test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

What do you think of this design proposition?

casualstocasualsto Member Posts: 672 Arc User
In order to create more class diversity and stop Tac from being an AIO class, I've came with a nice design idea that also stops the dps powercreep a bit.

The whole idea is:
1. Adding a shared cooldown between Attack Pattern Alpha and Go Down Fighting. - This means that one has to choose accordingly - Is it an Alpha Strike/Burst dps situation (using APA) or is it a constant DPS situation (where GDF would fit the situation better), but not both.

2. Removing the shared cooldown from attack patterns (Shared global cd of 15 sec removed so one user can use APO+APB or APB+APL or APO+APD. This will help in creating new builds and also allow a more specialized build to perform better (Especially non-tac builds and pilot seating ships).

Give us your golden two cents!
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on

What do you think of this design proposition? 40 votes

Add Cooldown shared for APA and GDF + Remove AP global 15 sec cooldowns
2%
casualsto 1 vote
Add Cooldown shared for APA and GDF Only
0%
Only Remove AP global 15 sec cooldowns
2%
sci321 1 vote
None of the above
95%
ikonn#1068coldnapalmjonsillsmeimeitoojoeykoricarabaturazrael605dongemaharurattler2seaofsorrowspeterconnorfirstvaloreahmarkhawkmanthay8472salazarrazerelicthiefalcyonesereneioneonvieth1theraven2378 38 votes

Comments

  • captainkoltarcaptainkoltar Member Posts: 895 Arc User
    edited July 2019
    I hardly ever use Go Down Fighting. I find that when my HP drops that low, I'm more concerned with using healing abilities to get it back up.

    Obviously I can't speak for everyone else here, but I'd want more opportunities to use Go Down Fighting, not less.
  • foxman00foxman00 Member Posts: 1,478 Arc User
    Yeah, i can tell you straight away this is not exactly going to go down well with tactical captains.
    pjxgwS8.jpg
  • darkbladejkdarkbladejk Member Posts: 3,698 Community Moderator
    None of the above
    There's nothing stopping folks from playing as an Engineer or Science captain now save for their own choice not to do it. To be perfectly blunt this just stinks of trying to force a particular playstyle on people. Basically amounting to "I don't like that so many folks prefer to use a mace instead of a sword like me. So I think we need to nerf maces so more folks will want to use swords." Neither of those 2 powers on their own are going to make or break someone, especially if they don't know how to use them. Secondly, instead of nerfing tacs, which I always see thrown around, why not buff engineers and science captains? You can't make folks play something they don't want to play and if folks just don't want to play engineers or science then that's their choice. Instead of trying to force more folks to play engineer or science, give them more of an incentive to try engineering or science. What they need are more meaningful captain powers and gap closers, and right now they don't have that.
    "Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations

    Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited July 2019
    None of the above
    I hardly ever use Go Down Fighting. I find that when my HP drops that low, I'm more concerned with using healing abilities to get it back up.

    Obviously I can't speak for everyone else here, but I'd want more opportunities to use Go Down Fighting, not less.

    Taks have the trait Good Day to Die which enables the use of GDF without that restriction. In practice one simply has the ability in a super buff bar and just uses it when one wants to.

    ---

    While I appreciate very much that the OP is thinking about game mechanics and equalizing the DMG potential of the classes my dilemma is always that I highly dislike changing year old game rules. There is some appeal in it even though we talk about a small nerf to one class here and then an equal buff to all classes.

    One should also ask, do one even want to have all classes to be more equal to tacs or does one rather have them more distinct?

    With stuff like cruiser commands and the things we got as lvl 65 captains powers in each career cryptic does not seem to want that however...
    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
  • lordmerc22lordmerc22 Member Posts: 776 Arc User
    None of the above
    Instead of trying to force more folks to play engineer or science, give them more of an incentive to try engineering or science. What they need are more meaningful captain powers and gap closers, and right now they don't have that.

    This. I agree exactly with darkblade and I mainly play engineer for the record. Nerfing something else to correct an error elsewhere would be a bad design choice
  • feliseanfelisean Member Posts: 688 Arc User
    None of the above
    but, every professions is more than capable of being strong enough to beat any content the game throws at you. its more like you're missing the last few %, but thats not important for close to all players.

    weaker players might actually do better with a sci or eng in space because of the damage output the photonic fleet could deliver on its own or the additional survivability you get as an eng ;)
  • casualstocasualsto Member Posts: 672 Arc User
    Add Cooldown shared for APA and GDF + Remove AP global 15 sec cooldowns
    Thank you for your input so far. I'm not surprised one bit :) But I was expecting more positivity on the AP cooldown removal part though. Looking forward to more votes/opinions.
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,501 Arc User
    edited July 2019
    None of the above
    I have more non-tac captains than tac captains. Space Magic is fun, and to me tac is less survivable on the ground.

    I'm all for giving science and engineering captains new, unique, class-specific buffs though.
  • rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 57,973 Community Moderator
    None of the above
    381.gif

    While I wouldn't mind the AP thing... I'm gonna have to say no. Combining AP Beta, Delta, and Omega would be kinda OP.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    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 many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • tm706tm706 Member Posts: 334 Arc User
    None of the above
    You don't improve the other classes by nerfing TACs. Tacs are damage dealers. Making them less capable of doing so for arbitrary reasons probably isn't the best idea. No one is forced to play any of the classes in any particular way that doesn't suit them. Let's keep it that way.
    Coffee is life.

    Message me in-game (@tm706) for help

    1st Alpha Quadrant Fleet
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    None of the above
    I hardly ever use Go Down Fighting. I find that when my HP drops that low, I'm more concerned with using healing abilities to get it back up.

    Obviously I can't speak for everyone else here, but I'd want more opportunities to use Go Down Fighting, not less.

    Taks have the trait Good Day to Die which enables the use of GDF without that restriction. In practice one simply has the ability in a super buff bar and just uses it when one wants to.

    ---

    While I appreciate very much that the OP is thinking about game mechanics and equalizing the DMG potential of the classes my dilemma is always that I highly dislike changing year old game rules. There is some appeal in it even though we talk about a small nerf to one class here and then an equal buff to all classes.

    One should also ask, do one even want to have all classes to be more equal to tacs or does one rather have them more distinct?
    The whole point of having classes is for them to be different. If they are all equal they might as well not even exist. I suppose one might say the game focusing so heavily on the same single role (DPS) for all players in all content all the time, makes it simply impossible for functionally different classes to exist in a relation any better than "the best" vs "not the best." But that's a different topic entirely.

    Personally, I don't have any problem with changing old rules per se, but I do think the first step in a class revamp* would have to be making classes switchable in a manner similar to the specializations. Both to avoid players being "stuck" with a class they no longer prefer and to more accurately measure any changes in the metagame of the "best" class to be.

    *unless of course the "revamp" was to remove the classes completely or turn them into some kind of functionally-identical Barbie options like some people would seem to prefer, in which case the point would be moot.
  • casualstocasualsto Member Posts: 672 Arc User
    Add Cooldown shared for APA and GDF + Remove AP global 15 sec cooldowns
    I have more non-tac captains than tac captains. Space Magic is fun, and to me tac is less survivable on the ground.

    I'm all for giving science and engineering captains new, unique, class-specific buffs though.

    Then why not vote for the Attack pattern shared cooldown to be removed? I'm just curious.
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,501 Arc User
    None of the above
    casualsto wrote: »
    I have more non-tac captains than tac captains. Space Magic is fun, and to me tac is less survivable on the ground.

    I'm all for giving science and engineering captains new, unique, class-specific buffs though.

    Then why not vote for the Attack pattern shared cooldown to be removed? I'm just curious.

    Because I haven't felt any need to nerf tac captains in order to enjoy playing non-tac captains.

    My science and eng captains do just fine in Advanced TFOs and all story content, and I'm too lazy to do Elite TFOs.

    If I was trying to climb the DPS leadership boards maybe I'd feel differently but that's even more work and requires a pile of compromises even for tac captains to chase the flavor of the month. At one point you needed to be a Romulan tac for the SROs, fly a Scimitar instead of the ship of your choice, etc. and though that's probably changed it's only to be replaced by a new set of cookie-cutter requirements.
  • echattyechatty Member Posts: 5,913 Arc User
    None of the above
    There's nothing stopping folks from playing as an Engineer or Science captain now save for their own choice not to do it. To be perfectly blunt this just stinks of trying to force a particular playstyle on people. Basically amounting to "I don't like that so many folks prefer to use a mace instead of a sword like me. So I think we need to nerf maces so more folks will want to use swords." Neither of those 2 powers on their own are going to make or break someone, especially if they don't know how to use them. Secondly, instead of nerfing tacs, which I always see thrown around, why not buff engineers and science captains? You can't make folks play something they don't want to play and if folks just don't want to play engineers or science then that's their choice. Instead of trying to force more folks to play engineer or science, give them more of an incentive to try engineering or science. What they need are more meaningful captain powers and gap closers, and right now they don't have that.

    This.

    I don't play tac very much because I like the other two better. That said, I do have some tacs, just more sci-engs too. There's nothing about tac abilities that I see needs nerfing. Nothing.

    As @darkbladejk said, this smells of trying to force one playstyle on people and that's just not necessary. If tac/sci/eng were all the same then the game would get very boring to me. And as someone else said, if they were all the same then why have three?
    Now a LTS and loving it.
    Just because you spend money on this game, it does not entitle you to be a jerk if things don't go your way.
    I have come to the conclusion that I have a memory like Etch-A-Sketch. I shake my head and forget everything. :D
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 12,587 Arc User
    None of the above
    I hardly ever use Go Down Fighting. I find that when my HP drops that low, I'm more concerned with using healing abilities to get it back up.

    Obviously I can't speak for everyone else here, but I'd want more opportunities to use Go Down Fighting, not less.

    Taks have the trait Good Day to Die which enables the use of GDF without that restriction. In practice one simply has the ability in a super buff bar and just uses it when one wants to.

    I have A Good Day to Die slotted since ages. It's almost like a spare APA. :) I never fly without it.
    3lsZz0w.jpg
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 12,587 Arc User
    None of the above
    rattler2 wrote: »
    381.gif

    While I wouldn't mind the AP thing... I'm gonna have to say no. Combining AP Beta, Delta, and Omega would be kinda OP.


    ^^ This. It's kind silly to try and 'stop Tac from being an AIO class,' and then propose to do away with shared cd on Attack Patterns, making them, next to already being an AIO class, an even further OP class to boot. :)
    3lsZz0w.jpg
  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 8,301 Arc User
    AIO class? Please tell this old geezer what AIO stands for.
    None of the abbreviations which i know for AIO seems to apply.
    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,501 Arc User
    None of the above
    questerius wrote: »
    AIO class? Please tell this old geezer what AIO stands for.
    None of the abbreviations which i know for AIO seems to apply.

    All-In-One (does everything).

    Tacs might have the highest DPS in space, but that doesn't make them the most fun to play or best on the ground.

  • nixie50nixie50 Member Posts: 1,260 Arc User
    want to narrow the gap between Tac and Eng? lower the CDs on rotate shield freq and EPSPower transfer from 120s to 30 or 45 sec. that would indeed narrow the gap and would ef make Romulan engineers top dogs
    u7acy6aymfw7.gif
    We Need BERETS in the tailor
  • dongemaharudongemaharu Member Posts: 544 Arc User
    None of the above
    Funny how when people want to improve something they usually want do it by taking from someone else. I guess Tac captains are the Oaks.

    The 3 groups are diverse and viable enough as it is. Sci and Eng have plenty of unique ways to succeed.
  • casualstocasualsto Member Posts: 672 Arc User
    Add Cooldown shared for APA and GDF + Remove AP global 15 sec cooldowns
    I've managed to make all of the active community of the forum to join in and protect design features of the game. I guess this is by far, the greatest achievement in STO endgame.
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,501 Arc User
    edited July 2019
    None of the above
    casualsto wrote: »
    I've managed to make all of the active community of the forum to join in and protect design features of the game. I guess this is by far, the greatest achievement in STO endgame.

    Yep, I can't recall any other polls where every vote except the poll creator's was NO. Congrats!

    (Of course now some joker will vote YES just to mess that up. :) )
  • salazarrazesalazarraze Member Posts: 3,794 Arc User
    None of the above
    I used to have a big issue with the classes in general. Recently, I learned that the DPS record for both science and engineers is over 700k DPS. All the OP's idea would do is punish players that aren't that good at the game that happen to use a tactical captain so I would say no to everything proposed here.
    When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
  • seaofsorrowsseaofsorrows Member Posts: 10,918 Arc User
    None of the above
    casualsto wrote: »
    I've managed to make all of the active community of the forum to join in and protect design features of the game. I guess this is by far, the greatest achievement in STO endgame.

    Props to you for taking the feedback in such a calm manner. Many would have blown up and started calling people names.

    Overall, I voted no because I simply see it as a proposed solution to a problem that doesn't exist. I do however, appreciate that you had an idea that you felt might be helpful and you presented it in an objective fashion to see what others thought and gain feedback.
    Insert witty signature line here.
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited July 2019
    None of the above
    casualsto wrote: »
    I've managed to make all of the active community of the forum to join in and protect design features of the game. I guess this is by far, the greatest achievement in STO endgame.

    Props to you for taking the feedback in such a calm manner. Many would have blown up and started calling people names.

    Overall, I voted no because I simply see it as a proposed solution to a problem that doesn't exist. I do however, appreciate that you had an idea that you felt might be helpful and you presented it in an objective fashion to see what others thought and gain feedback.

    Hallelujah so say we all. I love it when we manage to keep a discussion civil and productive.

    Power creep and rule changes are often a sensitive topic for most involved as it has a major impact on some while being completely irrelevant to others.

    When one reads through the OP's suggestions one immediately realizes that he put some thought into it and knows that we all have similar stakes here.

    No idea if you speak German a bit but an extreme example how things can go downhill on such topics is in the currently unmoderated local forums with an old acquaintance of ours by the way. :|

    Kind of helped me to appreciate the mods we have here in a new way.
    Post edited by peterconnorfirst on
    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
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,225 Arc User
    edited July 2019
    None of the above
    warpangel wrote: »
    I hardly ever use Go Down Fighting. I find that when my HP drops that low, I'm more concerned with using healing abilities to get it back up.

    Obviously I can't speak for everyone else here, but I'd want more opportunities to use Go Down Fighting, not less.

    Taks have the trait Good Day to Die which enables the use of GDF without that restriction. In practice one simply has the ability in a super buff bar and just uses it when one wants to.

    ---

    While I appreciate very much that the OP is thinking about game mechanics and equalizing the DMG potential of the classes my dilemma is always that I highly dislike changing year old game rules. There is some appeal in it even though we talk about a small nerf to one class here and then an equal buff to all classes.

    One should also ask, do one even want to have all classes to be more equal to tacs or does one rather have them more distinct?
    The whole point of having classes is for them to be different. If they are all equal they might as well not even exist. I suppose one might say the game focusing so heavily on the same single role (DPS) for all players in all content all the time, makes it simply impossible for functionally different classes to exist in a relation any better than "the best" vs "not the best." But that's a different topic entirely.

    I agree. What’s kind of nice at the moment is that with superfast ISA runs of 30 seconds and below teams with DPS record aims for individual members started to bring non-tac classes to matches on purpose in order to add their benefits. Now sics are long time welcome for their debuff-capabilities there but you also seek an engineer by now for power-level management.

    While I doubt cryptic will ever make maps with mandatory class requirements I would not mind it at all if things are changed in a fashion that would surface their individual strengths more or change the rules in a fashion that the classes on their own would be more pronounced instead of equalized. :)
    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
  • ikonn#1068 ikonn Member Posts: 1,448 Arc User
    None of the above
    Nope

    You can't nerf Tacs in the first part of the proposal and then buff them (and everyone else who use multiple APs) in the second part.

    I play Engineers mostly and even I have to say no to this.
    -AoP- Warrior's Blood (KDF Armada) / -AoP- Qu' raD qulbo'Degh / -AoP- Project Phoenix
    Join Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010
  • casualstocasualsto Member Posts: 672 Arc User
    Add Cooldown shared for APA and GDF + Remove AP global 15 sec cooldowns
    I used to have a big issue with the classes in general. Recently, I learned that the DPS record for both science and engineers is over 700k DPS. All the OP's idea would do is punish players that aren't that good at the game that happen to use a tactical captain so I would say no to everything proposed here.

    That wouldn't be a punish, that would be a chance to all non 500k dps guys to deal a bit more damage and get a bit more of buffs by the attack pattern stacking, regardless of their class.
This discussion has been closed.