test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Proposal : A Better BOFF Ability System (Space)

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
Lately i've done alot of thinking about the way our BO abilities work and space and as a gamer who has come from other mmos something doesnt seem right with the current system.

What i'd like to propose is that certain space skills are tied to the station itself rather than having a need to use 3 seperate stations to skill up in a certain ability.

The way i envision this working is when you skill up the full 9 skills in the BO skills window that the ability would reset to 1 at the next rank and you skill it up again to reach rank 3.

For example ill use Tactical Team

As it stands if i want rank 3 i need to put it in my lt commander slot which could be better utilised with a move like torpedo high yield 3.

How it would work is like this

Ensign Station - Tactical Team I > Invest 9 points to become Tactical Team II then another 9 for Rank III
Lt Station - Torpedo High Yield I > Invest 9 Points for High Yield II then another 9 for Rank III
Lt Commander > same as above
Commander > same as above

I feel this would bring the current system more inline with current MMO models and lets face it how many ensign abilities do we really desire?

Also when cryptic adds higher ranks of abilities it would be easier to adapt to this system.

Thoughts, Comments?
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    i like the idea

    I just think that being able to reach tier 3 in an ability should still be class specific.
    Like a tac officer shouldnt be able to get his sci boff to tier 3 sci team and stuff like that.
    Otherwise there would be even less variation in character builds and things would become unbalanced.

    Another way to go with your idea and still keep balance is to do away with the boff skill trainer and have every boff come with a set of skills that isnt changable.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I could see this system being very unruly and hard to balance toward within each rank.

    However, if you were to start a thread about changing up ground powers - my ears would give more. :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I like the idea of powers being tied to consoles/ships, rather than being 'officer powers' - and instead, your officer's training/skillpoint allocation acts as a modifier in a certain skill area. In other words, treat officers like simplified versions of player characters, rather than glorified ship devices.

    Here's an example, comparing the current system to my revision.


    CURRENT:

    A Lieutenant-ranked Tactical Officer has 5 points allocated to 'Torpedo: High Yield I' and 4 to 'Beam Array: Overload II'. These abilities are bound to the officer, and can be replaced by training the officer in a different ability. The skillpoints with the previous ability are lost - new points must be earned to train the officer in their new ability.


    REVISED:

    A Lieutenant-ranked Tactical Officer has 5 points allocated to the skills 'Starship Projectile Weapons Training' and 4 to 'Starship Energy Weapons Training'. The player character has achieved level 1 in 'Torpedo: High Yield' and level 2 in 'Beam Array: Overload' - these powers are bound to all ships under the player character's command. The bridge officer's skill training modifies the effectiveness of these abilities. Like with captain skills, officer skills can be re-allocated by 'respec'-ing. While the captain can unlock several more abilites (without replacing previously-earned abilites), they're all selectable from a menu, and only a fixed amount can be active at once. Like devices, abilites cannot be swapped during combat.


    Hopefully that makes sense - and people like the sound of it as a concept! I see it as a positive first step towards getting rid of the current system of 'each ship has a fixed number of 'Tac/Eng/Sci' slots (i.e.,'Dps/Tank/Healer' slots... :rolleyes: ), and powers are bound to each officer', and instead having a system where there's a dedicated Helm, Tactical Station, Conn, etc., with abilites 'hard-wired' to the ship stations (seriously, why is it that 'science ships' can target subsystems as standard, while for other ships, you have to permanently train a 'Tac/DPS' officer in only the one subsystem?!? Makes no sense...), and officer training boosting the effectiveness of the abilities relevant to their training.

    Eventually, we'd be able to have the true Command, Operations and Sciences divisions in-game, with actual Conn Officers, Helmsmen and the like - y'know, like they used to have in those old TV shows. What where they called again...?

    ...oh yeah, that's right - 'STAR TREK'. :p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Sounds like some very clever ideas.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    This thread has potential. It sounds like it could also tie in well with the First Officer/XO threads I've seen around the forums.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    If anyone's interested, I'm trying to expand on the ideas I 'blurted' out in a random stream of consciousness up-thread - the idea being to accurately represent the way starships work on the shows, and more specifically, create the feeling of a working bridge 'crew', rather than just a squad with various 'power-ups'.

    For example, I'm playing around with the following core bridge assignments:

    - First Officer (Executive Officer)
    (plus the ability to designate a Second Officer as well)

    - Flight Controller (Helmsman)

    - Conn Officer

    - Chief Medical Officer

    - Chief Engineer

    - Tactical Officer/Security Chief

    - Science Officer

    - Counselor

    - Operations (Ops) Manager


    Again, that's just off the top of my head - I'll hopefully be able to come up with something that covers all the important details yet stays understanable to the uninitiated. That, and perhaps find a way to overcome my terrible misuses of the English langauge... :o
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    The Devs said mentioned of this same idea months ago, they debated on you upgrading your abilities or having the current system where you have seperate slots.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Azurian wrote: »
    The Devs said mentioned of this same idea months ago, they debated on you upgrading your abilities or having the current system where you have seperate slots.

    It probably didn't make it due to the balance issues.

    Do we really want more level bands and queues (which is what this would need for balancing)?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I thought the same thing. Because effectively people would have 1 seperate ability per BO position. So in that respect it's a good thing.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Azurian wrote: »
    I thought the same thing. Because effectively people would have 1 seperate ability per BO position. So in that respect it's a good thing.
    It'd be too good of a thing.

    You'd need to break each rank in half so that way people don't get cremated. :D

    RSP III + HYT III + BO III + CSV III then Disengage cloak and fire plus some TR III + PSIII

    Game. Set. Match.

    Not only would all items potentially need a buff/nerf - all ships with +/- slots due to unique powers would be up for review.

    snix would probably turn to alcoholism after reading the complaint threads.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I think it's a great idea. there's no need to attach anything other than who sits where on your bridge. It can be simply cosmetic to enhance the true Star Trek experience. Maybe, there could be some form of benefit of having, for instance, a CMO onboard. But, this would not factor into combat or away mission. In fact the abillities of that BOff could be inactive during aforementioned events and only available when mission is complete. Just think, we would all be able to say, "What do you think, Number One?"
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    It'd be too good of a thing.

    You'd need to break each rank in half so that way people don't get cremated. :D

    RSP III + HYT III + BO III + CSV III then Disengage cloak and fire plus some TR III + PSIII

    Game. Set. Match.

    Not only would all items potentially need a buff/nerf - all ships with +/- slots due to unique powers would be up for review.

    snix would probably turn to alcoholism after reading the complaint threads.

    It would be good for PvE, but bad for PvP. But certain classes could benefit from such single slot upgrade. Like Cruisers and Science Ships with regards to High Yield 3 and Overload 3. While in Escorts, it would indeed be overpowered and really offset PvP.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    It'd be too good of a thing.

    I agree. And this is kind of how this idea and thread is going to go. Players are going to love ideas that allow them to ramp up their power in-game with few to no balance checks. Because they're players and it's what they want.

    Any and all consideration toward "game balance" or what the devs have to keep mindful of ... will be mostly ignored or rationalized away because they're devs and not players.

    Luckily it's just a feedback thread. And sometimes feedback doesn't go anywhere because it can't.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    So basically I could train over time an ensign or higher slot to accept a captains ability thus giving every slot on my vessel of choice- level 3 abilities?
    Is that what OP means?
Sign In or Register to comment.