test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
When STO launched Cryptic had a dream.....
tripwire690
Member Posts: 178 Arc User
When faced with the difficult task of engaging your enemy, the combat strategy was to use your energy weapons to weaken your enemies shields and follow up with a properly timed projectile/variable detonation device for the swift end to a troubled time. What happened to that idea?
I think variation is nice. There is diversity in some players running all energy and others running all kinetic damage depending on the way they want to captain their ship. But I think the original dream was good. It was trek. Where every torpedo was in some way for one reason or another to be feared. Where energy weapons were still great but could achieve something greater when in synergy with a good projectile weapon. If Cryptic was to reinvent the torpedo so that this dream was real for pvp....what would you think? Who among you would welcome this change? Who among you would not?
I think variation is nice. There is diversity in some players running all energy and others running all kinetic damage depending on the way they want to captain their ship. But I think the original dream was good. It was trek. Where every torpedo was in some way for one reason or another to be feared. Where energy weapons were still great but could achieve something greater when in synergy with a good projectile weapon. If Cryptic was to reinvent the torpedo so that this dream was real for pvp....what would you think? Who among you would welcome this change? Who among you would not?
Let no other Captain discourage you from what you believe you can achieve in PvP. Debuffs and Disables be damned! Charge up your Backstep and Forge your build out of Lock Boxes, Consoles, and Flash Sales feeding off of only your pure will to chain, spam, and hax your way forward. You will not be forgotten to history.
Post edited by tripwire690 on
0
Comments
CRUISERS NEED A 206% HULL BUFF
Federation :: Fleetless :: Klingon
Jorge Silva - Tac | Nayja - Sci | Jorge E. Silva - Eng
Jorge R. Silva - Tac (Romulan Fed)
Nayja K Silva - Sci | Vurg'jah - Tac
2 Things need to change imo.
1) Bleed through has to increase under X amount of shielding. My suggestion would be the 50% mark... where it would slide down. Slivers of shields should really do next to nothing as far as absorbing a torpedos dmg.
2) Torpedos alone have to have a way to effect shielding. I would say we need a new stat. "Kinetic Shield Resistance" Basicly if some one has low energy shield resistance they should also take more dmg to there shields from kinetic dmg.
Together this would mean torpedos hitting fully shielded targets would not be pointless. (the numbers should still mean energy does far better vs full shielding)
Right now the phasic consoles are boosting your breen cluster torps... if you use genaric warhead style cossoles they won't. Unless your planning to run mine consoles.
ive come to some new conclusions regarding torps, i dont think bleed is the answer. torps should do 80-90% damage to shields as they do to hull, shields should not have a built in 75% resistance to knetic damage, and if a shield facing is blown down by a torp, the rest of the damage would not transfer to hull, because the torp exploded away from the hull. if they did that every type of ship and every build would be be remiss if it didn't run at least 1 torp
Yes. I, too, have made similar suggestions. If you polarize the shield/hull relationship it would be a dramatic difference this game could use.
Honestly I could geek out on how to tailor that polarity in nature but I'm afraid I'd create quite a wall of text. I do believe though that instead of nerfing passives that it would be more pragmatic to simply filter all the rep bonuses and explicitly pair the most dramatic/impacting passives onto the same tier so that the player makes a hard choice and would need to consider their pro's and cons. Some of these rep tiers have options that stack against another and the benefits are sorely skewed.
In addition rep tiers should be revisited in general, not to nerf any passives but to consider combining some and make room for non-combat related benefits. I see no reason why 3% critical chance can't be paired with the +Aux to weapon training/energy/projectile passive and give the newly available panel a new option. There's plenty of room for other benefactors like discounts/xp boosting/a luck option for lock boxes/exponential suggestions and etc..
Honestly this is why I feel as though the devs are being led around by an inappropriate mindset. Every time devs are checked on their products we usually hear the status quo response of "fun" or "We just wanted to have fun" or "We just wanted to let the players have fun". That sounds innocent enough at first but why can't they have a season update and claim "We just wanted to create a fully working game for players to enjoy" or "We want our ground and space to be equally riveting and full of possibilities."
Who is leading this pack without the mind to make the game better? I guess we'll have to settle for naked dinos with laser faces.
That is possible...
Would only wonder if quantum boats wouldn't then be to powerful...
Imagine a claoked ship just spamming high dmg quantums. Where one crit would remove a facing.
I see your point though and the logic is undeniable.
This premise seems logical. However, wouldn't that forcibly chain react players to always consider a torpedo for their build? Disregarding the 75% means that torpedoes, even rescaled, then create a two-pop shot opportunity where 1 high yield would intend to put down a facing and follow through with an energy barrage like overload.
Although I would enjoy some strategy to taking an enemy player out, the innate higher yields of tricobalt would take runner up on that task and antiproton to lick that hull clean as it would follow, would it not? What does that do for tetryon's intents and purposes?
1 thing to keep in mind though that wile shields wouldn't have the built in 75% res, they would still have to encounter the general resist of anywhere between 50-75% that the shields have for energy weapons too.
all torp boats are sort of probematic here possibly, a rebalance on them may be needed. or like the removal of quantum and photon tac consoles. with out those consoles the damage those torps do would be quite balanced.
but hey, if anything can spike, and running energy and torps arent so rainbow, thats a pretty fundamental, and CANON change. energy weapons would be support to the real heavy weapons
regardless, i think such a change need to be made to torps and shield damage, it can be balanced from there. right now its completely unworkable for 95% of builds to run any torps.
very valid concerns. id like to see the change on tribble for a month, so we can properly balance it.
That is a great idea Dont.... and simpler then my idea really... I basicly said add a torpedo resistance to shields that wasn't set... hell I was saying the same thing you made it make more sense.
With everyone able to get to 75% shield resist anyway... this would work out just fine.
I approve. Simple and easy solution.
I don't see why not. They could give subscribers some more clout than just signing into tribble. I'd like them to use those polls to determine what paying customers are looking for and provide those experimental concepts to assist in a proper dichotomy.
This would make a lot of sense.
Energy weapons = effective against shields (as both are forms of energy-based tech)
Energy weapons = not as effective on hull
Kinetic weapons = not as effective on shields
Kinetic weapons = effective against hull
this would constitute a change in how energy weapons work. energy weapons = more gradual damage over time whereas torps = spike damage. as things stand, energy weapons are pretty much effective on shields and hull.
might also fix the current min-max state of the game. maybe shields lasting longer, but regen slower to the point when your tactical officer says "shields are down!" means they are down. then up comes the kinetic weapons. However, i think such things might only be effective in 1v1,2v1 or 2vv2 pvp situations, otherwise its a premade cluster **** on pugmade pvpers.
Chillax. No Ego. No Drama.
Like my alien? Watch THE VIDEO
Need custom graphics for you or your fleet? Click HERE
come to think of it, the tac skill lockout preventing stacking would go a long way to balance things too as it is. though currently you can still stack HY with HY, thats actually buged at the moment.
even if torps were dealing op damage, they still would only be firing 1 a second at most, so as long as you could get a sliver back from redistributing and the torp keeps hitting and only blowing away the sliver, no mater how much damage those torps do your not getting cut in half unless you get hit with spreads or HY. your shields are getting huge chunks blown off though. only HY or spread with their multiple torps would hit in quick enough succession to remove a facing and go to town on the hull.
for HY torps, they explode so big that for them i think at least 75% of the damage left after they take down a facing should then hit hull too. they would be even bigger losers in this system otherwise.
That assumes it'd be a good thing, not everyone is distressed over not having a mixed fluffy loadout, I rather prefer the look of an all energy or torp weapon loadout.
Ker'rat. 2 years ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UK0Fo-zhLhQ
Defiant PvP. 2 years ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3LpH2NLUuU
BoP PvP. 3 years ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alMMueVZYXg
eta: Waht is OP? 3 years ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6z-Cz1_ess
A mechanic where we could rotate shield frequency and determine shield frequency over time for increased shield penetration would also give torpedoes more interesting game play.
Ah yes. Frequency modulation should be apart of HY. It'd be nice if HY gave a proc for 1-20% chance of a 30% shield bypass where 1-20% was determined by the length of engagement(canon logic: time to discover shield frequency/mechanics for fairness and logical for pvp as to help avoid one-trick pony setups).
Would help instill a choice between spread and yield. Right now the minds that be gravitate toward spreads because they always hit targeted opponents.
These devs have a bad habit of leaving certain mechanics in an obvious light to the effect where almost all players 'in the know' will gravitate towards said mechanics out of logical discourse.