To me to fix it. They should create more missions based off exploration to add into the missions that tells the story. As it should not be all just kill, kill, and more killing. Even a nice rescue mission would be nice. There is a lot of ideas for missions.
The Rep grinds, you want me to do them. Show me some progress along the way. Having cutscenes and extra missions between each tier helps me want to keep going. That is what I loved about the Romulan and Dyson Rep. It felt like I was doing something other than just tier and gear.
About the ships. They did a decent upgrade to the Galaxy. I bought the pack and been loving it. I don't have issues with my Galaxy-R or Galaxy Dread. They both serve me well on my missions. The Defiant-R is a nice ship as well. Not every ship is for everyone. Which is why they make other options.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
that just the the thing you think its a long range explorer, but voyager was dumped into the delta quadrant and was a one off freak coincidence, meanwhile you got the bellerophon which just ferried passengers. so to me i cant see what the ships real purpose was. that is where the potential comes into it.
That's the problem in whole SF not one ship, Galaxy in TNG also provide many cargo/passenger mission which could be done by any other smaller vessel or even simply freighter. But it's not the topic for such discussion.
to a game based on the trinity sure.
only the trinity has the mechanical failings that reduce players to the level of npcs that must conform to class archetypes.
the player ratios in wow or those for the original stfs all do the same thing.
steal agency from the player just to accomodate the trinity
But this is what I am talking about. STO was (still is in it's base mechanics) a trinity game. When they moved away from it via hybrid classes thes did neither upgrade previously existant classes nor content, which broke the game. And I'm sorry, but I don't get your complaint about player liberty - if I play a game with a red/blue/yellow class system, what liberty is there to begin with? Either I'm fine with those archetypes and I play numerous characters to experience the whole or I play another game. Don't get me wrong, not promoting a trinity for STO here, but that's how it's set up. They either have to transform everything or everything is broken by design.
incredibly simple content, that was often bugged either by your boffs falling through the ground, or by finding hovering building shells, is not up to even the most rudimental foundry content i have played.
Again, not the point. The random mission generator could have been improved, which they didn't. Instead they take the lazy way out.
rules? no the rules are, queue for content and hope you get the team composition you need by pot luck.
just because the trinity needs there to be given rations of each cheracter archetype there or the system fails.
You don't need a perfect balance, three tanks can also supplement for a damage dealer for example. The system is not the end to all creativity. Although I agree with you, the queing system doesn't work, unless there's a algorithm in place looking for players to fill a (custom) predetermined group complement. Or, like in the old days, you set camp in front of the dungeon and wait for players to join you. If you mean that by preset groups I apologize, because I misunderstood. To me, however, this is part of the running game. Back in the days not everyone played with "tim is money" in the back of his or her head
i say "deviating from a myopic selection of class precepts causes systemic failure"
you say "not true, deviating from a myopic selection of class precepts causes systemic failure"
you are agreeing with my assertion about systemic failure, but being pedantic about subtypes.
nothing you have said there in any way undermines the issue, that if the gameplay and players arent severely hamstrung and restricted, then the system fails.
this is especially true with time gated content like stf optionals which naturally puts compettive pressure on more offensive abilities rather than technical.
and inescapable when you include pvp too, which forced you to buff survivability of the glass cannon types to the point they can take focussed fire, at which point they dont need taks to be there at all.
Once again, must have been a misunderstanding. I'm no native speaker, so certain things might slip my attention. But in this we actually agree, believe it or not
everything in the trinity fails at being anything to base a modern mmo on.
I'm curious, what does a "modern" MMO look like? If we talk about a star Trek MMO and you ask me, of course the trinity is all wrong to begin with. Classes would be meassured by size and mission profiles, like Bridge Commander or Klingon/SF Academy in a big multiplayer mode. But this would mean if you want to play a light cruiser, for example, you will need help when you face a heavy battlecruiser because it wil just dominate you. Likewise, if you take a tank alone into the dungeon with nobody to buff or heal you, you are being dominated. There are similarities.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Best fix for the Intrepid, is to have aux DBB like the Vesta has aux cannons. DBB or an AUX 360 array. Can I get an Amen?
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
that just the the thing you think its a long range explorer, but voyager was dumped into the delta quadrant and was a one off freak coincidence, meanwhile you got the bellerophon which just ferried passengers. so to me i cant see what the ships real purpose was. that is where the potential comes into it.
The Intrepid-class starship was a Federation design that entered service in the later half of the 24th century. The Intrepid-class was designed for long-term exploration missions. At less than half the size of a Galaxy-class starship, it was considered "quick and smart." (VOY: "Someone to Watch Over Me", "Scientific Method", "Relativity")
Sorry, but this time you are the one in the wrong.
That's the problem in whole SF not one ship, Galaxy in TNG also provide many cargo/passenger mission which could be done by any other smaller vessel or even simply freighter. But it's not the topic for such discussion.
the galaxy class was defined because it wasnt just the enterprise on exploration missions, the uss yamato before it was destroyed was also on exploration duty, unfortunately ran a foul the iconians.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
personally I think you are all looking at it backwards.
pretty well universally the game is perceived as :
1. too easy
2. the hero ships are weak
3. too much power creep (see point one)
I suggest that all 3 pc sets be reduced to 2 pc. (sorry cryptic, but the three ship sets would have to go)
at tier 5:
ALL escorts are to be 4/3 configuration with the ability to use DC/DHC
ALL cruisers are 4/4
ALL sci 4/3 and only able to use beams.
Reduce ALL ships to 6 consoles,in 2-2-2, configurations, adding one profession console and three universal consoles, with universal meaning JUST universal consoles- assimilated console, hydrodynamic compensator, Zero point. Ship specialty consoles not usable except on the variants of that ship (no more Valdore console on Scimitars) raise global on powers to 20 seconds.
haven't figured boffs out yet.
remove insta proc and always on DOFF abilities. Sorry, folks, Marion has to sleep.
yes this will cause a huge amount of nerdrage, but it curtails power creep and gets rid of OP ship design.
the idea is to nerf the player ships across the board and reset the ridiculous power creep I see every time I log in.
personally I think you are all looking at it backwards.
Interesting approach.
yes this will cause a huge amount of nerdrage, but it curtails power creep and gets rid of OP ship design.
LOL!
And not because I don't agree with you. Reeling in the power creep is not a bad idea. But because this forum would be awash in blood and tears. I don't even know how that would be possible, because this forum does not physically exist, but mark my words IT WOULD!.
It would also probably be detrimental to the game. Frankly put, and it pains me to admit this but, power creep is good for business.
the galaxy class was defined because it wasnt just the enterprise on exploration missions, the uss yamato before it was destroyed was also on exploration duty, unfortunately ran a foul the iconians.
Let's start with fact that SF main objective was Exploration, so technically all it's ships are explorers. The only non exploration ships mentioned in ST was Defiant and Prometheus class which were designed for combat.
its to do with how the trinity classes are designed to be simply interdependent, not independent & complementary.
this means that when players want to play x content, depending on the bias of that content they are at a mechanical disadvantage that prevents them from doing so competitivly.
unless they take other players with them. which by definition, is robbing them of independent ability.
But that does translate to "everybody should be able to do anything all the time", doesn't it? Why have a MMO to begin with? In that case, STO would be better off like Diablo 2 for example. Just being a singleplayer game with the option for coop multiplayer.
in fairness, net even minecraft does as good job of this and it is a random mission generator.
telling computers to create something random and structured at the same time doesnt work out very well even with darpa funding the project.
also, it wasnt really random. maybe a dozen maps that had object set a, enemy type y & objective z
In terms of creating landscapes, Minecraft does a good job IMO. This would be exploring strange new worlds indeed. But other games have capable randomly generated areas as well, my favourite games I play for 20 years already are still not getting old in that regard. I like that roguelike feeling very much, I don't need spiffy cutscenes and stories in a game like STO which is, again IMO, completely miscast in order to tell a story that's more complex than your average hack&slay game.
But the map isn't the important part. You could very well design maps by hand to avoid inaccesible tiles and what not, but the random generator could feature more variables, random events during your default survey starting little adventures on their own, discovery of legendary items etc.
... they cant really, especially in a timed scenario where more dps = easier to beat the timer.
and while it may not be the end of creativity, it is severely restrictive, or it just breaks.
the moment sto tried to have pvp with the trinity the system broke. as the escort class needed its survivability buffed to survive against players.
since players wherent forced to shoot the tanks by threat mechanics.
I feel we differ on that one. I personally think if someone wants to play an *escort*, it's his or her job to *escort*. It is the support, not the one being supported. You are right though, the moment Cryptic started to "balance" 1 on 1 encounters between Star Cruisers and Frigates it all falls apart because it is ridiculous. 1 on 1 encounters shouldn't artificially be balanced like this.
projection.
mmo's are moving away from the trinity across the board towrads less punitive class types. neither eve or ps2 are trinity based games yet they are mmo's(even if some people ego's wont let them see anything but mmorpg as mmo.), and thanks to this they can have full blown wars between players that just would not be possible with the trinity.
I, just from personal experience, fail to see why the trinity does not allow actions like that. In fact, ****, Everquest and WoW etc. proof that it does work. It works like an interactive RTS, albeit facing your "counter class" on the battlefield does in no way mean you are going to lose that encounter.
But that still doesn't mean it's adequate for Star Trek, but still it's what Cryptic chose and they can't get rid of, so there is extensive balancing needed. Just for instance look at this: All players have the exact same skills at their disposal. I can use the same healing powers on every ship, albeit a weaker version of it but an incredible amount of abilities are only needed in their lowest incarnation anyway. And hybrids can use basically all of it. If you look at other games, the hybrid classes are their own niche. A druid in a popular game for example can heal, cast, buff, debuff, tank and attack to substitute for every specialist missing, but with a *different* skill set to do so, it's not the exact same abilities. Something like this could suit STO well, IMO. Because why is every ship equipped to do the same stuff, essentially - where do escorts (frigates) cram the shuttles for boarding parties, why can a BoP slot devestatig deflector powers that would rip the ship itself apart? They should have their own version of certain skills and higher tiers of skills should make a difference like for example having a 100% chance to clear a level III debuff will only work with a level III team ability, while the level I only grants a 25% chance.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Let's start with fact that SF main objective was Exploration, so technically all it's ships are explorers. The only non exploration ships mentioned in ST was Defiant and Prometheus class which were designed for combat.
starfleet had enemies, federation had internal problems, federation had trade deals, starfleet had exploration and containment.. there was more to starfleet then just exploration for the hell of it.
it seems the original intent of the thread hasnt worked, there is no placation. didnt think it would work because we are a notoriously fickle bunch.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
mmo's are moving away from the trinity across the board towrads less punitive class types. neither eve or ps2 are trinity based games yet they are mmo's(even if some people ego's wont let them see anything but mmorpg as mmo.), and thanks to this they can have full blown wars between players that just would not be possible with the trinity.
Out of the dozen or so MMO's that have released over the last couple of years about three or four have used a free form skill system instead of the trinity, and guess what, almost everyone playing them games choose specific skills/equipment that shoe horn themselves into one of the trinity roles despite the roles not being integral to the game, yes even in eve they do it, why? because it's simply natural to do so, when working as a team you automatically assume the role you feel comfortable with and that's how you play, it's the same in real life you naturally gravitate towards roles you are more comfortable filling.
PS2 works without the trinity because the game style doesn't need it, it's an MMO but only barely, it's an MMOFPS and that's a completely different thing to any other type of MMO, you don't need healers and tanks in that game because a tank system just doesn't work against players (how would you code taunting another player?)and you don't need the classic healers because as an FPS game people die they respawn no harm no fowl, there's no progression or quest timer or anything to be disrupted by respawn, you just rinse repeat. Even then people seem to equip themselves in the style of a trinity.
There seems to be a gravitational effect surrounding the holy trinity.
That sort of exists in the game, press the HET button and you can do precisely that.
And frankly, all of the issues with the Galaxy stem from the fact that it simply doesn't have the right combination of boff slots to operate its basic systems. This will pretty much never change. The various powers of a ship are meant to work in combination with each other, but the Galaxy has only one type of power, the other two being too starved to operate. All ships with only a single type of power as a vast supermajority are a bit starved in this regard, but the Galaxy flops the hardest because Engineering powers are fundamentally passive in nature, and do not facilitate acting. Thus, the Galaxy's powers can only support its other abilities...abilities which it doesn't have. Ens Uni similar to its KDF Equivalent, the fleet Neghvar, would salvage it from the junkheap, at minimum. After all, the X got it, which it really didn't need.
I think that pretty much describes the problem of the engineering-focused ships. The KDF Neg'Var at least still got a good turn rate and the option to run DHCs (not sure if it's agood idea, but whatever you do, the turn rate helps.)
The game may simply need an offensive-oriented Engineering ability that is worth having. Maybe even two - one for the low rank, and one high-rank. Maybe the existing one needs to be buffed.
For powers that need to be buffed, Aceton Beam comes to mind. Seems pretty much useless. I never see anyone use it. Or is there a secret Aceton Beam build out there that rocks the world?
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Best fix for the Intrepid, is to have aux DBB like the Vesta has aux cannons. DBB or an AUX 360 array. Can I get an Amen?
Bad idea, the only reason they work on the Vesta is because the ability to use two subsystems to draw power from to fire your weapons. When you run leech, ES, and a AtoW warpcore you can run 125 aux with minimal drain, and have weapons power near 120. This way less drain to aux. I would consider the DBB. But a better fix to the intriped would give it a better Boff layout.
Commander sci
Lt commander sci
Lt commander uni
Lt engineer
Bad idea, the only reason they work on the Vesta is because the ability to use two subsystems to draw power from to fire your weapons. When you run leech, ES, and a AtoW warpcore you can run 125 aux with minimal drain, and have weapons power near 120. This way less drain to aux. I would consider the DBB. But a better fix to the intriped would give it a better Boff layout.
Commander sci
Lt commander sci
Lt commander uni
Lt engineer
Or swap the uni and the eng.
Univeral BO slots are overrated, to some extent. You can still, at any given time, slot only one class of BO in it. The benefit is that you are not stuck with a suboptimal combination. But if your ship doesn't have a suboptimal combination of BOs, it doesn't matter.
I always thought the Intrepid had one of the best BO layouts for a science vessel, simply because there are so many low rank science BO powers that are actually useful and you won't end up with global cooldown conflicts with your high tier powers.
I don't think that is one of the weaknesses.
The weakness compared to the Vesta is quite simply that the Vesta has Aux cannons and a hangar bay. Both increase its DPS output potential without requiring it to sacrifice its science capabilities. In PvP, this benefit might actually be marginal, but in PvE, it's quite notable IMO. (And the Vesta's lower hull in no way compensates its perks.)
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Iconic ships are capable endgame vessels, just ask anyone on the STB channel. Just because they can't hit as hard as a Scimitar it doesn't mean they are useless, and the only place every fraction of performance is actually important is PvP. I'd go further in fact and say their weakness is their strength. Beating endgame content in a supposedly inferior ship just makes it all the more satisfying.
Then of course we need to bear in mind that these ships are old, and newer ships with newer technology will be superior vessels.
Bad idea, the only reason they work on the Vesta is because the ability to use two subsystems to draw power from to fire your weapons. When you run leech, ES, and a AtoW warpcore you can run 125 aux with minimal drain, and have weapons power near 120. This way less drain to aux. I would consider the DBB. But a better fix to the intriped would give it a better Boff layout.
Commander sci
Lt commander sci
Lt commander uni
Lt engineer
Or swap the uni and the eng.
I don't have any of those and I run 2 dual aux cannons with a torp up front, a breen cluster and 180 deg quant torp and the 360 AP array just so I can do sub system targeting and running GW whenever it is ready along with Tyken's Rift, my Aux power rarely runs under 125.
Trust me, if you could get Aux DBB, intrepid could run them without a hitch.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
Iconic ships are capable endgame vessels, just ask anyone on the STB channel. Just because they can't hit as hard as a Scimitar it doesn't mean they are useless, and the only place every fraction of performance is actually important is PvP. I'd go further in fact and say their weakness is their strength. Beating endgame content in a supposedly inferior ship just makes it all the more satisfying.
Then of course we need to bear in mind that these ships are old, and newer ships with newer technology will be superior vessels.
excelsior, b'rel, fleet vor'cha(toh'kaht), t'varo, d'deridex make your point invalid(and i'm not even including lockbox ships like the galor, JHAS and d'kora, or the sovereign refit and akira refit).
also bear in mind the galaxy-R has a "new" refit being the venture and monarch, the same can be said about the intrepid with the bellerophon variant.
I don't accept that excuse, only an idiot would. But that said I can't understand why they could not have tied in the foundry as an optional add-on to the exploration. People who wanted exploration foundry missions could have had an options box in the settings to turn them on.... so when you enter an exploration cluster and you enter a system the game randomly picks a foundry mission. Creators of foundry missions could have a box to tick that would mean the mission is placed in the exploration system..... they could even pick which cluster they want the mission to be in.
The old exploration system is old and tired but I also don't think it should be completely thrown away, its just stupid to do such a thing. It just needs reworking.. maybe for expansion 3 and just move it all out to the Gamma quadrant. I remember when they introduced the foundry and people were worried that Cryptic would be making less and less mission content.... well it seems like that is happening.
Gonna ramble on now but I think it was stupid to remove the original STF's, the new easy grindy ones should have been the Normal/advanced mode and they should have kept the original ones and used them as the Elite ones because they required team work and lets face it, they used to be a challenge unlike the new stuff.
Yup. This is the attitude of the Anti-Cryptic Brigade. Its not possible to have a different opinion than them. Its not possible to have a similar or share the same opinion with Cryptic. An opinion you may have formed LONG before Cryptic decided to remove this content from the game. Noooo. If you dont share the opinion of the Exploration Cluster Champions. Youre an idiot. Because everyone knows. Their opinions arent opinions at all. Its all fact.
As for the OP. I honestly dont see any changes being made to these ships. For a number of reasons and the most obvious one is money. But they have released 2409 versions of each of those ships.
Galaxy - Venture
Defiant - Sao Paulo
Intrepid - Bellerophon
Now. You argue that you would like these Hero Ships to be better because they should be. But Id argue that it was the crew that made these ships Hero Ships. Every other instance of a Galaxy, Defiant or even an Intrepid Class seen on screen they are shown to be nothing extraordinary. In DS9 the Galaxys pop just as quickly as the Miranda Classes. The other Defiant Class Ships prove to be tough but even the original Defiant goes pop. And the best view of an Intrepid outside of Voyager. Its sitting in orbit of Romulus.
Its quite obvious watching these Series, that when it comes to the Ships the series follows. They get away with everything when everyone else doesnt. Time and time again we are shown examples of other ships blowing up, being overtaken, or just flat out gone missing. So what makes these ships so special? Are they made of something different than their counterparts? Do they have some strange intelligence unlike other Starships? Or is it the crew thats keeping this ship from being ripped apart/blown up/stolen/turning into a ghost ship?
In my personal opinion I think the trouble here does lie in sort of a minmaxers baliwick... Most of the ships are mostly equal. There are a few standouts that are better and a few that are worse...
For me personally I've no interest in achieving the insane at the expense of style though.... I know my rademaker is faster in sector space, but I'll continue to tour in my fleet regent because I'm a sovereign junkie through and through.
I agree that other faction ships should be able to take fed ships to task otherwise why would there be any level of tension at running into them.
To suggest tweaking the existing ships is simply to suggest that there are ships you like that dont perform as well as you'd like... Dont want to turn this into a tier 5 constellation class thread but thats the extreme end of what we're talking about here.
I for one am thankful that I can be confident that a constellation isnt going to roll up on my sovereign and pose much of a threat, and that *does* feel very canon to me.
So these two philosophies butt heads... If my favorite ship is an nx, I can't very well say 'i'm sticking to my nx no matter what for thematic reasons!' because theres no denying its not the kinda ship people will want to see in an stf... Because people in stfs have specific goals, parameters and expectations for the mission they're going into.
I'm thinking about trying to go through the entirety of story mode in an nx just to see how it goes... they say the missions scale difficulty and everyone says the story mode is too easy... I'm curious to see just *how* easy it really is.
The only drawback to the point I'm making is that I'm a sovereign buff and so my personal ship of choice is pretty decent all around. I'd feel a little wierd if an nx could stand up to it. And deep down I agree that if you like using nx or intrepid nobody should be complaining if you roll in to an stf with them... Just because a captain knew they were going up against something dangerous didnt mean they got some free magical ship upgrade... If you're an nx captain you're an nx captain... Trek captains 'make do' with what they've got. So if what you have is an nx in your stf, people should be respectful of your stylistic choice, though much more often they are not. They in response would suggest not taking your nx into elites but sticking with normal stfs... Because you're going for style, not break neck superachieving.
excelsior, b'rel, fleet vor'cha(toh'kaht), t'varo, d'deridex make your point invalid(and i'm not even including lockbox ships like the galor, JHAS and d'kora, or the sovereign refit and akira refit).
How is his point invalid? The STB channel exists specifically to use less "uber" ships and gear, and make it competitive while keeping a more 'trek-like" feel. Sounds like something the OP should at least take a look at before dismissing.
"You Iconians just hung a vacancy sign on your asses and my foot's looking for a room!"
--Red Annorax
Comments
The Rep grinds, you want me to do them. Show me some progress along the way. Having cutscenes and extra missions between each tier helps me want to keep going. That is what I loved about the Romulan and Dyson Rep. It felt like I was doing something other than just tier and gear.
About the ships. They did a decent upgrade to the Galaxy. I bought the pack and been loving it. I don't have issues with my Galaxy-R or Galaxy Dread. They both serve me well on my missions. The Defiant-R is a nice ship as well. Not every ship is for everyone. Which is why they make other options.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
That's the problem in whole SF not one ship, Galaxy in TNG also provide many cargo/passenger mission which could be done by any other smaller vessel or even simply freighter. But it's not the topic for such discussion.
But this is what I am talking about. STO was (still is in it's base mechanics) a trinity game. When they moved away from it via hybrid classes thes did neither upgrade previously existant classes nor content, which broke the game. And I'm sorry, but I don't get your complaint about player liberty - if I play a game with a red/blue/yellow class system, what liberty is there to begin with? Either I'm fine with those archetypes and I play numerous characters to experience the whole or I play another game. Don't get me wrong, not promoting a trinity for STO here, but that's how it's set up. They either have to transform everything or everything is broken by design.
Again, not the point. The random mission generator could have been improved, which they didn't. Instead they take the lazy way out.
You don't need a perfect balance, three tanks can also supplement for a damage dealer for example. The system is not the end to all creativity. Although I agree with you, the queing system doesn't work, unless there's a algorithm in place looking for players to fill a (custom) predetermined group complement. Or, like in the old days, you set camp in front of the dungeon and wait for players to join you. If you mean that by preset groups I apologize, because I misunderstood. To me, however, this is part of the running game. Back in the days not everyone played with "tim is money" in the back of his or her head
Once again, must have been a misunderstanding. I'm no native speaker, so certain things might slip my attention. But in this we actually agree, believe it or not
I'm curious, what does a "modern" MMO look like? If we talk about a star Trek MMO and you ask me, of course the trinity is all wrong to begin with. Classes would be meassured by size and mission profiles, like Bridge Commander or Klingon/SF Academy in a big multiplayer mode. But this would mean if you want to play a light cruiser, for example, you will need help when you face a heavy battlecruiser because it wil just dominate you. Likewise, if you take a tank alone into the dungeon with nobody to buff or heal you, you are being dominated. There are similarities.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
http://www.arcgames.com/en/games/star-trek-online/news/detail/3035243-season-8-dev-blog-_54
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Intrepid_class
Sorry, but this time you are the one in the wrong.
the galaxy class was defined because it wasnt just the enterprise on exploration missions, the uss yamato before it was destroyed was also on exploration duty, unfortunately ran a foul the iconians.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
i will have to study those episodes carefully to make sure it is exactly as mentioned.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
If they would just do that across the board, I'd pick up all three. That combined with the proper Doffs would make them a viable.
pretty well universally the game is perceived as :
1. too easy
2. the hero ships are weak
3. too much power creep (see point one)
I suggest that all 3 pc sets be reduced to 2 pc. (sorry cryptic, but the three ship sets would have to go)
at tier 5:
ALL escorts are to be 4/3 configuration with the ability to use DC/DHC
ALL cruisers are 4/4
ALL sci 4/3 and only able to use beams.
Reduce ALL ships to 6 consoles,in 2-2-2, configurations, adding one profession console and three universal consoles, with universal meaning JUST universal consoles- assimilated console, hydrodynamic compensator, Zero point. Ship specialty consoles not usable except on the variants of that ship (no more Valdore console on Scimitars) raise global on powers to 20 seconds.
haven't figured boffs out yet.
remove insta proc and always on DOFF abilities. Sorry, folks, Marion has to sleep.
yes this will cause a huge amount of nerdrage, but it curtails power creep and gets rid of OP ship design.
the idea is to nerf the player ships across the board and reset the ridiculous power creep I see every time I log in.
Interesting approach.
LOL!
And not because I don't agree with you. Reeling in the power creep is not a bad idea. But because this forum would be awash in blood and tears. I don't even know how that would be possible, because this forum does not physically exist, but mark my words IT WOULD!.
It would also probably be detrimental to the game. Frankly put, and it pains me to admit this but, power creep is good for business.
Let's start with fact that SF main objective was Exploration, so technically all it's ships are explorers. The only non exploration ships mentioned in ST was Defiant and Prometheus class which were designed for combat.
But that does translate to "everybody should be able to do anything all the time", doesn't it? Why have a MMO to begin with? In that case, STO would be better off like Diablo 2 for example. Just being a singleplayer game with the option for coop multiplayer.
In terms of creating landscapes, Minecraft does a good job IMO. This would be exploring strange new worlds indeed. But other games have capable randomly generated areas as well, my favourite games I play for 20 years already are still not getting old in that regard. I like that roguelike feeling very much, I don't need spiffy cutscenes and stories in a game like STO which is, again IMO, completely miscast in order to tell a story that's more complex than your average hack&slay game.
But the map isn't the important part. You could very well design maps by hand to avoid inaccesible tiles and what not, but the random generator could feature more variables, random events during your default survey starting little adventures on their own, discovery of legendary items etc.
I feel we differ on that one. I personally think if someone wants to play an *escort*, it's his or her job to *escort*. It is the support, not the one being supported. You are right though, the moment Cryptic started to "balance" 1 on 1 encounters between Star Cruisers and Frigates it all falls apart because it is ridiculous. 1 on 1 encounters shouldn't artificially be balanced like this.
I, just from personal experience, fail to see why the trinity does not allow actions like that. In fact, ****, Everquest and WoW etc. proof that it does work. It works like an interactive RTS, albeit facing your "counter class" on the battlefield does in no way mean you are going to lose that encounter.
But that still doesn't mean it's adequate for Star Trek, but still it's what Cryptic chose and they can't get rid of, so there is extensive balancing needed. Just for instance look at this: All players have the exact same skills at their disposal. I can use the same healing powers on every ship, albeit a weaker version of it but an incredible amount of abilities are only needed in their lowest incarnation anyway. And hybrids can use basically all of it. If you look at other games, the hybrid classes are their own niche. A druid in a popular game for example can heal, cast, buff, debuff, tank and attack to substitute for every specialist missing, but with a *different* skill set to do so, it's not the exact same abilities. Something like this could suit STO well, IMO. Because why is every ship equipped to do the same stuff, essentially - where do escorts (frigates) cram the shuttles for boarding parties, why can a BoP slot devestatig deflector powers that would rip the ship itself apart? They should have their own version of certain skills and higher tiers of skills should make a difference like for example having a 100% chance to clear a level III debuff will only work with a level III team ability, while the level I only grants a 25% chance.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
starfleet had enemies, federation had internal problems, federation had trade deals, starfleet had exploration and containment.. there was more to starfleet then just exploration for the hell of it.
it seems the original intent of the thread hasnt worked, there is no placation. didnt think it would work because we are a notoriously fickle bunch.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Using the word Trekkie instead of Trekker is enough to start a flame war with my friends
Out of the dozen or so MMO's that have released over the last couple of years about three or four have used a free form skill system instead of the trinity, and guess what, almost everyone playing them games choose specific skills/equipment that shoe horn themselves into one of the trinity roles despite the roles not being integral to the game, yes even in eve they do it, why? because it's simply natural to do so, when working as a team you automatically assume the role you feel comfortable with and that's how you play, it's the same in real life you naturally gravitate towards roles you are more comfortable filling.
PS2 works without the trinity because the game style doesn't need it, it's an MMO but only barely, it's an MMOFPS and that's a completely different thing to any other type of MMO, you don't need healers and tanks in that game because a tank system just doesn't work against players (how would you code taunting another player?)and you don't need the classic healers because as an FPS game people die they respawn no harm no fowl, there's no progression or quest timer or anything to be disrupted by respawn, you just rinse repeat. Even then people seem to equip themselves in the style of a trinity.
There seems to be a gravitational effect surrounding the holy trinity.
I think that pretty much describes the problem of the engineering-focused ships. The KDF Neg'Var at least still got a good turn rate and the option to run DHCs (not sure if it's agood idea, but whatever you do, the turn rate helps.)
The game may simply need an offensive-oriented Engineering ability that is worth having. Maybe even two - one for the low rank, and one high-rank. Maybe the existing one needs to be buffed.
For powers that need to be buffed, Aceton Beam comes to mind. Seems pretty much useless. I never see anyone use it. Or is there a secret Aceton Beam build out there that rocks the world?
Bad idea, the only reason they work on the Vesta is because the ability to use two subsystems to draw power from to fire your weapons. When you run leech, ES, and a AtoW warpcore you can run 125 aux with minimal drain, and have weapons power near 120. This way less drain to aux. I would consider the DBB. But a better fix to the intriped would give it a better Boff layout.
Commander sci
Lt commander sci
Lt commander uni
Lt engineer
Or swap the uni and the eng.
Univeral BO slots are overrated, to some extent. You can still, at any given time, slot only one class of BO in it. The benefit is that you are not stuck with a suboptimal combination. But if your ship doesn't have a suboptimal combination of BOs, it doesn't matter.
I always thought the Intrepid had one of the best BO layouts for a science vessel, simply because there are so many low rank science BO powers that are actually useful and you won't end up with global cooldown conflicts with your high tier powers.
I don't think that is one of the weaknesses.
The weakness compared to the Vesta is quite simply that the Vesta has Aux cannons and a hangar bay. Both increase its DPS output potential without requiring it to sacrifice its science capabilities. In PvP, this benefit might actually be marginal, but in PvE, it's quite notable IMO. (And the Vesta's lower hull in no way compensates its perks.)
Iconic ships are capable endgame vessels, just ask anyone on the STB channel. Just because they can't hit as hard as a Scimitar it doesn't mean they are useless, and the only place every fraction of performance is actually important is PvP. I'd go further in fact and say their weakness is their strength. Beating endgame content in a supposedly inferior ship just makes it all the more satisfying.
Then of course we need to bear in mind that these ships are old, and newer ships with newer technology will be superior vessels.
I don't have any of those and I run 2 dual aux cannons with a torp up front, a breen cluster and 180 deg quant torp and the 360 AP array just so I can do sub system targeting and running GW whenever it is ready along with Tyken's Rift, my Aux power rarely runs under 125.
Trust me, if you could get Aux DBB, intrepid could run them without a hitch.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
excelsior, b'rel, fleet vor'cha(toh'kaht), t'varo, d'deridex make your point invalid(and i'm not even including lockbox ships like the galor, JHAS and d'kora, or the sovereign refit and akira refit).
also bear in mind the galaxy-R has a "new" refit being the venture and monarch, the same can be said about the intrepid with the bellerophon variant.
My character Tsin'xing
Yup. This is the attitude of the Anti-Cryptic Brigade. Its not possible to have a different opinion than them. Its not possible to have a similar or share the same opinion with Cryptic. An opinion you may have formed LONG before Cryptic decided to remove this content from the game. Noooo. If you dont share the opinion of the Exploration Cluster Champions. Youre an idiot. Because everyone knows. Their opinions arent opinions at all. Its all fact.
As for the OP. I honestly dont see any changes being made to these ships. For a number of reasons and the most obvious one is money. But they have released 2409 versions of each of those ships.
Galaxy - Venture
Defiant - Sao Paulo
Intrepid - Bellerophon
Now. You argue that you would like these Hero Ships to be better because they should be. But Id argue that it was the crew that made these ships Hero Ships. Every other instance of a Galaxy, Defiant or even an Intrepid Class seen on screen they are shown to be nothing extraordinary. In DS9 the Galaxys pop just as quickly as the Miranda Classes. The other Defiant Class Ships prove to be tough but even the original Defiant goes pop. And the best view of an Intrepid outside of Voyager. Its sitting in orbit of Romulus.
Its quite obvious watching these Series, that when it comes to the Ships the series follows. They get away with everything when everyone else doesnt. Time and time again we are shown examples of other ships blowing up, being overtaken, or just flat out gone missing. So what makes these ships so special? Are they made of something different than their counterparts? Do they have some strange intelligence unlike other Starships? Or is it the crew thats keeping this ship from being ripped apart/blown up/stolen/turning into a ghost ship?
For me personally I've no interest in achieving the insane at the expense of style though.... I know my rademaker is faster in sector space, but I'll continue to tour in my fleet regent because I'm a sovereign junkie through and through.
I agree that other faction ships should be able to take fed ships to task otherwise why would there be any level of tension at running into them.
To suggest tweaking the existing ships is simply to suggest that there are ships you like that dont perform as well as you'd like... Dont want to turn this into a tier 5 constellation class thread but thats the extreme end of what we're talking about here.
I for one am thankful that I can be confident that a constellation isnt going to roll up on my sovereign and pose much of a threat, and that *does* feel very canon to me.
So these two philosophies butt heads... If my favorite ship is an nx, I can't very well say 'i'm sticking to my nx no matter what for thematic reasons!' because theres no denying its not the kinda ship people will want to see in an stf... Because people in stfs have specific goals, parameters and expectations for the mission they're going into.
I'm thinking about trying to go through the entirety of story mode in an nx just to see how it goes... they say the missions scale difficulty and everyone says the story mode is too easy... I'm curious to see just *how* easy it really is.
The only drawback to the point I'm making is that I'm a sovereign buff and so my personal ship of choice is pretty decent all around. I'd feel a little wierd if an nx could stand up to it. And deep down I agree that if you like using nx or intrepid nobody should be complaining if you roll in to an stf with them... Just because a captain knew they were going up against something dangerous didnt mean they got some free magical ship upgrade... If you're an nx captain you're an nx captain... Trek captains 'make do' with what they've got. So if what you have is an nx in your stf, people should be respectful of your stylistic choice, though much more often they are not. They in response would suggest not taking your nx into elites but sticking with normal stfs... Because you're going for style, not break neck superachieving.
--Red Annorax