Do ENG characters need some TLC?

salvation4

As the title says..ENG in STO seems to be at the bottom of the chain in evey aspect because of the current meta & And creep and especially in PvP..Should they get some TLC to make them more viable in terms of offense and defense? Causes SCI can rip through ENG defense like in 3-5 seconds making ENG defense really something below laughable..TAC can out class ENG in offense by well a long shot making ENG offense, again, below laughable So what I am saying is should ENG be given some TLC to bring them up to par at some respectable level?

And how many full fledged ENG ships are there Vs TAC and SCI???

Unknown

This content has been removed.

tremere12

sophlogimo wrote: »

There are various lockbox traits that can help a lot with Engineers being good dpsers.

https://sto.gamepedia.com/Ability:_Nadion_Inversion
https://sto.gamepedia.com/Trait:_EPS_Overload

Substandard, because Nadion has a 3 minute cooldown for some stupid reason, Would be better if they reduced it to 2 minutes.

The second trait would actually be good if it was active during all times instead upon actvating a 2 minute-cd clicky.

Engi's still need a bit more overal.

salvation4

sophlogimo wrote: »

There are various lockbox traits that can help a lot with Engineers being good dpsers.

https://sto.gamepedia.com/Ability:_Nadion_Inversion
https://sto.gamepedia.com/Trait:_EPS_Overload

First one is available on reaching level 8 in the character progression and is annoying to TRIBBLE because its a clicky..
Second one is fron where?!

Unknown

This content has been removed.

tremere12

sophlogimo wrote: »

I am sorry, I pasted the wrong link for the first one. This is the right one:
https://sto.gamepedia.com/Trait:_Nadion_Bypass

Yeah I have that trait, and I knew what you mean. Still, almost useless to me.

tremere12

salvation4 wrote: »

sophlogimo wrote: »

There are various lockbox traits that can help a lot with Engineers being good dpsers.

https://sto.gamepedia.com/Ability:_Nadion_Inversion
https://sto.gamepedia.com/Trait:_EPS_Overload

First one is available on reaching level 8 in the character progression and is annoying to **** because its a clicky..
Second one is fron where?!

Just look it up on the exchange.

seriousdave

Also they're cat 1 boosts that only boost the base damage like tac consoles do. So yeah, not that great especially since you could slot way better stuff instead especially if you step into lockbox territory.

With that being said ENG captains do have some very good abilities.
Nadion Inversion drastically lowers weapon power consumption which works wonders during a properly buffed up FAW/CRF/CSV cycle.
EPS Power Transfer again hugely helps firepower and can also be offesively used for AUX powered stuff like GW, DRB, TBR, etc. and the shield regen & hardness also benefit from it.
All my SCI & TAC captains usually carry either the kobali or Lukari console around, ENG has Miraculous Repairs which basically frees up that console slot.

BUT all of them have rather unsightly cooldowns. TAC can spam APA like crazy which is like the best buff in the game. SCI has means to drastically cut all cooldowns and also reach into spam territory.
ENG kinda loses out in that regard which sets it onto last place despite having some very potent abilities.

Tl;dr
Just slightly reducing the cooldonws would already push ENG quite a bit farther.

salvation4 wrote: »

And how many full fledged ENG ships are there Vs TAC and SCI???

A whole lot? Depends on the faction.
T6 only ('cause I'm lazy), fleet verisions not included:
FED: 28 ENG cmdr seat, 14 TAC cmdr seat, 10 SCI cmdr seat
KDF: 17 ENG cmdr seat, 14 TAC cmdr seat, 4 SCI cmdr seat
ROM: 13 ENG cmdr seat, 16 TAC cmdr seat, 5 SCI cmdr seat

Didn't count the lockbox/lobi ships, because I don't want to look through each dread and carrier variant to confirm it's cmdr seat.

asuran14

Not sure using traits to warrant a career being viable, or not viable is a good way of determine that fact, since base-line without traits science an tactical are pretty viable careers. I would say that if they had worked Eps power transfer to be that when it is used it grant you different buff/s, which would be based on what sub-system's power level was the highest, though I could see this done as a trait even. It would make it that engineers could get buffs to their damage output via weapons with weapon power, gain higher resists an shield/hull strength via shield power, become much more maneuverable via engine power, or even just gain more power in their debuffs/control an somewhat damage via exotic sources via aux power.

Though ships that have a heavy leaning towards engineering have the issue that outside of emergency power, and afew other abilities, they just lack alot of useful choices for the higher boff slots. Seeing some changes, or reworks of afew abilities in the boff abilities would help to make engineering boff slot heavy ships appealing, if you look at the pre-delta tier five ships there were alot more engineering heavy ship, but they were not that popular with how useless some of the high seat engineer boff abilities are.

Though also tanking/defense focused playstyles have the issue of needing a method of drawing attention/aggro towards them to make that focus worthwhile, which engineers have quite abit less of an ability to do that compared to tactical an science. Though if they implemented a method of engineers being able to redirect tank, than that might make their tanking focus more viable an appealing. such as reworking "Extend shields" to an ability that the engineer can toggle onto a ally, which would transfer a portion of any shield/hull healing done to the engineer that activated the boff ability to the toggled-target, while also making it that a portion of any damage applied to the toggled-target would be transferred to the engineer that applied the buff to them. Even you could make it that the amount of healing, or damage being transferred is based on the number of targets you have it toggled on, and which are in range making focusing the engineer more appealing an making their defense abilities more viable.

odinforever20000

seriousdave wrote: »

Also they're cat 1 boosts that only boost the base damage like tac consoles do. So yeah, not that great especially since you could slot way better stuff instead especially if you step into lockbox territory.

With that being said ENG captains do have some very good abilities.
Nadion Inversion drastically lowers weapon power consumption which works wonders during a properly buffed up FAW/CRF/CSV cycle.
EPS Power Transfer again hugely helps firepower and can also be offesively used for AUX powered stuff like GW, DRB, TBR, etc. and the shield regen & hardness also benefit from it.
All my SCI & TAC captains usually carry either the kobali or Lukari console around, ENG has Miraculous Repairs which basically frees up that console slot.

BUT all of them have rather unsightly cooldowns. TAC can spam APA like crazy which is like the best buff in the game. SCI has means to drastically cut all cooldowns and also reach into spam territory./
ENG kinda loses out in that regard which sets it onto last place despite having some very potent abilities.

You must be talking about ground..Sci Space abilities aren't up all that fast.Especially when compared to Eng or Tac.

odinforever20000

salvation4 wrote: »

As the title says..ENG in STO seems to be at the bottom of the chain in evey aspect because of the current meta & And creep and especially in PvP..Should they get some TLC to make them more viable in terms of offense and defense? Causes SCI can rip through ENG defense like in 3-5 seconds making ENG defense really something below laughable..TAC can out class ENG in offense by well a long shot making ENG offense, again, below laughable So what I am saying is should ENG be given some TLC to bring them up to par at some respectable level?

And how many full fledged ENG ships are there Vs TAC and SCI???

The captain abilities for an ENG toon buffs your resistances and power levels...If a Sci can take you a part in PVP your missing some key things that make your build work..or not..The Cheif tool in a SCI chars aresonal in PVP is Subnuke..But its got a decent cooldown (I think 2 min)..Sci SHIPS Typically Go Drain or EPG..Both are fairly easy to counter once you understand the mechanics.

TAC toons are ALL ABOUT OFFENSE.So its not surprise they are good at dealing damage.

I fly a science ship on an ENG toon in both PVE and PVP.. I dont feel "less than" facing any other class (I have 1 toon for each captain type)..

Now I know there are specific types of builds im not set up to counter..and Certain players theres nothing I can do (at the moment) to beat them (Cuz they is gud)..

odinforever20000

I haven't heard much negative on miracle worker ships/abilites (other than they are ugly)

leemwatson

I don't think Engie's need anything extra. I love my Engie toons as they are. Very easy to maintain power, and very reliable DPS in all things.

vetteguy904

on the ground I's like to see the turrets/equipment not take so long to materialise

talonxv

In space maybe. On the ground. HELL no.

salvation4

seriousdave wrote: »

Also they're cat 1 boosts that only boost the base damage like tac consoles do. So yeah, not that great especially since you could slot way better stuff instead especially if you step into lockbox territory.

With that being said ENG captains do have some very good abilities.
Nadion Inversion drastically lowers weapon power consumption which works wonders during a properly buffed up FAW/CRF/CSV cycle.
EPS Power Transfer again hugely helps firepower and can also be offesively used for AUX powered stuff like GW, DRB, TBR, etc. and the shield regen & hardness also benefit from it.
All my SCI & TAC captains usually carry either the kobali or Lukari console around, ENG has Miraculous Repairs which basically frees up that console slot.

BUT all of them have rather unsightly cooldowns. TAC can spam APA like crazy which is like the best buff in the game. SCI has means to drastically cut all cooldowns and also reach into spam territory.
ENG kinda loses out in that regard which sets it onto last place despite having some very potent abilities.

Tl;dr
Just slightly reducing the cooldonws would already push ENG quite a bit farther.

salvation4 wrote: »

And how many full fledged ENG ships are there Vs TAC and SCI???

A whole lot? Depends on the faction.
T6 only ('cause I'm lazy), fleet verisions not included:
FED: 28 ENG cmdr seat, 14 TAC cmdr seat, 10 SCI cmdr seat
KDF: 17 ENG cmdr seat, 14 TAC cmdr seat, 4 SCI cmdr seat
ROM: 13 ENG cmdr seat, 16 TAC cmdr seat, 5 SCI cmdr seat

Didn't count the lockbox/lobi ships, because I don't want to look through each dread and carrier variant to confirm it's cmdr seat.

I am putting my stats for power in the ENG/TAC hybrid thread I have created to give an idea of what they are..

nimbull

My engie on the ground is fine. In space it's decent. I fly a mat'ha just to get the extra tac consoles to boost disruptors more yet feel more durable then say a Tac would against bigger targets with larger HP pools. Engineer ships feel kinda gimped to me when you have a game that's set on rewarding high dps over everything else.

salvation4

nimbull wrote: »

My engie on the ground is fine. In space it's decent. I fly a mat'ha just to get the extra tac consoles to boost disruptors more yet feel more durable then say a Tac would against bigger targets with larger HP pools. Engineer ships feel kinda gimped to me when you have a game that's set on rewarding high dps over everything else.

I cant help but feel ENG being TRIBBLE slapped because basically SCI and TAC both need to rely on ENG to work, without ENG's to build TRIBBLE and improve TRIBBLE both basically are null and void, buts thats the real life me talking..I digressed..Sorry..

In STO the CD's on ENG abilities take forever even with duplicates..By which time if you are in PvP your Dust thats the reason I see why ENG in PvP are like a leap year..After years I enterd Kerat and got my 100K+HP ship with average resists of 50% across the board and 17K SHP vapped in less than 5 seconds upon entering by a cloaked science with a shitload of debuffs..In PvE I can hold my ground quite easily in Advance and above barring FEZ..

velqua

As an ENG player, I can honestly say that Engineers do need additional TLC. The area of most need is in space. Most ENGs perform well on the ground, even with TRIBBLE gear. The issue with ENGs is that they do not pull much DPS in space, assuming they are true ENGs with the Engineer Spec Tree full. Some may argue that ENGs shouldn't need to be DPSers and rather SCI and TAC should have that abiiity. I would say that ENGs should have the means whereby to do DPS just as the other two. Any boost, minute or grand, is always a plus for ENGs and in some cases needed.

That being said, ENGs cannot build their ships the same way as SCI and TAC DPSers. There are specific gear, traits, BOFFs, and DOFFs that the ENG must use in order to pump out sufficient DPS to compete with SCIs and TACs, regardless of the ship they use.

I would like to see an increase in a variety of gear that ENGs could use as well as be viable DPSers in the game.

dracounguis

STO is made for DPS. Big clue since launch: DPS consoles stack for full effect, resist consoles don't.

thunderfoot

I have a Rom Eng who is my main. I don't feel all this "inferiority" he allegedly has.

nikeix

velqua wrote: »

The issue with ENGs is that they do not pull much DPS in space, assuming they are true ENGs with the Engineer Spec Tree full.

In the current environment of paper-target shooting galleries, Engineer captains have no business heavily loading up on the Engineering tree. Your captain abilities cover your defensive needs more than adequately, leaving you the latitude to set your tree-picks to full-on foaming-at-the-mouth BERSERKER.

kyle223cat

nikeix wrote: »

velqua wrote: »

The issue with ENGs is that they do not pull much DPS in space, assuming they are true ENGs with the Engineer Spec Tree full.

In the current environment of paper-target shooting galleries, Engineer captains have no business heavily loading up on the Engineering tree. Your captain abilities cover your defensive needs more than adequately, leaving you the latitude to set your tree-picks to full-on foaming-at-the-mouth BERSERKER.

Agreed. I would go as far as to say you don't even need to invest heavily in the engineering portion of the skill tree as a NON-engineer to be tanky. As an engineer main, I've learned the hard way you don't need to be an engineer to be tanky anymore. This has probably been the case for a while now sadly.

salvation4

kyle223cat wrote: »

nikeix wrote: »

velqua wrote: »

The issue with ENGs is that they do not pull much DPS in space, assuming they are true ENGs with the Engineer Spec Tree full.

In the current environment of paper-target shooting galleries, Engineer captains have no business heavily loading up on the Engineering tree. Your captain abilities cover your defensive needs more than adequately, leaving you the latitude to set your tree-picks to full-on foaming-at-the-mouth BERSERKER.

Agreed. I would go as far as to say you don't even need to invest heavily in the engineering portion of the skill tree as a NON-engineer to be tanky. As an engineer main, I've learned the hard way you don't need to be an engineer to be tanky anymore. This has probably been the case for a while now sadly.

TO THE RETRAIN TOKEN!!!!!!!!

locutusofcactus

salvation4 wrote: »

...And how many full fledged ENG ships are there Vs TAC and SCI???

Here's the info graph from the 5th year anniversary.

georikzaberisk

salvation4 wrote: »

kyle223cat wrote: »

nikeix wrote: »

velqua wrote: »

The issue with ENGs is that they do not pull much DPS in space, assuming they are true ENGs with the Engineer Spec Tree full.

In the current environment of paper-target shooting galleries, Engineer captains have no business heavily loading up on the Engineering tree. Your captain abilities cover your defensive needs more than adequately, leaving you the latitude to set your tree-picks to full-on foaming-at-the-mouth BERSERKER.

Agreed. I would go as far as to say you don't even need to invest heavily in the engineering portion of the skill tree as a NON-engineer to be tanky. As an engineer main, I've learned the hard way you don't need to be an engineer to be tanky anymore. This has probably been the case for a while now sadly.

TO THE RETRAIN TOKEN!!!!!!!!

You should really try Tribble when testing builds if you can join in. That way you won't waste any of the Retrain Tokens. As for the ENG class... On personal experience this class is far much harder to balance. The simple reason is not because ENG skills suck but rather their Skill CD's are bad in a way that they don't have the ability to make them usable fast like Tact or Sci. In Land they are actually decent depending on the build and equipment. Their Land Skills aren't really that bad it's just the equipment and learning experience you have to acquire that will be your hurdle at the beginning that will be an issue.

In space battle though it's a different story. You have really limited choices and most cookie cutter builds are either a hit or miss depending on a situation on the other hand Tac and SCI doesn't suffer much from this kinds of issue. You can put Tac on almost all Ships and builds and you will find it still easy. Sci would be a little tricky and some ships I really don't recommend base on my experience, but more or less, is much like a Tac but excelling in "Space Magic". ENG? Well on my experience... Only a few ships I would actually recommend for this class. Then there is also the build for skills which will either make or break you if you mess up in synchronizing with your BOFF's, ships and weapon build. Then if you add in the equipment in to the equation for your ship then you're actually walking in a thin line here. If you want an Offensive ENG for space, I do suggest getting a Rom toon instead. Their much easier to make a build from.

Anyway I'm saying this as a disclaimer: All that I have said here is actually just based on my experience and experiments me and some of my friends did. So my experience may vary from others who might have gone through a more in dept analysis of things. In the end of the day though there isn't a perfect build. Sometimes the most satisfying things in life is trying something out of the box and coming up with unexpected results.

salvation4

georikzaberisk wrote: »

salvation4 wrote: »

kyle223cat wrote: »

nikeix wrote: »

velqua wrote: »

The issue with ENGs is that they do not pull much DPS in space, assuming they are true ENGs with the Engineer Spec Tree full.

In the current environment of paper-target shooting galleries, Engineer captains have no business heavily loading up on the Engineering tree. Your captain abilities cover your defensive needs more than adequately, leaving you the latitude to set your tree-picks to full-on foaming-at-the-mouth BERSERKER.

Agreed. I would go as far as to say you don't even need to invest heavily in the engineering portion of the skill tree as a NON-engineer to be tanky. As an engineer main, I've learned the hard way you don't need to be an engineer to be tanky anymore. This has probably been the case for a while now sadly.

TO THE RETRAIN TOKEN!!!!!!!!

You should really try Tribble when testing builds if you can join in. That way you won't waste any of the Retrain Tokens. As for the ENG class... On personal experience this class is far much harder to balance. The simple reason is not because ENG skills suck but rather their Skill CD's are bad in a way that they don't have the ability to make them usable fast like Tact or Sci. In Land they are actually decent depending on the build and equipment. Their Land Skills aren't really that bad it's just the equipment and learning experience you have to acquire that will be your hurdle at the beginning that will be an issue.

In space battle though it's a different story. You have really limited choices and most cookie cutter builds are either a hit or miss depending on a situation on the other hand Tac and SCI doesn't suffer much from this kinds of issue. You can put Tac on almost all Ships and builds and you will find it still easy. Sci would be a little tricky and some ships I really don't recommend base on my experience, but more or less, is much like a Tac but excelling in "Space Magic". ENG? Well on my experience... Only a few ships I would actually recommend for this class. Then there is also the build for skills which will either make or break you if you mess up in synchronizing with your BOFF's, ships and weapon build. Then if you add in the equipment in to the equation for your ship then you're actually walking in a thin line here. If you want an Offensive ENG for space, I do suggest getting a Rom toon instead. Their much easier to make a build from.

Anyway I'm saying this as a disclaimer: All that I have said here is actually just based on my experience and experiments me and some of my friends did. So my experience may vary from others who might have gone through a more in dept analysis of things. In the end of the day though there isn't a perfect build. Sometimes the most satisfying things in life is trying something out of the box and coming up with unexpected results.

Well gotta agree..But been getting some interesting results with my experiments on the Fleet intel aasault cruiser with some valuable input from the folks here..Well I dont have the patiences to download 22GB for tribble..But lets see I may bite the bullet there..Also what is the scale of differences between tribble and holo for it to be viable on holo?

abcd0

crybaby tacs need TLC, give them 10 more alpha strikes to nuke tha galaxxy.

velqua

Personally, I would like to see Engineers get a reduction of diminishing returns on hull resistance, meaning that Engineers get greater return values for their hull resistance. Also--specifically for Engineers--I would like to see a higher resistance cap. Engineers should be allowed to have 85% to 90% resistance. (I'm more likely go with 85% just to keep it reasonable.) I think that change alone would be enough for Engineers in space.

smokebailey

Well, in group runs, I'm often the only one to get through many times, not to be defeated...and I use a lot of engs....so I think eng's are ok.

salvation4

smokebailey wrote: »

Well, in group runs, I'm often the only one to get through many times, not to be defeated...and I use a lot of engs....so I think eng's are ok.

UUUUUH..Tried PvP of late?? I did, and nothing I did, did anything..Not even MR had a chance to cycle twice..I got it to cycle alot faster with one of the DoFF's (Critical Hit has a chance to reset MR CD) as someone pointed out in one of my threads..I had tried pushing all resistances across the average base of 50% but no luck so far..Also may I add I am experiemnting with a ENG/TAC hybrid cruiser with an ENG toon..I have my power levels very stable but resistance against SCI magic bypassing everything is non-existant..I try and hold out till they finish their cycle and then hit MR and try to launch a counter but get Vaped in PvP..