of our reasons:
- We neglected the underpowered classes for quite some time now. I.e. Flocki took a break from STO for several months after season 13 took the fun out the game. Our last half half-hearted runs were from early June btw.
- Fun. We thought it would be funny to top the charts with second line chars. Or call them underdogs. Reading this thread made us smile. Mission accomplished. Btw. we're confident to break 300k with our Engs and Scis.
- I needed some parses for the miracle worker ships to get some data and iron out the builds I posted on sto-league.com. I took my PvE Eng just because the other chars were occupied with other tasks.
- We thought it would be a good idea to add some higher parses to the league table to motivate other players to beat our numbers. Using Tacs and throwing 350k+ or even 400k at them would have been counterproductive.
Anyway. From my personal experience Tacs still do 30-40% more damage than Scis or Engs. Believe it or not. This was in Season 11.5, 12, 13. And it's all the same in Season 14.
Ah.
So that ~0.6% difference between the highest tac DPS and highest sci DPS is wildly unbalancing the game.
With respect, if the tac player on the aforementioned run had landed a tiny % more critical hits from sheer RNG, they would exceed the highest sci run.
Don't make mountains out of molehills. Tacs are still perfectly viable and competitive in both PVE and PVP.
DPS-Challenge (yes I looked at the URLs in your SIG) has nothing to do with it. You and your DPS-Challenge organizers have excluded themselves from this challenge, it says. So nothing is holding you back to do a TAC run which parses higher then the current SCI record, which can easily be done according to your words.
It are your words that TAC should be able to do 322K currently (60K more then SCI). Well untill done so, it just are words. Highscores stand until broken.
The DPS league admin team is doing a good job to encourage and support each and every player in the league. They do so every day and now you expect them to shine with numbers 20, 30, 40 times as high as some can achieve? Just to set your broken picture of STO classes straight? Why not instead of that you participate and proof yourself that TACs are still the master DPS class? Of course not! The scrub mentality you got yourself into is much easier.
I can image waiting for example for a dps gaining bug (every patchweek there is a chance for some kind of afterpatch bug, wich potentionaly could be used to have more DPS because some game mechanic all of the sudden works different then it should), could give an opportunity to gain dps.
You know what, @coldnapalm was right all along and I was much too naïve to try to reason with you in the first place. You rather resort to the absurd than to listen to the very people who set the current records, not to mention those who did so the past seasons.
PS: we don't know what devs exactly do, what tweaks and changes they perform serverside each patchweekand the impact on DPS. So we don't know if the conditions in season 14 is exactly the same as in season 13 when that specific higher TAC DPS score achieved. If you realy are convinced the conditions are exactly the same, then you actualy are diskwalifying the current records by saying ther are higher parses done. In other words you are saying the current number one position is actualy not the number one position. Well than it's very odd/unfair to not have the "real" records in these ranking tables.
The danger is that the Devs do something like they did in the past and that would be listening to players like you. Players who are unsatisfied with some aspects of the game and instead of just coping with it rather have it changed. That they ruin the game experience for everybody else as result is none of their concern of course. You are a real joke. Players cried for balance and stuff and now that the leaderboard temporarily reflects it you suddenly crawl out of you hole and emerge un satisfied. LOL.
Go ahead; continue asking for the game to be changed. It might interest you that those who did in the past found the changes not appealing at all and were the first to leave as a result.
Stay in your closed mind set all you want. At least it’s not on me.
1. The DPS league admin is a great supportive and helpfull person. I never said otherwise. The leagues are great and a real great contribution to STO, hence their popularity. It were his words he could now still do 322K in a TAC. I just said until done current record stands. He said now is not the time to do it. And now you are saying I have to do it. Why should I have to prove it. I am not claiming 322k can be done with TAC right now. I have read people saying they can do 1milionK dps, but untill done it's just talk.
2. All people should listen between the talking. You me, every one. Else conversating will be very difficult. I am listening and reading very well. But it doesn't change the fact that a SCI now holds the DPS record. Do you and your friends listen very well? What does number one on the DPS ranking mean? It looks to me that you and your friends (who done those runs as you say) call it meaningless. Because you keep saying TACs are the best.
3. You write "players like me" and "danger is that the Devs do something like they did in the past", you realy talk like you think you are more and better then other people. Devs are not stupid. If you think the Devs are not good at their job, wel develop a better game then yourself.
1) The people who are the heads of the DPS league are busy people who have a channel that is very busy to run. You want them to drop a challenge that they are doing for the good of everyone in the channel (well...most because as odd as it may sound, I am not super interested in increasing my DPS to super high levels. I have my for fun ships that I usually fly around in that has been made with certain restrictions. The one I like best currently is a no lockbox/lobi or promo item restricted build that is performing quite nicely) and do possibly hundreds of runs because you are too stupid to acvtually LISTEN to them?!? Yeah...how about no.
2) Yes. People should be listening. We (as in me, peter, fel and other who responded in detail to you) have been listening you fraking idjet. We don't agree with your logic...or math...or ANY OF IT. That does not me we didn't listen. It means you are just plain old WRONG. When everyone else tell you that you are wrong...guess what sunshine, chances are the problem is YOU...not the rest of the world. The cases of that not being true are like one in a million category of unlikely. And people who are right despite everyone else being wrong does this with proper logic and math and facts. NONE of which you have provided. You on the other hand does not seem to be listening very well. Or at all really. We told you what that number one value means. And how we get those numbers. And why for the most part it is pretty irrelivant to how the game is run for pretty much EVERYONE outside the top runs of the DPS league. And why it would be idiotic in the extreme to balance the game around JUST that.
3) History has proven otherwise. Kid, if you played this game as long as we have, you would know this. Or you are just blind and stupid. You think we bring these things out of nowhere? What, you think we are YOU who just makes **** up to try and prove we are right? No. We have past history. We have facts. We have proper math. We have LOGIC on our side. Not being a petulant child who is throwing a hissy fit and making stuff up when confronted. So yes, in the past, people like you have been a known problem that causes certain devs to do bad bad things. That doesn't mean EVERYTHING they do is bad...but seriously are you so daft to thing that just because they are a dev, that they are incapable of making mistakes?!? What, did they cease to be human somehow? The best we can hope for is that they learned their lesson...but once again, history has shown otherwise.
And finally...do you just LIKE to show off your stupidity and ignornace? And remember how you chimed in about discussion between decent folk? Yeah...I ain't decent...but you are quite throughly proving that you ain't either. That is why decent folks...like peter stop talking nice to you. I can sense a donkey's behind like you from a mile away since I know all your tricks already. I used them myself when I was young and stupid. Your silly cheap tricks don't work on me young one. You are never gonna win using stuff I figured out as a literal child. It's quite pathetic really.
Where I am actualy writting postive about the dps channels and the people running them, indirectly even bring the existance of those channels in the picture, you on the other hand are giving them a bad name by the language you use, calling names scolding etc if some one has an other view and opinion then you.
Ah.
So that ~0.6% difference between the highest tac DPS and highest sci DPS is wildly unbalancing the game.
With respect, if the tac player on the aforementioned run had landed a tiny % more critical hits from sheer RNG, they would exceed the highest sci run.
Don't make mountains out of molehills. Tacs are still perfectly viable and competitive in both PVE and PVP.
The people in this thread who told me I should take averages prove even a greater disbalance just by taking the top 5 results of each class. (actualy he then should have taken all the entries in the whole tabel but that aside.
This presents a much more fair analysis at where things are at - the lowest TAC in top 5 was 219k - while 2nd place SCI/ENG barely broke 183k yet quickly feel as low as 127k.
DPS-Challenge (yes I looked at the URLs in your SIG) has nothing to do with it. You and your DPS-Challenge organizers have excluded themselves from this challenge, it says. So nothing is holding you back to do a TAC run which parses higher then the current SCI record, which can easily be done according to your words.
It are your words that TAC should be able to do 322K currently (60K more then SCI). Well untill done so, it just are words. Highscores stand until broken.
We decided to postpone any new Tac records and play Eng and Sci instead. Here are some of our reasons:
- We neglected the underpowered classes for quite some time now. I.e. Flocki took a break from STO for several months after season 13 took the fun out the game. Our last half half-hearted runs were from early June btw.
- Fun. We thought it would be funny to top the charts with second line chars. Or call them underdogs. Reading this thread made us smile. Mission accomplished. Btw. we're confident to break 300k with our Engs and Scis.
- I needed some parses for the miracle worker ships to get some data and iron out the builds I posted on sto-league.com. I took my PvE Eng just because the other chars were occupied with other tasks.
- We thought it would be a good idea to add some higher parses to the league table to motivate other players to beat our numbers. Using Tacs and throwing 350k+ or even 400k at them would have been counterproductive.
Anyway. From my personal experience Tacs still do 30-40% more damage than Scis or Engs. Believe it or not. This was in Season 11.5, 12, 13. And it's all the same in Season 14.
Good that read that reading this topic made you smile. Indeed mission accomplished.
My conclusion so far reading all the responses so far is that people posting, do have the feel that game is now more balanced. Some say TACs are still overpowered. That they can easy do 60K or more DPS then other classes. You claim 400K dps doable for TACs. But on the otherhand when I say till that is achieved the current records still hold, same people who claim 320K or more for TACs vcan be done say "we dont have the time for that". So until a TAC has done 400K it is just talk and no reality, is my conclusion.
And if TACs will do 400K, and does more then 100K more dps then other classes, shouldn't TACs be nerfed then in order to establisch balance.
PS: While reading all this keep in mind its Cryptics goal to have a balanced game (not mine) and then they should make sure it is balanced. So my opinion is , if the game should be balanced, then it should be balanced and then there should be hardly difference between classes in all aspects.
You can't just use one single run as a baseline for the balance between classes. If you only use the very top score, you'll end up with extremely fringe and non-average runs with high numbers of crits, which can easily push a run a few 10k's higher than it would otherwise be.
Crits are random, and as such, you would need multiple trials and average the results to remove the wildly unpredictable nature of crits. You cannot do that with one single outlier that got more luck than any other. That is cherry picking.
No they shouldn't. They should not scr*w around with any of this any more. It would not end well and they would end up breaking who knows what.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
This presents a much more fair analysis at where things are at - the lowest TAC in top 5 was 219k - while 2nd place SCI/ENG barely broke 183k yet quickly feel as low as 127k.
But this is actually pretty interesting, and right there on page one!
It shows about what I would expect if we assume each class is intended to more or less fit a specific role. Tactical, the damage class, does more damage more consistently. The more support-oriented classes score lower. All three are still pumping out ridiculous, respectable numbers when pushed to extremes, but ultimately fall kinda-sorta into line with what you'd aim for in a class-based system.
The surprising thing to me is Science is much closer to Eng than Tac. I would have expected a slightly more balanced spread, with Science landing closer to an average of 200k, given a big part of Sci is frakkery like exotic damage and debuffs.
Seeing just the numbers is kinda misleading, though. What ships were used? Were characters in corresponding class ships, or were these, say, Science captains in Escorts? Do the numbers take these factors into account? A better spread would give us nine such placing lists, one for each division in each prime class of ship, with notations indicating what specific class each number was achieved in.
Lol at that thread! Beyond doubt the best we currently have.
As a fun fact the player who set the current sci record expressed her concern that with higher figures of scis & engineers, even though only temporarily, such a misconception might come up.
But how many of those top 20-odd runs you mention are super-specialised nannied runs that don;t really reflect the true nature of the game?
I mean i know of one run up there from a sci that was a pug and the guy who did it would get similar numbers in a tac, eng or sci.
The top end of the DPS league tables don't really reflect accurately how the whole playerbase is handling things. They are the top 1% of players and i doubt what they do can be easily translated into the average.
That's like looking at F1 racing and asking for people to nerf everyday cars.
Well then its not about the nature of the game but rather the nature of the community right?
I mean the term “nannied run” already badmouths all aspects of team play and social interaction we get offered game side. In the 200k+ world, when you moved beyond your ship’s gear and good piloting, yea it is all about that. We play a mmorpg peeps, we play a Star Trek game at that guys!
Those who top the leader boards embraced this thought and realized that only the sky is the limit if they do. And lol well yea, for moment this sky looks blue.
I count myself privileged that felisean made me part of it. Letting go of all this DPS and FAW antagonism is just the first step. Not pursuing DPS as some sort of sad solo chase then is the next. In the end it’s all about friendship.
not really. because i seriously doubt that any of the uber DPS scores can be done without a lot of team buffs. that's not something you can do running solo or with a pug
Ah.
So that ~0.6% difference between the highest tac DPS and highest sci DPS is wildly unbalancing the game.
With respect, if the tac player on the aforementioned run had landed a tiny % more critical hits from sheer RNG, they would exceed the highest sci run.
Don't make mountains out of molehills. Tacs are still perfectly viable and competitive in both PVE and PVP.
The people in this thread who told me I should take averages prove even a greater disbalance just by taking the top 5 results of each class. (actualy he then should have taken all the entries in the whole tabel but that aside.
This presents a much more fair analysis at where things are at - the lowest TAC in top 5 was 219k - while 2nd place SCI/ENG barely broke 183k yet quickly feel as low as 127k.
Dude, the whole point of quoting the top 5 of each is to show you that Tacs are vastly superior in damage. That becomes even more overwhelmingly clear when you look at the entire parsed playerbase, don't even think of bringing that up because that annihilates your claim of Sci and Eng being overpowered.
And further, he did look at that, he just didn't post it because you are looking at data from tens of thousands of players, which will need further processing to account for most people having multiple bests, as there are multiple parsers, parsing methods, parse databases etc. Ok, for the purpose of showing that you are wrong examining one dataset would do, but for Cryptic to do what you demand they should consider collating and cleaning the stats before analysis.
If you were actually being fair to the top 1 statistics (and you aren't) you'd conclude a <1% variance between the three is balanced. Just looking at the record tells you nothing as you need to do additional investigation - such as remembering it is ISA, so the map lasts roughly a minute at this level, so at a <2k DPS difference the gap in damage is 70-80k. Back in gameplay context, that is the equivalent to high single digit to low teens of weapons critting vs not critting - I.e. the gap could be down to just RNG SNAFU. (I'm speculating, as I can't be bothered to download CLR again and find the parse file of the run so that I can actually check - it is your responsibility to do so, as in order to claim which class is best, you must control for the effect of RNG)
Now, as soon as you control for the RNG, what happens is Sci and Eng drop damage - every Tac in the top 5 is ahead of the second placed Sci and Eng. Look even across a single parser dataset and the gap becomes incredibly apparent.
The problems get even greater - you want to rebalance all 3 classes on the basis of a single map, and on the basis of just 3 runs of that map? And don't give any bull droppings about builds; a top end build costs the equivalent of hundreds if not into the thousands of dollars and whole days to set up and get the feel of, and balancing classes - in a free to play game no less - around the people who can afford that investment of time, money and resources into their ships when the changes affect everyone is at best inadvisable, at worst potentially game-killing.
When balancing things as basic as class, you look at data from every facet of the game to make a judgement on how balanced the 3 classes are. You don't make a snap judgement because the top Tac is <1% away from the top Sci.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Comments
We decided to postpone any new Tac records and play Eng and Sci instead. Here are some of our reasons:
- We neglected the underpowered classes for quite some time now. I.e. Flocki took a break from STO for several months after season 13 took the fun out the game. Our last half half-hearted runs were from early June btw.
- Fun. We thought it would be funny to top the charts with second line chars. Or call them underdogs. Reading this thread made us smile. Mission accomplished. Btw. we're confident to break 300k with our Engs and Scis.
- I needed some parses for the miracle worker ships to get some data and iron out the builds I posted on sto-league.com. I took my PvE Eng just because the other chars were occupied with other tasks.
- We thought it would be a good idea to add some higher parses to the league table to motivate other players to beat our numbers. Using Tacs and throwing 350k+ or even 400k at them would have been counterproductive.
Anyway. From my personal experience Tacs still do 30-40% more damage than Scis or Engs. Believe it or not. This was in Season 11.5, 12, 13. And it's all the same in Season 14.
STO-League.com | Weapon Damage Calculator | DPS Web Tools | STO-Center Forums
So that ~0.6% difference between the highest tac DPS and highest sci DPS is wildly unbalancing the game.
With respect, if the tac player on the aforementioned run had landed a tiny % more critical hits from sheer RNG, they would exceed the highest sci run.
Don't make mountains out of molehills. Tacs are still perfectly viable and competitive in both PVE and PVP.
Where I am actualy writting postive about the dps channels and the people running them, indirectly even bring the existance of those channels in the picture, you on the other hand are giving them a bad name by the language you use, calling names scolding etc if some one has an other view and opinion then you.
The people in this thread who told me I should take averages prove even a greater disbalance just by taking the top 5 results of each class. (actualy he then should have taken all the entries in the whole tabel but that aside.
see:
Good that read that reading this topic made you smile. Indeed mission accomplished.
My conclusion so far reading all the responses so far is that people posting, do have the feel that game is now more balanced. Some say TACs are still overpowered. That they can easy do 60K or more DPS then other classes. You claim 400K dps doable for TACs. But on the otherhand when I say till that is achieved the current records still hold, same people who claim 320K or more for TACs vcan be done say "we dont have the time for that". So until a TAC has done 400K it is just talk and no reality, is my conclusion.
And if TACs will do 400K, and does more then 100K more dps then other classes, shouldn't TACs be nerfed then in order to establisch balance.
PS: While reading all this keep in mind its Cryptics goal to have a balanced game (not mine) and then they should make sure it is balanced. So my opinion is , if the game should be balanced, then it should be balanced and then there should be hardly difference between classes in all aspects.
Crits are random, and as such, you would need multiple trials and average the results to remove the wildly unpredictable nature of crits. You cannot do that with one single outlier that got more luck than any other. That is cherry picking.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
But this is actually pretty interesting, and right there on page one!
It shows about what I would expect if we assume each class is intended to more or less fit a specific role. Tactical, the damage class, does more damage more consistently. The more support-oriented classes score lower. All three are still pumping out ridiculous, respectable numbers when pushed to extremes, but ultimately fall kinda-sorta into line with what you'd aim for in a class-based system.
The surprising thing to me is Science is much closer to Eng than Tac. I would have expected a slightly more balanced spread, with Science landing closer to an average of 200k, given a big part of Sci is frakkery like exotic damage and debuffs.
Seeing just the numbers is kinda misleading, though. What ships were used? Were characters in corresponding class ships, or were these, say, Science captains in Escorts? Do the numbers take these factors into account? A better spread would give us nine such placing lists, one for each division in each prime class of ship, with notations indicating what specific class each number was achieved in.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
not really. because i seriously doubt that any of the uber DPS scores can be done without a lot of team buffs. that's not something you can do running solo or with a pug
Dude, the whole point of quoting the top 5 of each is to show you that Tacs are vastly superior in damage. That becomes even more overwhelmingly clear when you look at the entire parsed playerbase, don't even think of bringing that up because that annihilates your claim of Sci and Eng being overpowered.
And further, he did look at that, he just didn't post it because you are looking at data from tens of thousands of players, which will need further processing to account for most people having multiple bests, as there are multiple parsers, parsing methods, parse databases etc. Ok, for the purpose of showing that you are wrong examining one dataset would do, but for Cryptic to do what you demand they should consider collating and cleaning the stats before analysis.
If you were actually being fair to the top 1 statistics (and you aren't) you'd conclude a <1% variance between the three is balanced. Just looking at the record tells you nothing as you need to do additional investigation - such as remembering it is ISA, so the map lasts roughly a minute at this level, so at a <2k DPS difference the gap in damage is 70-80k. Back in gameplay context, that is the equivalent to high single digit to low teens of weapons critting vs not critting - I.e. the gap could be down to just RNG SNAFU. (I'm speculating, as I can't be bothered to download CLR again and find the parse file of the run so that I can actually check - it is your responsibility to do so, as in order to claim which class is best, you must control for the effect of RNG)
Now, as soon as you control for the RNG, what happens is Sci and Eng drop damage - every Tac in the top 5 is ahead of the second placed Sci and Eng. Look even across a single parser dataset and the gap becomes incredibly apparent.
The problems get even greater - you want to rebalance all 3 classes on the basis of a single map, and on the basis of just 3 runs of that map? And don't give any bull droppings about builds; a top end build costs the equivalent of hundreds if not into the thousands of dollars and whole days to set up and get the feel of, and balancing classes - in a free to play game no less - around the people who can afford that investment of time, money and resources into their ships when the changes affect everyone is at best inadvisable, at worst potentially game-killing.
When balancing things as basic as class, you look at data from every facet of the game to make a judgement on how balanced the 3 classes are. You don't make a snap judgement because the top Tac is <1% away from the top Sci.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch