That's a stupid argument, it's a game not a damn physical chemistry book it isn't supposed to be difficult to figure out!
I hear what you're saying, but the new tree forces you to take worthless things in order to get at the things you want and need. The current system might be overly complicated for the tastes of some people, but it allows you far greater flexibility. There's always some way to put the points into something useful under the current system, and that's just not true of the new tree.
Again, the tree seems to have been designed by someone who doesn't play the game very much or very well, and therefore doesn't really understand what we do and how we do it.
Then again, the above is just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Personally I always felt forced to take useless things under the current system, just to unlock the next tier of skills, and it almost always required a respec when I got to level 50 just to get my skills into a useful form.
That's a stupid argument, it's a game not a damn physical chemistry book it isn't supposed to be difficult to figure out!
I hear what you're saying, but the new tree forces you to take worthless things in order to get at the things you want and need. The current system might be overly complicated for the tastes of some people, but it allows you far greater flexibility. There's always some way to put the points into something useful under the current system, and that's just not true of the new tree.
Again, the tree seems to have been designed by someone who doesn't play the game very much or very well, and therefore doesn't really understand what we do and how we do it.
Then again, the above is just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Personally I always felt forced to take useless things under the current system, just to unlock the next tier of skills, and it almost always required a respec when I got to level 50 just to get my skills into a useful form.
A completely factual azrael response.
Fixed that for you.
How can it be factual when you were expressing an opinion? Remember, you began with the words, "Personally I always felt..."
That's a stupid argument, it's a game not a damn physical chemistry book it isn't supposed to be difficult to figure out!
I hear what you're saying, but the new tree forces you to take worthless things in order to get at the things you want and need. The current system might be overly complicated for the tastes of some people, but it allows you far greater flexibility. There's always some way to put the points into something useful under the current system, and that's just not true of the new tree.
Again, the tree seems to have been designed by someone who doesn't play the game very much or very well, and therefore doesn't really understand what we do and how we do it.
Then again, the above is just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
If the bonus is so powerful that it's a MUST have bonus like you said, it should damn well be behind some resource tax. That is a good way to make you ponder if that bonus is worth taking those less then optimal choices to get it. If you can get everything optimal without having to make such a choice, then there is no choice and you have what you have now where there only a few set of skill set that is the OTW of doing things. Yes the current version is more flexable in allowing you to break it into a million pieces...and while that is great for some players, it does not make it a good game system. In fact a system that has such a high system mastery level (with traps and all) is generally frowned upon for getting new players to join. That doesn't mean an over simplified system is a good thing either where you basically have one path no matter what you do. Le me use a table top game example. Pathfinder is the current ruler of table top RPG games. It is like our current system. It is flexable and lets you do what you want and is full of traps and best options. You can utterly break the game or be utterly useless. Dungeons and Dragon, the system that it came from when it went to 4th edition basically made it where everything was simplified to a one path system. No matter what class you pick, it all worked the same...and worse, the powers were basically the same (the main effect being it does 1xweapon, 3x weapon, etc etc). Now the reason pathfinder did so well is that all the established players upon seeing this terrible simple system left. Here is the thing however, 4th ed did bring a LOT of new players to the genre BECAUSE it was so simple to mess up...but with no vets to support these new players, the center did not hold. Now D&D is in it's 5th ed. They simplified things from what it was before...BUT they allowed for REAL choices. You want thay hybrid build? You can do it...but it will cost you. The system makes you make REAL choices. They are slowly winning over the old players now and getting new players. If they never went the overly stupid simple path, they would still be top dog. So the question is...is the system simple enough for new players to figure out? And is the system complex enough to make you REALLY choose what you are doing. The answer to both seems to be a yes so far(okay barring the stupid first node of tact and sci...those are kinda dumb)...we will see going forwards.
you have never played 4E, because everything you have to say about it is wrong
That's a stupid argument, it's a game not a damn physical chemistry book it isn't supposed to be difficult to figure out!
I hear what you're saying, but the new tree forces you to take worthless things in order to get at the things you want and need. The current system might be overly complicated for the tastes of some people, but it allows you far greater flexibility. There's always some way to put the points into something useful under the current system, and that's just not true of the new tree.
Again, the tree seems to have been designed by someone who doesn't play the game very much or very well, and therefore doesn't really understand what we do and how we do it.
Then again, the above is just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
If the bonus is so powerful that it's a MUST have bonus like you said, it should damn well be behind some resource tax. That is a good way to make you ponder if that bonus is worth taking those less then optimal choices to get it. If you can get everything optimal without having to make such a choice, then there is no choice and you have what you have now where there only a few set of skill set that is the OTW of doing things. Yes the current version is more flexable in allowing you to break it into a million pieces...and while that is great for some players, it does not make it a good game system. In fact a system that has such a high system mastery level (with traps and all) is generally frowned upon for getting new players to join. That doesn't mean an over simplified system is a good thing either where you basically have one path no matter what you do. Le me use a table top game example. Pathfinder is the current ruler of table top RPG games. It is like our current system. It is flexable and lets you do what you want and is full of traps and best options. You can utterly break the game or be utterly useless. Dungeons and Dragon, the system that it came from when it went to 4th edition basically made it where everything was simplified to a one path system. No matter what class you pick, it all worked the same...and worse, the powers were basically the same (the main effect being it does 1xweapon, 3x weapon, etc etc). Now the reason pathfinder did so well is that all the established players upon seeing this terrible simple system left. Here is the thing however, 4th ed did bring a LOT of new players to the genre BECAUSE it was so simple to mess up...but with no vets to support these new players, the center did not hold. Now D&D is in it's 5th ed. They simplified things from what it was before...BUT they allowed for REAL choices. You want thay hybrid build? You can do it...but it will cost you. The system makes you make REAL choices. They are slowly winning over the old players now and getting new players. If they never went the overly stupid simple path, they would still be top dog. So the question is...is the system simple enough for new players to figure out? And is the system complex enough to make you REALLY choose what you are doing. The answer to both seems to be a yes so far(okay barring the stupid first node of tact and sci...those are kinda dumb)...we will see going forwards.
you have never played 4E, because everything you have to say about it is wrong
Oh dear, let's have a D&D Edition fight in the mix.
For what it's worth: D&D 4Ever!
Mustrum "Definitely not a member of the secret C4B4L" Ridcully
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Tons of posts of not being able to create similar builds. So the claim we won't lose anything is false.
You mean a bunch of posts being immediately rebutted because they're flat-out wrong? Calm yourself. This change is generate substantial buffs in most cases. All while putting some entirely new tools in the toolbox of build-crafting.
Skill trees front loaded with stuff with no use at low levels.
That would be people not understanding that low investment to access isn't because it's meant to be fantastic for the hour or so you spend at sub-20 while leveling. It's placed there so a level 50+ has an option to grab something outside their main focus without completely diluting their drive towards an ultimate.
And a claim that the design intent of the ultimates was to get people to try other things, burrying core build compents at the ends of trees.
How the hell do you call an ability you've never had before a "core component" of existing builds? It you're reading for more than gloom & doom to stoke your own fears, you'll see that people are finding that if they recreate their current -does-it-all builds they don't qualify for the ultimates. If you want an ultimate, you have to actually specialize and that's encouraging people to try out new, less well-rounded builds. Job well done.
Hopefully there isn't a deadline to when this is being released, because as it is, it needs to be revamped a lot.
These threads and the negativity about the new skill revamp are getting out of hand lately. Has anyone actually tried the new revamp on tribble I was quite surprised on how much I gained compared to the current system. All I'm saying before you criticize Cryptic's work on this new system actually try it out. While yes some things are being changed that may impact builds negatively most of it is really good. Its incredibly simplified and was able to get what I wanted plus more there is really no middle ground like with the current system. Either you get it or you don't get it. It's quite simple and I believe that was Cryptic's goal was to make it more consistent.
These threads and the negativity about the new skill revamp are getting out of hand lately. Has anyone actually tried the new revamp on tribble I was quite surprised on how much I gained compared to the current system. All I'm saying before you criticize Cryptic's work on this new system actually try it out. While yes some things are being changed that may impact builds negatively most of it is really good. Its incredibly simplified and was able to get what I wanted plus more there is really no middle ground like with the current system. Either you get it or you don't get it. It's quite simple and I believe that was Cryptic's goal was to make it more consistent.
Consistant, you mean stupidly over-simplified to either DPS, DPS, or DPS? Then yes, they succeeded. Now I have spent a few hours going over the new Revamp, and I can say that my Current build for my Fed Tac CANNOT be replicated, nor will it be with the new system coming into place. My Fed Tac specializes in shutting people down to the point all they can do is heal, while my team mates tear them apart. All that with practically 0 science skills. That's right, Maximum of 4 abilities in the current science tree. You cannot replicate that with the new system.
Unless the Skill Revamp gets delayed and planned and fixed for a few more months, I can consider all my characters KIA against the Terran Empire.
And you can has my stuff after I put a Bat'leth through your gut.
Consistant, you mean stupidly over-simplified to either DPS, DPS, or DPS? Then yes, they succeeded. Now I have spent a few hours going over the new Revamp, and I can say that my Current build for my Fed Tac CANNOT be replicated, nor will it be with the new system coming into place. My Fed Tac specializes in shutting people down to the point all they can do is heal, while my team mates tear them apart. All that with practically 0 science skills. That's right, Maximum of 4 abilities in the current science tree. You cannot replicate that with the new system.
Unless the Skill Revamp gets delayed and planned and fixed for a few more months, I can consider all my characters KIA against the Terran Empire.
And you can has my stuff after I put a Bat'leth through your gut.
If it is PVP we are talking about then I am glad it is getting less love. I never liked MMOs that get changed in favor of PVP. It was long overdue.
Consistant, you mean stupidly over-simplified to either DPS, DPS, or DPS? Then yes, they succeeded. Now I have spent a few hours going over the new Revamp, and I can say that my Current build for my Fed Tac CANNOT be replicated, nor will it be with the new system coming into place. My Fed Tac specializes in shutting people down to the point all they can do is heal, while my team mates tear them apart. All that with practically 0 science skills. That's right, Maximum of 4 abilities in the current science tree. You cannot replicate that with the new system.
Unless the Skill Revamp gets delayed and planned and fixed for a few more months, I can consider all my characters KIA against the Terran Empire.
And you can has my stuff after I put a Bat'leth through your gut.
I will admit you have to make some sacrifices with this new system I know I had to but I also knew that going into this. However, I was able to get 6 science skills and still get my tac ultimate with plenty of engineering skills so I'm not sure what you did wrong. This skill revamp is going to rein some stuff in and attempt to try to balance what everyone keeps complaining about DPS/power creeping. So just remember everyone asked for this with the constant DPS threads over the last three months.
Consistant, you mean stupidly over-simplified to either DPS, DPS, or DPS? Then yes, they succeeded. Now I have spent a few hours going over the new Revamp, and I can say that my Current build for my Fed Tac CANNOT be replicated, nor will it be with the new system coming into place. My Fed Tac specializes in shutting people down to the point all they can do is heal, while my team mates tear them apart. All that with practically 0 science skills. That's right, Maximum of 4 abilities in the current science tree. You cannot replicate that with the new system.
Sounds like a fun and interesting build. Care to walk me through it in more detail (here or over in the Tribble boards) and we can figure out what fell apart?
The system's not set in stone yet. Now is the time to explain in excruciating detail to the Devs what you're losing and why.
That's a stupid argument, it's a game not a damn physical chemistry book it isn't supposed to be difficult to figure out!
I hear what you're saying, but the new tree forces you to take worthless things in order to get at the things you want and need. The current system might be overly complicated for the tastes of some people, but it allows you far greater flexibility. There's always some way to put the points into something useful under the current system, and that's just not true of the new tree.
Again, the tree seems to have been designed by someone who doesn't play the game very much or very well, and therefore doesn't really understand what we do and how we do it.
Then again, the above is just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Personally I always felt forced to take useless things under the current system, just to unlock the next tier of skills, and it almost always required a respec when I got to level 50 just to get my skills into a useful form.
A typical azrael response.
He's 100% correct. In the current system, you have to dump enough points into lower tier skills before the next tier opens up to fill up. I've often been forced to dump points into stuff that has no bearing on my build because I haven't spent enough points yet to open up the next tier.
That's a stupid argument, it's a game not a damn physical chemistry book it isn't supposed to be difficult to figure out!
I hear what you're saying, but the new tree forces you to take worthless things in order to get at the things you want and need. The current system might be overly complicated for the tastes of some people, but it allows you far greater flexibility. There's always some way to put the points into something useful under the current system, and that's just not true of the new tree.
Again, the tree seems to have been designed by someone who doesn't play the game very much or very well, and therefore doesn't really understand what we do and how we do it.
Then again, the above is just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Personally I always felt forced to take useless things under the current system, just to unlock the next tier of skills, and it almost always required a respec when I got to level 50 just to get my skills into a useful form.
A typical azrael response.
He's 100% correct. In the current system, you have to dump enough points into lower tier skills before the next tier opens up to fill up. I've often been forced to dump points into stuff that has no bearing on my build because I haven't spent enough points yet to open up the next tier.
In fairness, OP likely has not tried it since his other thread was complaining that he wanted a web page to play with instead.
In all fairness, I have because I'm forced to try it on tribble rather that a web option. Way to assume to ignore actually responding to points.
Even with Bort's responses not all builds are achievable. So the claim we don't lose anything isn't holding up. Have looked at some of the builds I use even after his posts to see the difference and it isn't adding up in the actual ability output.
Throw in other issues like the lack of being able to preview a full build. You click it you bought it unlike the current system. Unless they change respecing to be free, this will be an issue for some.
But nah any criticism and disappointment is all in our heads. Its perfect.
whats beginning to appear to be OP Science Ultimate.
in all fairness the cool down on that ultimate is not correct currently, and they intend something like 2 minutes or so. So 15-20s out of every 2 minutes.
Will have to see how the meta goes on builds go to see how many are willing to skimp on builds to get that.
The worst part is there is one dude that is already asking for science to be nerfed when the new tree helps science play a more worthwhile role in PvE outside of FAW+part gens boats.
Still having trouble finding out what is happening to all the consoles and equipment that boost current skills. How will they work under the new system?
Some constancy over the information given for various items such as CrtH and CritD - we're given a percentage increase for critH but a flat base number for CritD give it a percentage figure for both.
im loving how most of the criticism seems to be purely anecdotal comments with no actual specifics other than.. i cant do what i can do now, and that apparently, stuff that is wanted, is buried behind other stuff.
the odds are, that the majority of players currently complaining, have done little more than log into tribble, look at the new ui, and as soon as they couldn't see what they wanted right of the bat, or discovered that they had to make some 'either/or' decisions between favourable options, immediately decided.. fail system! i bet most couldn't even quote values, or the difference in stat weights between the old and the new. yet they can already decide its carp!!
those interested in actually testing are doing just that.. trying the system out, collecting data, and making proper comparisons. its far too early to be throwing dummies, toys and other collective guff, from the buggy.
The worst part is there is one dude that is already asking for science to be nerfed when the new tree helps science play a more worthwhile role in PvE outside of FAW+part gens boats.
im loving how most of the criticism seems to be purely anecdotal comments with no actual specifics other than.. i cant do what i can do now, and that apparently, stuff that is wanted, is buried behind other stuff.
I disagree, I see a lot of good solid feedback, at least in the official feedback forum.
It needs minor changes and few fixes IMO but nothing major overall. I am curious as to when this gets officially released on holodeck though.
Retired. I'm now in search for that perfect space anomaly.
The worst part is there is one dude that is already asking for science to be nerfed when the new tree helps science play a more worthwhile role in PvE outside of FAW+part gens boats.
im loving how most of the criticism seems to be purely anecdotal comments with no actual specifics other than.. i cant do what i can do now, and that apparently, stuff that is wanted, is buried behind other stuff.
I disagree, I see a lot of good solid feedback, at least in the official feedback forum.
It needs minor changes and few fixes IMO but nothing major overall. I am curious as to when this gets officially released on holodeck though.
sorry, i wasn't trying to suggest that there isn't any good feedback.. i was saying that currently, most of the criticism (by which i mean negative opinion) seems to be anecdotal.
im loving how most of the criticism seems to be purely anecdotal comments with no actual specifics other than.. i cant do what i can do now, and that apparently, stuff that is wanted, is buried behind other stuff.
the odds are, that the majority of players currently complaining, have done little more than log into tribble, look at the new ui, and as soon as they couldn't see what they wanted right of the bat, or discovered that they had to make some 'either/or' decisions between favourable options, immediately decided.. fail system! i bet most couldn't even quote values, or the difference in stat weights between the old and the new. yet they can already decide its carp!!
those interested in actually testing are doing just that.. trying the system out, collecting data, and making proper comparisons. its far too early to be throwing dummies, toys and other collective guff, from the buggy.
My complaint IS legit. Currently, my tac can freely switch between a T6 Akira and a T6 Prometheus (2 of my all time favorite ship designs) and be at peak efficiency regardless without doing a respec. In the new system, hanger pets now have a several skills of their own, so to do what I currently do I would have to respec every time I switch ships.
I realize this was shown to us waaaay to far in development to change, but IMHO hangar pets don't belong in the skill tree, they belong in their own dedicated Spec tree. One change they COULD make to -somewhat- alleviate the problem would be to make separation pets get at least a partial bonus from the hangar pet skills, but that wouldn't help everyone in my position, only those who switch between a carrier and a separation ship.
Again I'm not saying I should be able to fly escorts and sci ships or any other crazy TRIBBLE with the same build, but one build shouldn't have a problem handling two escorts.
im loving how most of the criticism seems to be purely anecdotal comments with no actual specifics other than.. i cant do what i can do now, and that apparently, stuff that is wanted, is buried behind other stuff.
the odds are, that the majority of players currently complaining, have done little more than log into tribble, look at the new ui, and as soon as they couldn't see what they wanted right of the bat, or discovered that they had to make some 'either/or' decisions between favourable options, immediately decided.. fail system! i bet most couldn't even quote values, or the difference in stat weights between the old and the new. yet they can already decide its carp!!
those interested in actually testing are doing just that.. trying the system out, collecting data, and making proper comparisons. its far too early to be throwing dummies, toys and other collective guff, from the buggy.
My complaint IS legit. Currently, my tac can freely switch between a T6 Akira and a T6 Prometheus (2 of my all time favorite ship designs) and be at peak efficiency regardless without doing a respec. In the new system, hanger pets now have a several skills of their own, so to do what I currently do I would have to respec every time I switch ships.
I realize this was shown to us waaaay to far in development to change, but IMHO hangar pets don't belong in the skill tree, they belong in their own dedicated Spec tree. One change they COULD make to -somewhat- alleviate the problem would be to make separation pets get at least a partial bonus from the hangar pet skills, but that wouldn't help everyone in my position, only those who switch between a carrier and a separation ship.
Again I'm not saying I should be able to fly escorts and sci ships or any other crazy TRIBBLE with the same build, but one build shouldn't have a problem handling two escorts.
I think your only choice really is, do you want to buff your pets and have wasted skills when you fly the Prometheus or do you want your pets to be the same as they are now (no buff/ no nerf) and not have wasted skills while flying the Promethius? I think it's pretty obvious that you're trying to get both buffed pets and not wasted skills which is why I'm having trouble following your argument.
im loving how most of the criticism seems to be purely anecdotal comments with no actual specifics other than.. i cant do what i can do now, and that apparently, stuff that is wanted, is buried behind other stuff.
the odds are, that the majority of players currently complaining, have done little more than log into tribble, look at the new ui, and as soon as they couldn't see what they wanted right of the bat, or discovered that they had to make some 'either/or' decisions between favourable options, immediately decided.. fail system! i bet most couldn't even quote values, or the difference in stat weights between the old and the new. yet they can already decide its carp!!
those interested in actually testing are doing just that.. trying the system out, collecting data, and making proper comparisons. its far too early to be throwing dummies, toys and other collective guff, from the buggy.
My complaint IS legit. Currently, my tac can freely switch between a T6 Akira and a T6 Prometheus (2 of my all time favorite ship designs) and be at peak efficiency regardless without doing a respec. In the new system, hanger pets now have a several skills of their own, so to do what I currently do I would have to respec every time I switch ships.
I realize this was shown to us waaaay to far in development to change, but IMHO hangar pets don't belong in the skill tree, they belong in their own dedicated Spec tree. One change they COULD make to -somewhat- alleviate the problem would be to make separation pets get at least a partial bonus from the hangar pet skills, but that wouldn't help everyone in my position, only those who switch between a carrier and a separation ship.
Again I'm not saying I should be able to fly escorts and sci ships or any other crazy TRIBBLE with the same build, but one build shouldn't have a problem handling two escorts.
I think your only choice really is, do you want to buff your pets and have wasted skills when you fly the Prometheus or do you want your pets to be the same as they are now (no buff/ no nerf) and not have wasted skills while flying the Promethius? I think it's pretty obvious that you're trying to get both buffed pets and not wasted skills which is why I'm having trouble following your argument.
Because you're over simplifying the argument. The point is, on live my one set of skills puts both my Akira and my Prometheus at max capabilities, whereas the new skill tree puts one or the other at less than peak effectiveness no matter what I do.
As I said, pet skills have no place in the SKILL trees, they are too specialized for a tree that's otherwise fairly broad. They should instead have their own dedicated SPEC tree. It should be a choice between Intel, Command, Pilot, and Hangar, not between hangar pets and otherwise more useful skills.
And don't let me get started on how the tier 1 tactical unlock gives you the choice of buffing pets or stealth, two things many, many players don't have any use for at all ...
im loving how most of the criticism seems to be purely anecdotal comments with no actual specifics other than.. i cant do what i can do now, and that apparently, stuff that is wanted, is buried behind other stuff.
the odds are, that the majority of players currently complaining, have done little more than log into tribble, look at the new ui, and as soon as they couldn't see what they wanted right of the bat, or discovered that they had to make some 'either/or' decisions between favourable options, immediately decided.. fail system! i bet most couldn't even quote values, or the difference in stat weights between the old and the new. yet they can already decide its carp!!
those interested in actually testing are doing just that.. trying the system out, collecting data, and making proper comparisons. its far too early to be throwing dummies, toys and other collective guff, from the buggy.
My complaint IS legit. Currently, my tac can freely switch between a T6 Akira and a T6 Prometheus (2 of my all time favorite ship designs) and be at peak efficiency regardless without doing a respec. In the new system, hanger pets now have a several skills of their own, so to do what I currently do I would have to respec every time I switch ships.
I realize this was shown to us waaaay to far in development to change, but IMHO hangar pets don't belong in the skill tree, they belong in their own dedicated Spec tree. One change they COULD make to -somewhat- alleviate the problem would be to make separation pets get at least a partial bonus from the hangar pet skills, but that wouldn't help everyone in my position, only those who switch between a carrier and a separation ship.
Again I'm not saying I should be able to fly escorts and sci ships or any other crazy TRIBBLE with the same build, but one build shouldn't have a problem handling two escorts.
I think your only choice really is, do you want to buff your pets and have wasted skills when you fly the Prometheus or do you want your pets to be the same as they are now (no buff/ no nerf) and not have wasted skills while flying the Promethius? I think it's pretty obvious that you're trying to get both buffed pets and not wasted skills which is why I'm having trouble following your argument.
Because you're over simplifying the argument. The point is, on live my one set of skills puts both my Akira and my Prometheus at max capabilities, whereas the new skill tree puts one or the other at less than peak effectiveness no matter what I do.
As I said, pet skills have no place in the SKILL trees, they are too specialized for a tree that's otherwise fairly broad. They should instead have their own dedicated SPEC tree. It should be a choice between Intel, Command, Pilot, and Hangar, not between hangar pets and otherwise more useful skills.
And don't let me get started on how the tier 1 tactical unlock gives you the choice of buffing pets or stealth, two things many, many players don't have any use for at all ...
Could you post your current skill build on holodeck? That might help me understand you. I still think if you build for a standard escort it will work with both ships. The choice between stealth and pets is lame but doesn't cost any skill points.
im loving how most of the criticism seems to be purely anecdotal comments with no actual specifics other than.. i cant do what i can do now, and that apparently, stuff that is wanted, is buried behind other stuff.
the odds are, that the majority of players currently complaining, have done little more than log into tribble, look at the new ui, and as soon as they couldn't see what they wanted right of the bat, or discovered that they had to make some 'either/or' decisions between favourable options, immediately decided.. fail system! i bet most couldn't even quote values, or the difference in stat weights between the old and the new. yet they can already decide its carp!!
those interested in actually testing are doing just that.. trying the system out, collecting data, and making proper comparisons. its far too early to be throwing dummies, toys and other collective guff, from the buggy.
My complaint IS legit. Currently, my tac can freely switch between a T6 Akira and a T6 Prometheus (2 of my all time favorite ship designs) and be at peak efficiency regardless without doing a respec. In the new system, hanger pets now have a several skills of their own, so to do what I currently do I would have to respec every time I switch ships.
I realize this was shown to us waaaay to far in development to change, but IMHO hangar pets don't belong in the skill tree, they belong in their own dedicated Spec tree. One change they COULD make to -somewhat- alleviate the problem would be to make separation pets get at least a partial bonus from the hangar pet skills, but that wouldn't help everyone in my position, only those who switch between a carrier and a separation ship.
Again I'm not saying I should be able to fly escorts and sci ships or any other crazy TRIBBLE with the same build, but one build shouldn't have a problem handling two escorts.
I think your only choice really is, do you want to buff your pets and have wasted skills when you fly the Prometheus or do you want your pets to be the same as they are now (no buff/ no nerf) and not have wasted skills while flying the Promethius? I think it's pretty obvious that you're trying to get both buffed pets and not wasted skills which is why I'm having trouble following your argument.
Because you're over simplifying the argument. The point is, on live my one set of skills puts both my Akira and my Prometheus at max capabilities, whereas the new skill tree puts one or the other at less than peak effectiveness no matter what I do.
As I said, pet skills have no place in the SKILL trees, they are too specialized for a tree that's otherwise fairly broad. They should instead have their own dedicated SPEC tree. It should be a choice between Intel, Command, Pilot, and Hangar, not between hangar pets and otherwise more useful skills.
And don't let me get started on how the tier 1 tactical unlock gives you the choice of buffing pets or stealth, two things many, many players don't have any use for at all ...
Could you post your current skill build on holodeck? That might help me understand you. I still think if you build for a standard escort it will work with both ships. The choice between stealth and pets is lame but doesn't cost any skill points.
yeah im a little lost here too, as it stand there is no buff in the current tree for pets, so by spending the points to gain the same build on the standard escort, even though he wont gain anything for the pets.. he still isn't loosing out compared to his old build, he just isnt gaining anything either.. is that how you are seeing it too? or am i missing something?
Comments
exactly.........
A typical azrael response.
How can it be factual when you were expressing an opinion? Remember, you began with the words, "Personally I always felt..."
you have never played 4E, because everything you have to say about it is wrong
Oh dear, let's have a D&D Edition fight in the mix.
For what it's worth: D&D 4Ever!
Mustrum "Definitely not a member of the secret C4B4L" Ridcully
You mean a bunch of posts being immediately rebutted because they're flat-out wrong? Calm yourself. This change is generate substantial buffs in most cases. All while putting some entirely new tools in the toolbox of build-crafting.
That would be people not understanding that low investment to access isn't because it's meant to be fantastic for the hour or so you spend at sub-20 while leveling. It's placed there so a level 50+ has an option to grab something outside their main focus without completely diluting their drive towards an ultimate.
How the hell do you call an ability you've never had before a "core component" of existing builds? It you're reading for more than gloom & doom to stoke your own fears, you'll see that people are finding that if they recreate their current -does-it-all builds they don't qualify for the ultimates. If you want an ultimate, you have to actually specialize and that's encouraging people to try out new, less well-rounded builds. Job well done.
Well at least we agree on something
Consistant, you mean stupidly over-simplified to either DPS, DPS, or DPS? Then yes, they succeeded. Now I have spent a few hours going over the new Revamp, and I can say that my Current build for my Fed Tac CANNOT be replicated, nor will it be with the new system coming into place. My Fed Tac specializes in shutting people down to the point all they can do is heal, while my team mates tear them apart. All that with practically 0 science skills. That's right, Maximum of 4 abilities in the current science tree. You cannot replicate that with the new system.
Unless the Skill Revamp gets delayed and planned and fixed for a few more months, I can consider all my characters KIA against the Terran Empire.
And you can has my stuff after I put a Bat'leth through your gut.
I will admit you have to make some sacrifices with this new system I know I had to but I also knew that going into this. However, I was able to get 6 science skills and still get my tac ultimate with plenty of engineering skills so I'm not sure what you did wrong. This skill revamp is going to rein some stuff in and attempt to try to balance what everyone keeps complaining about DPS/power creeping. So just remember everyone asked for this with the constant DPS threads over the last three months.
Sounds like a fun and interesting build. Care to walk me through it in more detail (here or over in the Tribble boards) and we can figure out what fell apart?
The system's not set in stone yet. Now is the time to explain in excruciating detail to the Devs what you're losing and why.
He's 100% correct. In the current system, you have to dump enough points into lower tier skills before the next tier opens up to fill up. I've often been forced to dump points into stuff that has no bearing on my build because I haven't spent enough points yet to open up the next tier.
same here actually
In all fairness, I have because I'm forced to try it on tribble rather that a web option. Way to assume to ignore actually responding to points.
Even with Bort's responses not all builds are achievable. So the claim we don't lose anything isn't holding up. Have looked at some of the builds I use even after his posts to see the difference and it isn't adding up in the actual ability output.
Throw in other issues like the lack of being able to preview a full build. You click it you bought it unlike the current system. Unless they change respecing to be free, this will be an issue for some.
But nah any criticism and disappointment is all in our heads. Its perfect.
Will have to see how the meta goes on builds go to see how many are willing to skimp on builds to get that.
the odds are, that the majority of players currently complaining, have done little more than log into tribble, look at the new ui, and as soon as they couldn't see what they wanted right of the bat, or discovered that they had to make some 'either/or' decisions between favourable options, immediately decided.. fail system! i bet most couldn't even quote values, or the difference in stat weights between the old and the new. yet they can already decide its carp!!
those interested in actually testing are doing just that.. trying the system out, collecting data, and making proper comparisons. its far too early to be throwing dummies, toys and other collective guff, from the buggy.
Yeah as if PVP matters anymore.
I disagree, I see a lot of good solid feedback, at least in the official feedback forum.
It needs minor changes and few fixes IMO but nothing major overall. I am curious as to when this gets officially released on holodeck though.
sorry, i wasn't trying to suggest that there isn't any good feedback.. i was saying that currently, most of the criticism (by which i mean negative opinion) seems to be anecdotal.
My complaint IS legit. Currently, my tac can freely switch between a T6 Akira and a T6 Prometheus (2 of my all time favorite ship designs) and be at peak efficiency regardless without doing a respec. In the new system, hanger pets now have a several skills of their own, so to do what I currently do I would have to respec every time I switch ships.
I realize this was shown to us waaaay to far in development to change, but IMHO hangar pets don't belong in the skill tree, they belong in their own dedicated Spec tree. One change they COULD make to -somewhat- alleviate the problem would be to make separation pets get at least a partial bonus from the hangar pet skills, but that wouldn't help everyone in my position, only those who switch between a carrier and a separation ship.
Again I'm not saying I should be able to fly escorts and sci ships or any other crazy TRIBBLE with the same build, but one build shouldn't have a problem handling two escorts.
I think your only choice really is, do you want to buff your pets and have wasted skills when you fly the Prometheus or do you want your pets to be the same as they are now (no buff/ no nerf) and not have wasted skills while flying the Promethius? I think it's pretty obvious that you're trying to get both buffed pets and not wasted skills which is why I'm having trouble following your argument.
Because you're over simplifying the argument. The point is, on live my one set of skills puts both my Akira and my Prometheus at max capabilities, whereas the new skill tree puts one or the other at less than peak effectiveness no matter what I do.
As I said, pet skills have no place in the SKILL trees, they are too specialized for a tree that's otherwise fairly broad. They should instead have their own dedicated SPEC tree. It should be a choice between Intel, Command, Pilot, and Hangar, not between hangar pets and otherwise more useful skills.
And don't let me get started on how the tier 1 tactical unlock gives you the choice of buffing pets or stealth, two things many, many players don't have any use for at all ...
Could you post your current skill build on holodeck? That might help me understand you. I still think if you build for a standard escort it will work with both ships. The choice between stealth and pets is lame but doesn't cost any skill points.
yeah im a little lost here too, as it stand there is no buff in the current tree for pets, so by spending the points to gain the same build on the standard escort, even though he wont gain anything for the pets.. he still isn't loosing out compared to his old build, he just isnt gaining anything either.. is that how you are seeing it too? or am i missing something?