Would you change Ground Comat

grazyc2 · February 2016

You know the ground comat in sto I must say it's not realy fun or is it ? My question to you would you change it ?

grazyc2 · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

I would love to see this changed the team effort they try to force you into it doesn't make sence, remove this and change this to boff command I have a med on my team so I could heal the sick, I have a Tactical on my team so let him call in a strike team and clear out the place. I have a engineer so let him do repairs on stuff. and so on and so on

evilmark444 · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

Yes, because ground combat has always been god awful terrible in this game since day one, I only ever play because space combat is so good.

First, I would completely remove kits. Abilities would be chosen in a similar manner to spec trees.

Second, I would make a concrete decision on what I want ground combat to be, shooter or traditional MMO, and rework the controls and abilities to support this. If shooter, fewer abilities, lower enemy health, location based damage (ie headshots, etc), and a much more authentic shooter firing pattern (if you have a full auto, primary fire only fires one bolt unless held down, but has a high rate of fire, etc). MMO style would have more abilities, higher enemy health, fewer enemies overall, a focus on an ability "rotation", and full implementation of the MMO trinity system, with all 3 classes able to fill all 3 roles.

jodarkrider · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

One of reasons why I enjoy STO is.. it's not a classic MMO-style boring ground combat and the fact it doesn't have the ridiculous trinity system "hardcoded". The moment this changes is, when STO would turn into yet another unnamed game clone and it would, quite frankly, be just bad, as far as I am concerned.

I'd be all up to making it more shooter-like - like, allowing people to cover & allow for more tactics, etc. But other than that, leave it as it is.

rattler2 · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

Ground Combat is fine as is. Sure some things can be improved on, like some kind of cover system, but its not FAW spam like Space Combat can be. Positioning actually means something, and you gotta think about your kit powers since generally you can only take 5 with you at the most. With kits the way they are now, you can just carry one or two extra modules and swap around without compromising all your abilities. Want to keep the buffs of an old school Fire Team Kit but want a different grenade? You can do that. Want to make up your own combination? You can do that.

lan451 · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

I feel it's mostly fine as is. A few small tweaks like maybe some sort of cover system would be fine, but I don't feel that any major revamps are needed.

seseron · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

I like the ground combat, but admit that it has room for improvement. It doesn't need an overhaul, but it does need some little things fixed or at least reviewed for balance, such as spawn rates and npc placements. I do think STO is moving in the right direction by having more persistent worlds, like New Romulus or Kobali Prime, and not some generic patrol that's a one-and-done. It's ambitious, but having a Star Trek universe is invaluable in which one can become immersed in the various cultures of the different species. I like the space combat, but the ground actions is where the immersion takes place.

jade1280 · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

jodarkrider wrote: »

One of reasons why I enjoy STO is.. it's not a classic MMO-style boring ground combat and the fact it doesn't have the ridiculous trinity system "hardcoded". The moment this changes is, when STO would turn into yet another unnamed game clone and it would, quite frankly, be just bad, as far as I am concerned.

I'd be all up to making it more shooter-like - like, allowing people to cover & allow for more tactics, etc. But other than that, leave it as it is.

What the borg fella said is very close to how i feel on the topic.

angrytarg · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

It's fine-ish, really. Good mix of RPG and arcade controls, only things I'd like to see improved are better animations, some more weapons (especially canonical ones) and better hit detection but all in all it works well for what it is. I would make it differently if I could build it from scratch and remove all the magic spells and so on, but for what it is it works fine.

I'd absolutely loathe a action oreinted cover shooter mush like every single actiongame since 2006 does it.

nickcastleton · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

rattler2 wrote: »

Ground Combat is fine as is. Sure some things can be improved on, like some kind of cover system,

No its fine but i do agree with this, true star trek combat always had away teams in cover not just standing and shooting.

warpangel · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

Harder enemies.
Separate slot for equipping EV suit.
Kits for boffs.
More/better options to commanding boffs.
A tricorder slot (science equipment).
Party poppers usable from inventory without being equipped.
A slot where you can put a non-combat pet to automatically summon it everywhere.

alexraptorr · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

I like ground combat fine, but what it needs is a melee overhaul.
More melee weapons and less dodgy melee mechanics.

isthisscience · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

90% fine. As above melee could do with an improvement - both in better attack/defence options and a variety of weapons with their own animations - but I'm not sure how they'd pull that off within the current framework.

Some other tweaks would be good, like being able to use natural cover when attacking, a better stealth mechanic and in particular an actual difference between stun and kill. Though like the above, not sure how these would be implemented within the current framework so probably wouldn't be worth the effort required. The only thing I feel strongly about is a Star Trek game where there isn't a stun option (sure, you can assume they've been stunned rather than killed, but doesn't usually tally with the vaporise animation. It would be nice as an actual mechanic like in the movie game).

Unknown · February 2016

This content has been removed.

bergins · February 2016

Flawed poll answers.

I lean towards the "Ground Combat is Just Fine" camp, but there's always one or two little tweaks that could make it better, right? Just read the answers from those who voted "Leave It Alone" and you can see what I mean.

warpangel · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

bergins wrote: »

Flawed poll answers.

I lean towards the "Ground Combat is Just Fine" camp, but there's always one or two little tweaks that could make it better, right? Just read the answers from those who voted "Leave It Alone" and you can see what I mean.

What's so flawed about it? Either you would change something about ground combat, or you wouldn't. All those people who voted no but then say they'd change something anyway are giving self-contradictory answers.

risian4 · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

Beside some small things like getting stuck on corners of crates and such, the inability to jump in certain instances and other minor things, ground combat is fine. It's already much more dynamic than space combat.

Only thing I wish they hadn't done is releasing shield-ignoring weapons. Beside these things, ground combat is the most balanced and diverse part of the game imo.

bergins · February 2016

Kinda my point, isn't it? There's no room for degrees of change. Voting "Yes" could be calling for one little tweak or a Bottom-Up rebuild of the system.

risian4 · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

warpangel wrote: »

bergins wrote: »

Flawed poll answers.

I lean towards the "Ground Combat is Just Fine" camp, but there's always one or two little tweaks that could make it better, right? Just read the answers from those who voted "Leave It Alone" and you can see what I mean.

What's so flawed about it? Either you would change something about ground combat, or you wouldn't. All those people who voted no but then say they'd change something anyway are giving self-contradictory answers.

My guess is that the option 'yes, change it in this way:' is meant for those who are very disappointed in ground combat, like the poster of the other thread (I'm guessing this poll showing up around the same time isn't a coincidence

) and 'no, it's fine' is for those who think the systems etc. are fine, but some very minor changes should be made.

I agree that more options would've been better, but then again, it's near impossible to include all options of things you'd change or keep the same and it's always a matter of what you consider more important. IN other words, it's never, or almost never, a matter of fully satisfied or entirely dissatisfied with something as broad as 'ground combat'.

warpangel · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

risian4 wrote: »

warpangel wrote: »

bergins wrote: »

Flawed poll answers.

I lean towards the "Ground Combat is Just Fine" camp, but there's always one or two little tweaks that could make it better, right? Just read the answers from those who voted "Leave It Alone" and you can see what I mean.

What's so flawed about it? Either you would change something about ground combat, or you wouldn't. All those people who voted no but then say they'd change something anyway are giving self-contradictory answers.

My guess is that the option 'yes, change it in this way:' is meant for those who are very disappointed in ground combat, like the poster of the other thread (I'm guessing this poll showing up around the same time isn't a coincidence ) and 'no, it's fine' is for those who think the systems etc. are fine, but some very minor changes should be made.

I agree that more options would've been better, but then again, it's near impossible to include all options of things you'd change or keep the same and it's always a matter of what you consider more important. IN other words, it's never, or almost never, a matter of fully satisfied or entirely dissatisfied with something as broad as 'ground combat'.

And that's why I think forum polls are useless. Even when asked a simple yes/no question people can't stop overthinking it.

risian4 · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

Especially when asked a simple yes/no question, it will be difficult to make a choice. Most questions cannot be answered with a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

It can still give some impression whether people are more on the side of 'things are fine' vs 'everything needs to change' and, to quote the other thread's title, 'ground combat sucks'. Still useful in some way imo.

ajalen · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

option A ...... i wish slighty more FPS based version , where i must use cover etc .........

but keep basic as it , now is ground combat far more balanced than space , minimal power creep

and of course more options for boffs is always welcome

- 2 slots for weapons like have player .... meele / ranged , close range / sniper / AoE etc .....
- 2 slots for armor ( base / enviromental suit ) for player and away team
- more commands , best NPC handling system which i see in game was in Dragon age where u may set which skill party member use etc , i dont have always time control them and make me angry see how they waste AoE or just long CD skill at single weak enemy
- more meele weapons ! in game is aready several more meele weapons - D'k tahg ( is in emote ) , Mek'leth ( Worf blade ) , Kar'takin polearms ( Jem'hadars ) ....
- rework some old and non-logical skills , for example Quantum mortar ...... looks a bit weird when shoot throught ceiling in starships / buildings etc , transform him into something like is Iconian turret - keep dmg , but direct fire compensated by long charge-up

- targ combat pets for klingon boffs , something like is Targ Handler NPC ......and of course something similiar ( but lore friendly ) for other faction , drones maybe ......now my eng Boff may call small drone armed with beam weapon , why not (un)friendly targ instead , we have after all war targs on our bridge......

grazyc2 · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

One hand it is fine but on the other hand it realy need a change, When I'm on the ground as a comanding officer I like to command or with other words like to boss them arround as Ellisa Flores would say in the turtorial.... Further more I would suggest some cover and shoot options, I know most of us working with keybord and mouse has limitted options... So let's see right ???

marcopolo84x · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

I would love to see a decent mixture of PvP/PvE ground goals.
A wet dream of mine is Breaking the planet mechanic/type of mission with two opposing teams.
It would surely bring a lot of life back to ground PvP/PvE.

nulonu · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

Otha does have this mixture of pve/pvp, however I think it's a poor example of what could be done as at level 60 the pve side has no reward for completion and provides little incentive aside from the pvp aspect and it's far too easy to camp a side there.

I don't think the mechanics can change much more from what they did in season 4, when they added that sort of shooter mode, changed kit modules and added new weapon types. They also decreased shield and player hit points dramatically at that time. Most of that is moot now as the run away power creep has taken hold.

For me, it's all about pvp, what I'd like to see is multiple game modes such as using the facility 4028 for a jail break pvp game. One side is escaped criminals, the other the security guards. An option for a mode that would set everyone on equal footing gear wise, a "vanilla" mode if you will. Andoria finally finished for dueling. It's kinda funny and sad all the people asking in zone "how do I duel here??" during the anniversary event!

Pve wise I think the power creep has ruined the experience the game used to give. Most NPCs die before you can even see what they are capable of doing. I recall testing the Dyson sphere ground battle zone on tribble and the Voth had an always on shield res that made them last long enough to actually put up a fight. This was a mistake however as it was fixed before launch and they melted as soon as they spawn like every other npc. Just imagine if a map like that was also fed vs kdf!

Point is, I've played for a long time and I like the essence of the ground combat in this game but it could use more variety to keep it interesting. The voth and kobali battle zones are good examples of some things they have done to address this pve-wise. We all know already what's been done pvp-wise. Whole lotta nothing!

bernatk · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

NW has the perfect ground combat. I would put that in STO.

storules · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

kirk2390 wrote: »

You know the ground comat in sto I must say it's not realy fun or is it ? My question to you would you change it ?

Yes...ground is in COMMA....punt intended.

wraithshadow13 · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

For me personally, I like ground combat, and my main is an Augment, so you know he hits hard, but at the same time ground combat just seems like it could have been better made. Cover mechanics would have been nice. More Fluid melee is a necessity, as well as more types of melee weapons. More styles of energy weapons would be nice, like the Grenade launcher from the concept art. Guns that Actually look canon. Customizible weapon appearances would be great, as some higher tiers just look like TRIBBLE. Considering how many Canon Characters new some form of martial arts or another, it would be nice if Melee got a much bigger focus, i.e. holds could be an actual hold, knock backs could be a throw or takedowns to knock down.

Better ground mechanics in general would have been nice as well.

Has there been any word on upgrading kit powers yet? Given the difficulty increase in elite, you would think they would have allowed that by now.

peterconnorfirst · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

Ground combat is perfect. Easy for everybody to participate and get used to.

valarauko43 · February 2016

No, Ground combat is fine and here is why !!!

Ground combat works, for me, as it is. For me the suggestions I have seen so far would make ground combat overly complicated for very little return.

leviathan99 · February 2016

Yes, I would love a change in Ground Combat, this is my idea.

I would look at an overhaul to bridge officers.

This would involve several things, including a rank overhaul.

1. First, I would eliminate BO skills and convert expertise into a choice of unrefined dilithium and fleet voucher dilithium.

Bridge officers would use kit modules, directly slotted onto the BO.

2. Bridge officers would draw from the same pool of traits as the captain.

3. Ranking up a bridge officer would be handled more like mastery. They would receive superior gains from ground combat and would receive a fraction of the gain when at a station in space. Ranking up would increase the number of kit slots available.

4. Bridge officers would retain their special species trait, unique to them from their lowest level. However ranking them up fully would unlock this trait for you as the Captain and for your other officers as a special "away team mastery" trait.

5. Ranks would be renamed:

Ensign (1-9)
Lt. JG (10-19)
Lt. (20-29)
Lt. Cmdr (30-39)
Cmdr (40-49)
Captain (50+)

Bridge officer mastery would run through Commander. (ie. 5 tiers.)

Captain would be a player rank. Admiral titles would remain for those who earned them previously as a cosmetic and new players would earn these through DOffing as cosmetic titles and rank costume options.

6. Bridge officers would no longer take up team spots and would act more like carrier pets. In standard missions, they auto-deploy. In STFs, they might be ineligible for portions of the STF but bridge officers would available in some form in all ground content.

I would look at further tweaks possibly including development of an RTS style gameplay with bridge officer, reworking fabrications/drones/etc. I'm not suggesting any core changes to most existing content but just an RTS resource system and the possibility of ground combat territory control systems support with things like fabrication upgrades and holding control as a further update for down the road.

Would you change Ground Comat

Would you change Ground Comat 70 votes

Comments