My point is create a standar rule to add or quit shield and hull points for size. That form, a very big escort or science vessel had a advantage with little ships and cruisers can take part of her tank work.
The game is become a escort game (on pvp that is a criminal fact).
If beams no can take more range, or a big buff damage, or in cruisers powered beams raise their stats, or something is made, STO will be a escorts and carriers game... maybe, we can rename as Star Wars online or Battlestar Galactica online.... we are close to see Imperial Star Destroyers and Battlestars, beacouse cannons and fighters are op against big "weak" and unturnable cruisers with the "best" technology than starfleet can provide.
Another way, is upgrade the energy pool on cruisers, give to escorts 200 points 250 for science and 300 for cruisers, or set that points for size.
Even shield, hull and energy pool can be setup by size of any ship.
Thanks to everybody for the fun, sorry for my bad english.
I agree, if big ships take more shield, hull points or/and energy, little ships with reduced points by her size must gain a defense modiffier... On DS9 we see the defiant big point is their chance to evade big ships' fire but she take lots of hits from another small ships...
Maybe, setting a negative based on diferent defense (nearly defense value ships dont affect their attack values) and that can do that escorts first work will be finnish another escorts.
Thanks to everybody for the fun, sorry for my bad english.
Your suggestion is nice in theory ! But think about the other dudes that invested big money in their escort tanks. So I dont know, its hard to take a great toy from a child
I agree that the hull points on many escorts is silly, and indeed it's silly when see a defiant class handing an Odyssey it's TRIBBLE when the opposite should be true. However, if you scale ships by size then you risk removing the ability for people to play what they want.
I posted a thread however about scaling ship attributes by size, but introducing the ability to take "wingmates" so smaller ships could fight with a small NPC formation. So even if a small escrot's stats were reduced to a fifth of what they are now, you'd fight with three wing mates for four times the combined stats, and scale abilities to your captain and "wing" composition, so it would even out in practice with a wing of four small escorts being required to actually threaten a capital ship.
This would TRIBBLE over Science players, who are proud to have the highest shield modifiers in the game, since it is one of the few trumps they have over escorts.
What is needed to balance the ship-classes? Well, first we should take a look at what we currently have.
Escorts have got +15 Weapon-Power, 30 k hull and 0.9 shield-modifier (typically). The Bonus to their Weapon-Power is used every 1 or 2 seconds, every time they shoot.
Science-Vessels have got +15 Aux-Power, 27.2 k hull and a shield-modifier of 1.3 to 1.45. The bonus to their Auxilary-Power can be used about every 10 to 15 seconds.
Additionally Science-Vessels have got Sensor-Analysis, that grants them about 33% bonus-damage after 1 minute hunting the same target.
Cruisers have got +5 to all sub-systems (sum is usually +20 total), 40 k hull and a shield-modifier of 1. Bonuses to shield power are granted every 6 seconds (passive shield-regeneration), to weapons every time you shoot,...
So, if you want to balance these ship-classes, you've got to match them to their description: Cruisers have got advanced Warp-Cores, Science-Vessels have got advanced Sensors.
I would give Cruisers a Bonus of about 25 to their starship Warp Core Efficiency - that sounds much, but it gives them maximum a +4.5 energy to subsystems on the Energy-preset of 25. Check this.
The next thing would be to boost Science-Vessels a little bit. To do this, I would nerf Sensor Analysis, so that the bonus only stacks to a maximum of about 16.6%. In return I would give those ships a Bonus to Targeting Systems.
This way we would just match the description of the ship-types better, Science-Vessels would have a little more firepower in the beginning, but sensor-analysis would provide the full bonus after 30 seconds. Cruisers would finally have a little more energy, that they could use for Hazard-Emitters or other Energy-based heals, the bonus to the engine-power would give them also a little higher defense (if they could always fly with full speed).
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
If Star Trek Online was an Open-Source (GPL) Game, we would have a low-grind fork.
A +15 on one system, is better than +5 on each system (you can see it only with the ships with 2x +10 or +10/+5/+5).
About Shield, escorts had 0.9 (I will quit the fleet ships beacouse problem grow), but they can use several facing only turning the ship, so they had more "able" shield than cruisers.
About hull.... damage umbral is too high, hull had Little effect on a good alpha attack.
Worse of that, using some maneouvers attacks with fire on my mark, you haven't any problem on take down lots of hp. And cruisers beams can't do the same proportion of damage to incoming escort (no the same damage, the same proportion). If you want raise the problem, any escort can set field generators to quit their "low .9 shield) but on cruisers armor consoles stacks losing a great part of own bonus.
And we now must add the consoles.... were tactical bring great bonus on damage, science gargantuan shields and cruisers... none of none.
I used nearly all fed ships in the game. But I see, with any "upgrade" escorts become more efficient, and cruisers more unefficient. If we go for that way, we only see masive carriers on pve and op escorts on pvp. A good pvp need balance... in that moment of the game, sto no have it (maybe never... but now that is worse).
From begin to year ago, I was playing pvp, with cruisers, escorts and science, lots of games to day. Now I only play one of two when a new season come... to see if that is more playable with any ship or only still getting worse.
At least sto had PvE, but that some day no will be sufficient to lots of players.
Thanks to everybody for the fun, sorry for my bad english.
Considering many escorts are just as large as cruisers (in fact most escorts actually *are* cruisers, but STO decided it needed a trinity to they got called escorts, but that's neither here nor there), I don't think this would have the effect you want it to.
A standard would be great, but that's not going to happen any time soon if at all. Something to say "you are <w> far off this point, so you get <x>, <y>, and <z>" would be awesome.
The current strategy by marketing seems to force the 'new' ships to always be a little bigger, a little tougher, and a little meaner then the last one. Regardless of what that does to the rest of the stock or balance.
Up to this point, Either devs or management appear to have zero interest in a standard or the long-term effects.
Comments
when u see the sicnec eship with all the shield that is just kind of op
u must have a buff for the damage evasion of smaller ship it hink or
orthwerise my keyboard is brtoken
please nerf shield of eng captains
ty
Maybe, setting a negative based on diferent defense (nearly defense value ships dont affect their attack values) and that can do that escorts first work will be finnish another escorts.
Thanks to everybody for the fun, sorry for my bad english.
I posted a thread however about scaling ship attributes by size, but introducing the ability to take "wingmates" so smaller ships could fight with a small NPC formation. So even if a small escrot's stats were reduced to a fifth of what they are now, you'd fight with three wing mates for four times the combined stats, and scale abilities to your captain and "wing" composition, so it would even out in practice with a wing of four small escorts being required to actually threaten a capital ship.
Game Balance - Ship Size and Wingmates
What is needed to balance the ship-classes? Well, first we should take a look at what we currently have.
Escorts have got +15 Weapon-Power, 30 k hull and 0.9 shield-modifier (typically). The Bonus to their Weapon-Power is used every 1 or 2 seconds, every time they shoot.
Science-Vessels have got +15 Aux-Power, 27.2 k hull and a shield-modifier of 1.3 to 1.45. The bonus to their Auxilary-Power can be used about every 10 to 15 seconds.
Additionally Science-Vessels have got Sensor-Analysis, that grants them about 33% bonus-damage after 1 minute hunting the same target.
Cruisers have got +5 to all sub-systems (sum is usually +20 total), 40 k hull and a shield-modifier of 1. Bonuses to shield power are granted every 6 seconds (passive shield-regeneration), to weapons every time you shoot,...
So, if you want to balance these ship-classes, you've got to match them to their description: Cruisers have got advanced Warp-Cores, Science-Vessels have got advanced Sensors.
I would give Cruisers a Bonus of about 25 to their starship Warp Core Efficiency - that sounds much, but it gives them maximum a +4.5 energy to subsystems on the Energy-preset of 25. Check this.
The next thing would be to boost Science-Vessels a little bit. To do this, I would nerf Sensor Analysis, so that the bonus only stacks to a maximum of about 16.6%. In return I would give those ships a Bonus to Targeting Systems.
This way we would just match the description of the ship-types better, Science-Vessels would have a little more firepower in the beginning, but sensor-analysis would provide the full bonus after 30 seconds. Cruisers would finally have a little more energy, that they could use for Hazard-Emitters or other Energy-based heals, the bonus to the engine-power would give them also a little higher defense (if they could always fly with full speed).
If Star Trek Online was an Open-Source (GPL) Game, we would have a low-grind fork.
About Shield, escorts had 0.9 (I will quit the fleet ships beacouse problem grow), but they can use several facing only turning the ship, so they had more "able" shield than cruisers.
About hull.... damage umbral is too high, hull had Little effect on a good alpha attack.
Worse of that, using some maneouvers attacks with fire on my mark, you haven't any problem on take down lots of hp. And cruisers beams can't do the same proportion of damage to incoming escort (no the same damage, the same proportion). If you want raise the problem, any escort can set field generators to quit their "low .9 shield) but on cruisers armor consoles stacks losing a great part of own bonus.
And we now must add the consoles.... were tactical bring great bonus on damage, science gargantuan shields and cruisers... none of none.
I used nearly all fed ships in the game. But I see, with any "upgrade" escorts become more efficient, and cruisers more unefficient. If we go for that way, we only see masive carriers on pve and op escorts on pvp. A good pvp need balance... in that moment of the game, sto no have it (maybe never... but now that is worse).
From begin to year ago, I was playing pvp, with cruisers, escorts and science, lots of games to day. Now I only play one of two when a new season come... to see if that is more playable with any ship or only still getting worse.
At least sto had PvE, but that some day no will be sufficient to lots of players.
Thanks to everybody for the fun, sorry for my bad english.
Science ships are supposed to have the strongest shields in the game. That's not OP. That's their design.
Engineering ships are supposed to have the strongest hull.
Tactical ships are supposed to have the best turning.
Other ships only get 15.
5 extra power is Alot!!!
Escorts need +5 engine and give sci ship +5 to shield
Ty
Sure, sure.. you can have the extra +5 when you give up the triple digit damage bonuses escorts get from lt cmdr tac+ abilities.
Though I liked the idea about ship power reserves based on ship size, though I would not advise so huge differences.
The current strategy by marketing seems to force the 'new' ships to always be a little bigger, a little tougher, and a little meaner then the last one. Regardless of what that does to the rest of the stock or balance.
Up to this point, Either devs or management appear to have zero interest in a standard or the long-term effects.