test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

The main problem with this game: You can't play like a Fed!

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
Let me explain. Since day one of this game (and before in Beta), the gameplay has been all wrong for how a true Federation captain should act. Fire first and ask questions later is fine for Klingons and Rommies and the like (even Mirror universe!), but the Federation is supposed to be above that, and actually are trained to deal with threats on a negotion level first, then if all else fails, will resort to defending their ship. I know this is of no surprise to most here, and I assume many will agree with. But it is VERY hard to Roleplay this game as a Fed captain, with ZERO options other than straight up combat. I know we are at war and all, but even in war, there are other options to victory. The Prime Directive (something we have been beaten over the head for the last 45 years) is also lacking and has been thrown out the door.

If this game is to last and to actually represent Star Trek, we have to have options added to encounters!

(sorry if this has been talked about to death or being worked on, but had to get this off my chest)
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    I would be happy if I could just switch my weapons to non lethal. Except for certain people and ships I have to kill and destroy everything I encounter. I know it would be hard to implement alternative diplomatic solutions to every random encounter... but at least give me the option to not be a butcher. Let me disable ships... and incapacitate people.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Yeah I was doing this quest where I had to kill Cpt. bvat and he was sitting there with his back to me and the only way to initiate combat is to shoot him in the back! Sheesh!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Its been suggested before, but the Devs should add a "capture" or "offer surrender" option once you have disabled a ship. They could also add two new stats like "boarding party" and "diplomacy" that would affect your chances at a capture or getting the enemy ship to surrender.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    One of the things that really annoys me about the game is the hypocrisy of the dev team when it comes to these issues and why they are in place.

    Many people complained about the space ship movement and numerous times we are told that it has to be that way because it fits in with the tall ships philosophy that the game is based upon ( why we have this philosophy I don't know. I don't recall anything in Star Trek that said it was tall ships in space ).
    Well I know a thing or two about tall ships, after all I sail a brigantine-rigged Baltic trader. I have some interest in the history of sail and especially the era of combat.
    Tall-ship combat was not about 'circle and destroy' it was about prizes. The word prize comes from the very idea of capturing an enemy ship.
    The first ship named Enterprise ( Enterprize ) was booty for a British Captain.
    Capturing ships and plundering what they carried was the whole reason for it. Even in war. Your prize fund was tied directly to your advancement in rank.
    Blowing everything into space dust is an illogical concept. If you want it like tall-ships then ( you should have made a pirates game ) you should at least give us the option to plunder and capture enemy ships for technology and re-sale.
    I long ago gave up any hope of this being a proper Star Trek Universe or even a proper MMO. I never had any hop of it becoming successful as both.

    And sadly this will be moved to the thread graveyard where new players won't see it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Its been suggested before, but the Devs should add a "capture" or "offer surrender" option once you have disabled a ship. They could also add two new stats like "boarding party" and "diplomacy" that would affect your chances at a capture or getting the enemy ship to surrender.
    Capturing someones unborn babies does sound more humane than just butchering them.

    What? It does...

    And yes... They seriously need to rework that mission. It should have sent the age rating for this game through the roof.
    1 lil nipslip and you get an 18+ age rating.
    Killing of children... Is best performed by children.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Feds are evil by 2409.

    I estimate that by the time I made captain, I killed at least 30,000 people.

    It's WAAARRR!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    there should be more diplomatic and non combat missions and there should be multiple ways to deal with situations, ie dip; stealth first, diplomacy second, pew pew third

    in space some of the ships should just be disabled and float around showing serve damage, others should spin like they do now with plasm leaks and stuff just without the explosion, some should split in two or lose a nacelle and some should blow up as they do already.

    i dont have a huge problem with ships blowing up because sisko never exactly left ships disabled during the wars but it would help if not every ship exploded and would be nice to see the wreckages of ships and add variety to the way ships are taken out.

    the ground im fine with as this has been argued but with the exception of one or two missions it never says you kill anyone, as fallen NPC can be revived it heavily suggests they are just stunned although some of the dialogue needs to be changed or tweaked as your dialogue options sometime sound too aggressive.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    We are the Federation. Resistance is futile.

    I've Wolf 359ed so many enemy fleets I might as well be flying a cube shaped ship. I just absolutely rework the game in my head every time I play so it makes sense. I overlook stuff and pretend other stuff away. When it becomes effort I log out.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    On some exploration missions there are non-violent ways to finish missions occasionally, and I always do them that way when I get the chance. Stuff like sneaking behind the enemy group and scanning the object in a place where I don't draw aggro. Because I frankly don't feel like it's worth killing 6 people (even enemies!) just to scan a rock or a plant. Stealth still works (barely) for some of the missions. Often I go around ships guarding wrecks I'm supposed to scan too; I figure hundreds of people didn't die because I went around instead of straight at them.

    I don't like it when we don't have a chance to negotiate and a bridge officer tells me we have to go kill these folks because of their history of violence. Way to generalize a whole race because of their history. Although in the game of course these folks will also only shoot (down to the last man!) and never talk back. Personally if I were a Crimpto guarding a rock and all my squad were mowed down in seconds, I'd be surrendering. But we just kill him too even though we should be able to stun him, beam him up and ask him questions. That seems a better result for the war effort, and it's a lot more Trek.

    Some of the language in the exploration missions also do not jive with Trek. We often get a mission where we approach the planet, are supposed to go beam down to scan something, and at the last second the bridge officer mentions there is a Borg ship nearby, but we should just beam down anyway. Sure, our enemy is nearby enough for our scanners to detect, but we should just go check out the artifacts anyway. As captain there is NO WAY I would not go after that ship instead of beaming down and surprise, we have to fight the Borg on the ground. In this case, I actually want the option of space combat instead of ground combat for the same foe.

    Right now the biggest problem with the exploration missions are the missing mission enemies, bigger than this problem. I don't see anything to drop to reset the mission as some have suggested. That only works for me when I don't complete a mission and get the chance to go back to it, but even then the mission had to work the first time.

    Incapacitating on the ground and boarding a ship to take it whole would be great additions and would also be like the Trek we know, even one at war.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Truth be told, I'm certainly glad diehard Star Trek fans didn't make this game. Do you realize how boring it would be if it were just like TNG? Face it, the shows were mostly drama because that works for television but it doesn't make for a game.

    I can already see it now with the new diplomatic missions...the majority of people don't read the text anyway so it'll just be a click fest to get it over with.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    My entire away team, myself included, are equipped with phaser stun pistols.

    When we get into a firefight with aggressive aliens or people we are currently at war with ... we still have our phasers set for stun.

    When we disable these foes, they fall to the ground. At that point our ship beams them up to either the brig or sickbay. A lot of times we're on an asteroid base with radiation issues that are affecting them. So they would have had to have been beamed up to sickbay in the first place.

    I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm no killer.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    OP: Absolutely spot on! This thread is absolutely destined to be sent to the "ghetto" at the bottom of the forums soon as a mod wakes up it is so on point.

    Not only is there nowhere near enough to do, you cannot play the game in any manner that actually resembles Star Trek.

    People forget that Captain James T. Kirk, while unquestionably the greatest of all the canon Captains with respect to fighting, both as a space tactician and even hand to hand, tried like hell to AVOID fighting if at all possible. He only fought when given no other option.

    In STO there is no other option even considered in the missions. "Your mission is to scan 5 computers or 5 shiney rocks, oh, the Orions have beamed down, shoot them so you can scan the shiney things".

    This goes back to fundamentally flawed design decisions in the heart of STO made by the whole production staff.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Myrdden74 wrote:
    Truth be told, I'm certainly glad diehard Star Trek fans didn't make this game. Do you realize how boring it would be if it were just like TNG? Face it, the shows were mostly drama because that works for television but it doesn't make for a game.

    I can already see it now with the new diplomatic missions...the majority of people don't read the text anyway so it'll just be a click fest to get it over with.

    That's your opinion. If the game did have the TNG immersion and required thought and choices when the text popped up it would be a different game. It's just easier to please button mashing ADD players that just want to click-click-clickity-click click through games while trying not to get cheeto slobber in their keyboards.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    superchum wrote: »
    My entire away team, myself included, are equipped with phaser stun pistols.

    When we get into a firefight with aggressive aliens or people we are currently at war with ... we still have our phasers set for stun.

    When we disable these foes, they fall to the ground. At that point our ship beams them up to either the brig or sickbay. A lot of times we're on an asteroid base with radiation issues that are affecting them. So they would have had to have been beamed up to sickbay in the first place.

    I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm no killer.

    Problem is stun isn't really stun (as implemented in game). It's a snare. It still causes damage, and if you ONLY shoot stun beams you will still kill the target.

    I do think that should be an option, to use non lethal force. Or in space, to DISABLE ships rather than destroy them.

    Even when fighting the Romulans in "Balance of Terror" (which is one of the finest episodes of any series with respect to battle scenes) Kirk sought only to disable the Romulan ship and offered to rescue the crew when he finally did.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    It's really simple. what we need ( for the short term ) is two captain powers. one called disable, and one called stun. these powers when used on a target causes them to have a buff that stays on them for them whole fight. now what would happen is when you knock out their health, they would not be killed.

    So I stun you and you pass out, ( maybe your body would have the beam out action to remove. it )

    for ships, instead of blowing, the ship will just drift, spark and would have damage. ( later on it would disappear )

    also using this buff would make the fight harder because instead of our right trying to kill your target, you are being careful in disabling it. so damage to that target mite be reduced. in return since your not killing the target it, you would also get better loot off of the target. ( since it would be harder to kill )
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    wildcat84 wrote: »
    OP: Absolutely spot on! This thread is absolutely destined to be sent to the "ghetto" at the bottom of the forums soon as a mod wakes up it is so on point.
    Wont let that happen.

    Will simply mention that butchering unborn children is very undesirable in a game with such a low age rating.
    That and it goes against everything the Federation stands for blablabla...
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    wildcat84 wrote: »
    Problem is stun isn't really stun (as implemented in game). It's a snare. It still causes damage, and if you ONLY shoot stun beams you will still kill the target.

    Like I said. I'm no killer. None of my targets are killed. They are stunned, disabled, and drop to the ground. From there, their stunned bodies disappear as they are beamed up to my ship's brig or sickbay to be treated and then placed in the brig.

    I haven't killed anyone.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    You've let your imagination do what the missions did not. Except that in my version, after the mission you'd get a report on what the prisoners had to say when questioned, and mention sending them to federation justice or made prisoners of war.
    I suppose you'd never use exploit because that would vaporize enemies. But it is an interesting take on how to stay Trek while having to fight people over the right to scan a rock.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Shakkar wrote: »
    You've let your imagination do what the missions did not. Except that in my version, after the mission you'd get a report on what the prisoners had to say when questioned, and mention sending them to federation justice or made prisoners of war.
    I suppose you'd never use exploit because that would vaporize enemies. But it is an interesting take on how to stay Trek while having to fight people over the right to scan a rock.

    Correct, I do not have any exploit weapons equipped on my away team. My second weapon is a Phaser Auto Assault weapon. (My Nausicaan has less qualms about this. And both the Gorn on his away team have exploit attack using weapons, and so occasionally some folks on my KDF side do vaporize enemies).

    Yes, I am using my imagination.

    And yes I totally understand that this doesn't work for everyone. Mileage will vary for us all.

    But it has worked out well for me to add this to the game. Because I did not like the thought of continually killing people. But do recall that a lot of fighting and action was a part of the various shows.

    So I took some time to figure out how to use the stun pistols to get a desired result in my gameplay.

    :)

    It helps that the stun pistols are really really useful on the harder away missions on higher difficulty settings. I'll grant you that. And that very effective tactics can be built around them and weapons malfunction. But I think the heart of why I do this is ... I'm very much a traditionalist with my one character and want to use phasers, set to stun.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    superchum wrote: »
    Like I said. I'm no killer. None of my targets are killed. They are stunned, disabled, and drop to the ground. From there, their stunned bodies disappear as they are beamed up to my ship's brig or sickbay to be treated and then placed in the brig.

    I haven't killed anyone.

    You can RP however you like, but as far as game mechanics are concerned every player is a mass murderer. Thats not our fault of course, its just bad game design by Cryptic.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    i agree with the OP. i'm not a federation captain, i'm an intergalactic warlord.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    You should know,

    the Mirror Universe Feds are actually the "good" guys.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    but as far as game mechanics are concerned every player is a mass murderer.

    I don't think so. As far as game mechanics are concerned they have two visual representations of defeat.

    1- The standard drop to the ground, and fade away. This is done for the very obvious RL reason ... to keep the game's rating acceptable to a more general audience. Less violence and all.

    2- The Vaporize graphic. Which is definitely a kill. But not a bloody kill so skirts the visual violence issue a tad.

    However, it's the heart of the ESRB rating, and the depiction of the violence that actually opens the door for my role playing. All of those characters who aren't vaporized ... also show no visible signs of being killed or murdered. Because this game wants to not get into a huge legal tussle over depictions of violence.

    And as such, they leave defeat wide open to your own imagination.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Signalsgt wrote: »
    That's your opinion. If the game did have the TNG immersion and required thought and choices when the text popped up it would be a different game. It's just easier to please button mashing ADD players that just want to click-click-clickity-click click through games while trying not to get cheeto slobber in their keyboards.

    Right, much like it's your opinion that the stylings of the show would make a good game. That's the thing though, it would not. It's clear you guys have absolutely no idea how to make a game which is a good thing as I pointed out in my initial post.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    superchum wrote: »
    I don't think so. As far as game mechanics are concerned they have two visual representations of defeat.

    1- The standard drop to the ground, and fade away. This is done for the very obvious RL reason ... to keep the game's rating acceptable to a more general audience. Less violence and all.

    2- The Vaporize graphic. Which is definitely a kill. But not a bloody kill so skirts the visual violence issue a tad.

    However, it's the heart of the ESRB rating, and the depiction of the violence that actually opens the door for my role playing. All of those characters who aren't vaporized ... also show no visible signs of being killed or murdered. Because this game wants to not get into a huge legal tussle over depictions of violence.

    And as such, they leave defeat wide open to your own imagination.

    There was no need for you to explain anything, because I understand exactly what you mean. I know your RPing, and that is fine. However, RP asside, the mechanics of STO are you have to kill all your enemies(unless the mission is written where your capturing someone). And even your RP cant explain away all the hundreds(and sometimes even thousands) of people who die on the ships you destory in space. Even if you are in a galaxy class, you couldnt fit all the crew of every ship you kill in one normal mission in your brig.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    Myrdden74 wrote:
    Right, much like it's your opinion that the stylings of the show would make a good game. That's the thing though, it would not. It's clear you guys have absolutely no idea how to make a game which is a good thing as I pointed out in my initial post.

    Actually, there have been several ST games based closely on the style of the shows that have been very good. Here are a couple of old ones:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_25th_Anniversary_(computer_game)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Judgment_Rites

    They were very story driven and had alot of puzzles you had to figure out. Some screens from the games:

    http://www.whattheyplay.com/media/images/features/star-trek-every-video-game-254/spotart/25thAnniversary.jpg

    http://www.abandonware-paradise.eu/Gifs/Abandonware/Star_trek_judgment_rites.png

    Their both actually abandonware now, and can be downloaded for free.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    There was no need for you to explain anything, because I understand exactly what you mean. I know your RPing, and that is fine. However, RP asside, the mechanics of STO are you have to kill all your enemies(unless the mission is written where your capturing someone). And even your RP cant explain away all the hundreds(and sometimes even thousands) of people who die on the ships you destory in space. Even if you are in a galaxy class, you couldnt fit all the crew of every ship you kill in one normal mission in your brig.

    Like I said, the mechanics do not support any visual evidence that you are killing someone when you drop them with any attack besides a vaporize.

    I'm glad you brought up space.

    When we destroy a ship, we bring it to 0%

    It then pauses. There is a noticable pause in the the time when the ship is at 0% and when it's warp core breaches.

    I trust that space combat does indeed have casualties. It's part of the risk. However, I also feel that many of those ship captains send their crew to escape pods. It's something I've seen happen in the books and the shows.

    And in that time between 0% and the actual warp core breach ... those escape pods are launched.

    Since I'm no monster, I do not hunt down the escape pods and murder those people.

    There are casualties in space. But since in space I do not start the aggression ... I find that completely acceptable.

    Also, there are more than a few missions where all you do is disable the ship. Sometimes you disable it and beam aboard it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    superchum wrote: »
    Like I said, the mechanics do not support any visual evidence that you are killing someone when you drop them with any attack besides a vaporize.

    I'm glad you brought up space.

    When we destroy a ship, we bring it to 0%

    It then pauses. There is a noticable pause in the the time when the ship is at 0% and when it's warp core breaches.

    I trust that space combat does indeed have casualties. It's part of the risk. However, I also feel that many of those ship captains send their crew to escape pods. It's something I've seen happen in the books and the shows.

    And in that time between 0% and the actual warp core breach ... those escape pods are launched.

    Since I'm no monster, I do not hunt down the escape pods and murder those people.

    There are casualties in space. But since in space I do not start the aggression ... I find that completely acceptable.

    Also, there are more than a few missions where all you do is disable the ship. Sometimes you disable it and beam aboard it.

    I dont think Klingons would use escape pods, so at the very least you have killed every member of the crew on Klingon ships you fight. I'm pretty sure the Jem'Hadar do not either. Also, considering the fact that the warp core breach will damage YOUR ship, it would destroy any escape pods that had been launched.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    superchum wrote: »
    Like I said, the mechanics do not support any visual evidence that you are killing someone when you drop them with any attack besides a vaporize.

    I'm glad you brought up space.

    When we destroy a ship, we bring it to 0%

    It then pauses. There is a noticable pause in the the time when the ship is at 0% and when it's warp core breaches.

    I trust that space combat does indeed have casualties. It's part of the risk. However, I also feel that many of those ship captains send their crew to escape pods. It's something I've seen happen in the books and the shows.

    And in that time between 0% and the actual warp core breach ... those escape pods are launched.

    Since I'm no monster, I do not hunt down the escape pods and murder those people.

    There are casualties in space. But since in space I do not start the aggression ... I find that completely acceptable.

    Also, there are more than a few missions where all you do is disable the ship. Sometimes you disable it and beam aboard it.

    I'd be interested to see how you 'imagination' away the killing of the Jem'Hadar eggs in that Cardassian-area mission.

    Get me a cardboard box, I can fix STO!

    Just because I can imagine it better, doesn't mean it shouldn't be improved.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited May 2010
    We're at war, so we accept we have to kill lots of ships, and lots of sentient beings. But we might also add large facilities on our ships for holding prisoners, or perhaps just put them in stasis until arrival at a starbase.

    I can see how you could rationalize the disappearing man lying down as him beaming out instead of disappearing, which frankly makes more sense anyway. In Star Trek, people don't just disappear when they die unless they were vaporized.

    Context matters too. I'm much more willing to kill an antagonist who has already attacked me first than I am to kill a man guarding a rock. I'm more likely to kill a Borg on sight than I am some race the random generator just made up a name for.

    Many times though it would be better for Starfleet to disable a ship, take prisoners, bring home the whole ship for tech rather than whatever piece managed to survive the warp core breach that we call loot. Boarding parties could be an integral part of the battle. While I could see few Klingon ships choosing surrender over self-destruct, other races might place their lives higher than their warrior code.

    I'm still hopeful that time will improve many things including the "Trek" feel of playing Federation.
Sign In or Register to comment.