test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Test Servers› Tribble› Tribble - General Discussion and Feedback

Carrier bonus under the tactical bonus is too far down.

immudzenimmudzen Member Posts: 145 Arc User
in Tribble - General Discussion and Feedback
Most of the pure carriers in the game are science focused carriers.

If enough points are put into the science side to make the ship effective science wise it is very difficult to also get enough point for the carrier bonus for pets on the tactical tree.

Overall I understand that the game overall needs a pretty large nerf bat swung at it because things are pretty far out of balance. However, you don't see carriers high up on any dps measures and certainly not from their pets so I would prefer to see something to help carriers farther down on the choices.

The new skill system looks pretty good overall and while my overall power levels are lower across the board now than on the live server that is probably necessary.

Respecs really should be free though. The spec for a ship is still pretty narrow and so if any ship comes out for sale that does not meet your spec you would have to respec to effectively fly the new ship, buy the ship and if you don't like it respec back. Mostly what I see happen is people just pick one play style and stay with it and refuse to fly any ship that won't work for that play style. I have seen many good ships I would never buy due to reasons like this.

Comments

  • hardsalehardsale Member Posts: 20 Arc User
    have to agree the first week that had the new skill table was a far better layout than what is running now pets got nerfed to hell with the release of delta and now this it makes carriers useless unless you fly an escort/carrier
  • borticuscrypticborticuscryptic Member Posts: 2,478 Cryptic Developer
    Heads up before this conversation goes around in the same circles again... another Unlock Path re-shuffle is on the horizon. I haven't nailed down the new order, but will post it next week when I do.

    There's going to be a Skill shuffle, as well.
    Jeremy Randall
    Cryptic - Lead Systems Designer
    "Play smart!"
  • dragonsbrethrendragonsbrethren Member Posts: 1,854 Arc User
    Yay \o/
    @Kinanra_STO on Twitter • Star Trek Battles Regular • Sarita Devastated, my latest Foundry mission
  • immudzenimmudzen Member Posts: 145 Arc User
    borticuscryptic wrote: »
    Heads up before this conversation goes around in the same circles again... another Unlock Path re-shuffle is on the horizon. I haven't nailed down the new order, but will post it next week when I do.

    There's going to be a Skill shuffle, as well.


    Thank you for the reply.

    I did not want to start any kind of argument. I just copied a character to Tribble and played around with it a bit before giving some feedback. I am sure feedback is going in pretty much every direction possible. I intend to do some more testing and see how various abilities work compared to holodeck.

  • banatinebanatine Member Posts: 250 Arc User
    borticuscryptic wrote: »
    There's going to be a Skill shuffle, as well.

    Colour me intruiged... But i get the feeling this isn't going to be quite as exciting as i would like to imagine :disappointed:
    Real Temporal Operative: Purchased the Special Temporal Agent pack before it was even officially announced!
  • where2r1where2r1 Member Posts: 6,054 Arc User
    edited March 2016
    I don't understand why Hangar stuff is even IN the Captain Skill Tree???
    It is not something universally needed for every single Captain that will be created in the game. Right?

    This is pretty specific TO one type or style of ship...and there are so many other usable types.

    Maybe it needs to be a "Ship Trait" and attached to a ship with a hangar bay?
    Or even a new branch of Specialization...because people who enjoy flying carrier type ships ARE specializing in it?

    Post edited by where2r1 on
    "Spend your life doing strange things with weird people." -- UNK

    “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
  • nikeixnikeix Member Posts: 3,972 Arc User
    edited March 2016
    So I have a carrier (Narcine) and 3 ships that have a launch bay (Tarantula, Paradox, T6 Romulan Flagships). Using a skill calculator, my Narcine captain will end up with 10 Engineering, 15, Science, and 21 Tactical, so no problem there. I don't fly the Scimitars regularly (at all really, other than time spent unlocking their ship skills) but on the Tarantula and the Paradox, I'm not sure I'd spend a lot of effort trying to upgrade the single hangar slot worth of Frigates. There's so much more going on with those ships I expect my points to be tied up elsewhere.

    I've suggested before a way of shuffling the decision gates that puts hanger pet HP in the first gate of the Engineering path, while the hangar pet damage options stays mid-way up the tactical path so that people who are NOT flying carriers can ALWAYS take something else. TO me this is NOT equivalent to the Projectile and energy weapon gates - you can choose who to fill your weapons slots so if you're not benefiting from one of those choices it's because YOU opted out. The hangar bonuses improves something hard coded into the ship - you have a hangar slot or you don't. Splitting the two hangar pet bonuses up so people can dance around what will be perceived as a dead choice where neither option ever helps them will avoid a lot of frustration.

    Re-posted for clarity:
    Here's my purely selfish version :grin:. Changes in CAPS

    It allows people with carriers to get some benefit without massively investing in Tac. It allows people not in carriers to always pick something else. It makes harder choices for extra power by grouping offense and defense in pairs. It gives a harder choice between Subsystem Repair and Control Resistance. It gives people with cloaks benefits early in the leveling process. It gives players without cloaks a useful tool instead.
    • Engineering:5 = HANGER HEALTH // Battery Expertise
    • Engineering:10 = Hull Capacity // Hull Resistances
    • Engineering:15 = Engine Power // SHIELD POWER
    • Engineering:20 = AUXILARY POWER // Weapon Power
    • Science:5 = Sector Space Speed // Transwarp Cooldowns
    • Science:10 = Shield Capacity // Shield Hardness
    • Science:15 = SUBSYSTEM REPAIR // Control Resistance
    • Science:20 = Power Drain Resist // Shield Drain Resist
    • Tactical:5 = Stealth // Threat Control (pair shifted down)
    • Tactical:10 = Projectile CritH // Projectile CritD (pair shifted up)
    • Tactical:15 = Energy CritH // Energy CritD (pair shifted up)
    • Tactical:20 = Hangar Weaponry // PERCEPTION
  • nikeixnikeix Member Posts: 3,972 Arc User
    borticuscryptic wrote: »
    Heads up before this conversation goes around in the same circles again... another Unlock Path re-shuffle is on the horizon. I haven't nailed down the new order, but will post it next week when I do.

    There's going to be a Skill shuffle, as well.

    Three cheers for iteration!

    Hip-hip-horay!
    Hip-hip-horay!
    Hip-hip-horay!

  • pwstolemynamepwstolemyname Member Posts: 1,417 Arc User
    borticuscryptic wrote: »
    Heads up before this conversation goes around in the same circles again... another Unlock Path re-shuffle is on the horizon. I haven't nailed down the new order, but will post it next week when I do.

    There's going to be a Skill shuffle, as well.

    Glad to hear it Bort.

    The Abilities that really stand out to be as problem abilities are Hanger Boosting, Stealth Detecting, Stealth boosting, Threat generating/nullifying and sector space/transwarp.

    The reason these are problem abilities is that they are all abilities which cross the cruiser/escort/science ship line. There are ships with hangers in all three classes, ships with cloaks in all three, ships that do or don't want threat in all three (reciprocity means even a squishy ship might want threat) and of course every one wants to save time in sector space, but putting that in the sci, eng or tac line means that that line gets one less in combat ability, putting it at a disadvantage.
Sign In or Register to comment.