yes! Nerf the game. Make sure no one does more than 5k dps - I mean, I Keep trying to improve my game and I am wasting so much time trying out different combinations - and I was in an ISA the other day where I was THE ONLY Player who did morre than 3k DPS.
Now my solution: remove the mechanics. Everytime you join a PvE you watch an unskippable Video and then you get the message that you have won. No unhappy players anymore. Those over the top hardcore players who spent a lot of time and Money on this game will finally move on and let the new players and occasional players enjoy the game!
here's one to shock you-I used to PvP, and have always been a 'Casual/occasional' player, not the book-definition "hardcore" here, but Casual.
I say 'used to' because there's nothing left for casual players in PvP-it's been neglected and powercreeped to the point that the entire remains of the 'community' consists of the same 20 people at the top end, and a few cheezemunchkins trolling for easy duels in ESD.
(Historical note: in 2012 PvP players counted in the THOUSANDS-with Fleets and Teams not 'a team', but LOTS OF THEM.)
as a 'casual' in PvE...it's so engaging that I often don't log in for weeks. (I think I logged in once in April)-this is down from when I was logging in frequently, being a 'rock' to help my fleet, grinding the grind to fill projects and at times single-handedly carrying large investment projects to completion.
on a time-budget of two hours a night on weekdays.
as a casual player, i'm less and less impressed just about every patch now. Lots of existing content is pretty much unplayable because I'm not keen on surfing a hundred TRIBBLE channels to make a private match, and Pugging anything but ISA and CCA is nearly impossible.
When those missions do pop, it's basically an average of two to five minutes at the longest and they're done and we're back to a halfhour cooldown.
Now, put in perspective-once upon a time, STF's ran about fifteen minutes for the major six, you could run them comfortably with good green or blue gear at Mk XI and not be an embarrassment, or worse, hit with AFK penalties.
Yeah, I'm not shitting you-fifteen minutes was a GOOD RUN, and you had to run ALL OF THEM to get a full set of gear-sometimes more than once.
but none of them to the obsessive-compulsive ISA flogging we see today, where it's basically one to three minutes or failure.
Is DPS the problem? well, maybe, but maybe not. The problem is that it's the only Solution.
let me say it again-the problem is that DPS is the Only Valid Solution.
There is no role for the tank or the healer, no place for stealth or even for assassin builds in PvE here-there is only "Mass Quantities" DPS-that's the ONLY VALID SOLUTION IN THE CONTENT.
Basically it's all target-practice, only with weapons you don't even have to aim. Because BFAW and Torp Spread and Gravity Well do all your aiming for you.
Someone noted how 'useless' Science ships are in PvE runs-how showing up with one will get you snarked and laughed at and maybe even trigger some sensitive soul to ragequit...keep in mind, Science Ships Dominate in PvP...and heeere is why:
most sci abilities do jack TRIBBLE to NPC's, Sci captains' key abilities do very little or nothing to NPC's. NPC's do not have subsystems to target, they aren't 'grayed out' and stripped of buffs by subnuke-because they don't use buffs on their tray, the abilities they do use, are used on a timer, they don't react, they don't change. You can run ISA with a keybind, a stopwatch, watching netflix, once you've done it enough times-and a big chunk of the DPS community has done it enough times.
They don't even need to look at the frigging screen.
This problem extends across all the existing PvE..but especially to the most popular (read: easiest to memorize) queues.
DPS is not the culprit. Design philosophy is the culprit-the absolute refusal to make NPC's follow the same rules players do, the outright refusal to give the NPC's effective AI, and the complete and utter refusal by development staff to consider game-balance when adding new stuff until three months after the game goes live.
Limiting DPS to a ceiling won't help here, anymore than giving PvP players a hitpointz buff in instances would have saved that community.
we're debating the symptom-the disease marches cheerfully along.
*snip*
2) Do you have any idea what would happen if the NPC followed the player rules and got even a remotely good AI? All the ACTUAL casuals that keeps this game afloat would ragequit in about a second as they would not be able to play anything. Yeah, they don't have millions of HP anymore...but then again, they will get more weapons and abilities and would just vape the casuals in 2 seconds like in PvP because casuals are gonna be terrible at this game. Imagine the nakhul red alert if they got 4 times the energy weapon they have now. No new abilities...no new AI...just the load out that players get. Think of how many people complain NOW about this easy as all hell mission. Yeah...what you ask will be the death of STO because, remember, this playerbase sucks at games.
If NPCs somehow, amazingly played the same rules and range of abilities players could, then you'd have content worthy of this game's amazing, out of control power creep.
Death of STO? Pffft. STO withstood Delta Rising and the mass departure of people, yet it's still around.
Edit: DPS is the endgame goal for a number of players. Because, well, what else is there to shoot for? Space Barbie? Build up the Starbase / Fleet Holdings? PVP is Dead, so take that bit of content out. Play for story on missions you already know the story and fixed results for, because PVE isn't dynamic in its content? Really, what else is there to shoot for?
Second, the devs made the game this way. They had every intention of putting players on the DPS treadmill. The problem is that game knowledge is what really produces DPS. So the solution would be for the devs to revamp the game to have other things besides DPS as a focus, and teach people how to make builds.
Normalizing things between all people is not the answer. Each nerf makes me log in less. I've worked hard on my build, and space barbie, take more of it away and I'd probably play even less. Further, nerfing just causes viable builds to narrow, leading to less fun for players like me. This is because the goal of a given event is still DPS - until they fix that, a DPS hardcap is just silly.
I built a Sci/DPS build to be able to save any PUG on advanced from failure, I don't push beyond that because I don't want to. I find having that power to be fun. Sure, it may not be fun for you, but who's fun is more paramount over the other? The bottom line is that when you PUG, you assume the risk of encountering other people's fun. This is inherent to social interactions, if you can't handle that, you'd likely be better off playing this game as a single player game, or moving on entirely.
I often take my "iconic" ships out for a spin at lower tiers (my T4 Defiant, Intrepid, and Galaxy getting the most use). I have phasers and photons, subpar consoles and old un-upgraded rep equipment to equip these ships. I deselect traits, sometimes even rep passives if I remember to do so. While I have played queued events in these ships, I mostly take these ships into Foundry missions or Episodes. Playing some of the DR story arc in a canon-inspired Intrepid was a lot of fun.
The point, fun is everywhere if you look for it. Nothing is inherently fun.
What you're asking for, a DPS hardcap, is already in game. The only problem is that you want to impose your will on other people. The devs were smart to make much of the power creep we've experienced toggleable. Challenges are everywhere, the tools are there, the only limitation is your imagination.
(I can't believe how much of a white knight I am in this post )
When I said similar build, I mean lt down to specializations, skills, traits, boffs, doffs, consoles, ship sets, etc, I loterally copied thier build, the only difference is I have a Nebula and they were in a Annorax. That should make enough difference to where I am firing off significantly less uses of GW and FAW.
No, this is not important enough to require developer attention
Nope.
Last thing I am interested in is reducing someone else's enjoyment of STO. Some people really enjoy finding out just how far a game will let them go. Who am I to ask their entertainment be reduced or curtailed because I personally do not think the game should be played that way?
I do know that making one of those 100k DPS runs in any STF is not generally a solo effort. It requires teamwork and practice. Lots of practice. By people who have set a goal for themselves and want to play this game as a group. I see no good reason at all to arbitrarily take all that away from them because I currently cannot make such a run myself.
And if I do encourage the Devs to nerf these players, how long is it until someone decides I am part of the problem and need to be nerfed as well?
A six year old boy and his starship. Living the dream.
It is marvellous how one can ignore the core argument in a debate so enduringly.
In order for this to happen, your argument first has to have a core beyond your amorphous emotional appeal to people who resent being made to "feel useless" by better players.
Here are all the problems with this poll and the "argument" you think you are making.
1) It's totally unworkable and impractical as presented. There's no way to cap DPS to begin with, and even if there WAS a way to do it, it would cause all sorts of problems you seem incapable of recognizing (what happens to AOE powers? What happens to spike damage builds? etc) AND even if you solved those two problems, the solution of capping DPS doesn't fix the actual problem here unless you can demonstrate how throttling players back to whatever DPS you think is "fair" is going to help the multitudes who are struggling to do 5000 DPS somehow improve their play to something worthwhile. Capping me to 20,000 DPS doesn't make your inadequate DPS more useful, it just means the mission takes longer, so you get to experience being useless for longer. Yay?
2) It supposes a problem that probably doesn't even exist in the first place. I get that some people have hurt feelings over a mission being "too fast" or whatever, but how often does that even happen? If it's not very often (and this is what would match my experience), then basically grow up and suck it up. The risk with playing in the public queues is that you might encounter people who don't play how you like. That's life, and if it really bothers you, that's a YOU problem. On the other hand, if it really is every mission (or even most missions) where this is happening? That's even MORE a you problem. That's not a few random high performing outliers "ruining" the game for you, that's you being the outlier in the other direction. Up your game, or don't queue up. Oh, and if the problem isn't a comparative one (IE it's not "I'm upset that other players make me feel useless"), but rather simply "I don't like that missions are over so fast", then the solution is glaringly obvious - change your build to do less damage, and understand that not everyone plays the same you do, so you'll have to be willing to compromise in a public queue. If you can't do that, again, that's a YOU problem.
3) It misses that some of the proposed solutions actually have been attempted, in some limited ways, and quickly abandoned due to player outcry. For example, I don't know why people are treating "better AI" or "better powers" as hypotheticals - we've had several enemy types released with better power selection and better AI use, and the outcry from the casuals has been, again and again, that these enemies were too hard, or took too long to kill. Heck, there was a long thread about this very thing with the Na'kuhl just recently. Or, going back a ways, doesn't anyone else remember the D'deridex Defender fiasco? That last one was particularly telling - the great crime of the Defender was that it had some self-heals, like players do, and the casuals HATED it.
If you really want to close the gap between players to make the game more egalitarian and make the design work easier for Cryptic, the place to focus your energies is not on capping players who overperform, but rather on the players who simply don't make the grade. Bring the floor up, and I think youll see a lot less calls for tearing down the "unfair" high performers.
2) Do you have any idea what would happen if the NPC followed the player rules and got even a remotely good AI? All the ACTUAL casuals that keeps this game afloat would ragequit in about a second as they would not be able to play anything. Yeah, they don't have millions of HP anymore...but then again, they will get more weapons and abilities and would just vape the casuals in 2 seconds like in PvP because casuals are gonna be terrible at this game. Imagine the nakhul red alert if they got 4 times the energy weapon they have now. No new abilities...no new AI...just the load out that players get. Think of how many people complain NOW about this easy as all hell mission. Yeah...what you ask will be the death of STO because, remember, this playerbase sucks at games.
Except that devs would ensure this doesn't happen by the three existing difficulty levels and tuning the AI so that casuals and borderline non-gamers as well as gamers and those who play a lot have something to do with all of their skills and acquisitions.
So many game elements would suddenly come to life and play a vital role for actual team play (this is an MMO after all), and there'd be variety and new circumstances out of previously scripted and entirely predictable maps. As mentioned, many would leave, but how many would join or come back suddenly finding the game more attractive and popular because of this? I don't know the answer to that, but I'd rather them do something than continue along the same old path that's been done over and over.
doesn't anyone else remember the D'deridex Defender fiasco? That last one was particularly telling - the great crime of the Defender was that it had some self-heals, like players do, and the casuals HATED it.
Actually, the real issue with the D'deridex Defender wasn't it's heals, rather it's tendency to hit you with tractor beam, viral matrix and a series of high yield torps (not forgetting the thing's 360 degree firing arc) not unlike those now available through rep, if I recall correctly it was also equipped with a SNB which doesn't help matters. Heck that combo was a bit much for most of the above average players at the time. I remember having issues taking the edge off that amount of damage even without the VM making life harder.
They got close to the same issue with the Na'khul, between their duplicates and their cone of death, although I do question how people manage to miss the cone of death, missing the duplicates and the "Immune" in small font size in the middle of a one vs five (or more) engagement is rather easy when your build isn't based on perma-FAW.
They got close to the same issue with the Na'khul, between their duplicates and their cone of death, although I do question how people manage to miss the cone of death, missing the duplicates and the "Immune" in small font size in the middle of a one vs five (or more) engagement is rather easy when your build isn't based on perma-FAW.
Na'Khul in space are a little challenging. A little tedious. It's kind of a mix for me. I'm cool with the cones. The distortions are sometimes a little micro-management heavy. The immunity is fun to deal with. Overall they're a fine change of pace for me so far.
Personally I find the immunity to be the most frustrating part of it, I wouldn't mind so much if it were a heave resistance buff that makes it more expedient to take out the duplicate but when I'm managing my positioning, my current buffs, tracking theirs so I can coordinate defence and planning for the near future, I really don't care for "Immune, immune, immune", it just leaves me thinking "I really can't be bothered with this" but it's mostly my own fault for building largely single target builds in the era of AOE. Still, at no point would I consider them to be challenging, just frustrating and tedious, I want my pvp back.
Loving the DPSer fanboy here talking about how DPSers do what they do because of their "knowledge of STO" lol.
Tell me, who knows more about combat: someone that knows how to fight a punching bag? Or someone that knows how to fight a person?
Notice the difference? Problem is that at the moment, people are grenading and machine-gunning the punching bag and that's quite frankly embarrassing and not fun for everyone with the exception of a select few.
I'm not so sure that it's even player vs player. you want to decrease power creep? don't let Attack Patterns stack. at all. the way tac powers are is ridiculous. why should AP(x) boost exotic damage, for example (but it does) and for it to last any sort of time.. again ridiculous. APB should boost the next weapon fired. in fact APA should be energy weapon and APB be projectile. that would go so ridiculously far in evening the level between tac and eng and sci...
I'm not so sure that it's even player vs player. you want to decrease power creep? don't let Attack Patterns stack. at all. the way tac powers are is ridiculous. why should AP(x) boost exotic damage, for example (but it does) and for it to last any sort of time.. again ridiculous. APB should boost the next weapon fired. in fact APA should be energy weapon and APB be projectile. that would go so ridiculously far in evening the level between tac and eng and sci...
Making APA work only on weapons in general would help even the gap, changing how APB works (beyond stacking) would harm sci and eng more than tac, as it is I frequently use APB on my sci because it's just so useful.
Loving the DPSer fanboy here talking about how DPSers do what they do because of their "knowledge of STO" lol.
Tell me, who knows more about combat: someone that knows how to fight a punching bag?
Or someone that knows how to fight a person?
Notice the difference? Problem is that at the moment, people are grenading and machine-gunning the punching bag and that's quite frankly embarrassing and not fun for everyone with the exception of a select few.
Think twice before you type next time.
Sounds like good advice. Maybe you should follow it as well.
As a former US Army combat veteran who served in both the First Gulf War and Bosnia, I happen to know the difference between fighting a person and fighting a punching bag on a level most people probably do not. And when I fought it wasn't in some arena for some trophy or award. MOS 19K30. Google it. Unit was Task Force 1-32 Armor. Part of 2d Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division. Battle of the Ruhkri Pocket for starters and then engaging the Tawaklana Republican Guard Mechanized Division. Guess what happens in real battle? People die. No respawn points either. Which means a lot of the people around here probably would take a pass on it.
So, I suppose that settles the idea as to whether or not I can tell the difference between battling a real person and battling a punching bag. Anyone who thinks differently is probably some sort of overprotected, self-entitled, sanctimonius twit. I have other words I'd like to use here, but the profanity filter keeps removing them.
What I have taken from this thread is the OP feels the need to limit or reduce the way some people play this game. To make it easier for someone in a self-induced Diet Dew and Cheetos haze to understand what I am saying, I will use simple declarative sentences and small words.
People play this game to have fun.
Not everyone has the same ideas about fun.
Removing the way someone has fun in this game is bad.
I am always against such changing of the game.
I do not play for DPS.
Some people do.
Changing the game so they cannot is wrong.
Because it takes away their fun.
A six year old boy and his starship. Living the dream.
Yes, this is somewhat important, but there is one other issue that I would have to be solved first.
I would like to see the range narrowed, but when possible by improving the low end rather then nerfing the high end.
Fixing broken items, buffing wildly sub-optimal items and possibly automating some things.
This seems to me a case of timing to make the most out of abilities like AHOD, Attrition Warfare, Astrometric Synergy (or whatever else CD reduction you and they have slotted). For tac abilities, positioning is key to get aggro as well for Reciprocity to kick in.
Comments
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
If NPCs somehow, amazingly played the same rules and range of abilities players could, then you'd have content worthy of this game's amazing, out of control power creep.
Death of STO? Pffft. STO withstood Delta Rising and the mass departure of people, yet it's still around.
Edit: DPS is the endgame goal for a number of players. Because, well, what else is there to shoot for? Space Barbie? Build up the Starbase / Fleet Holdings? PVP is Dead, so take that bit of content out. Play for story on missions you already know the story and fixed results for, because PVE isn't dynamic in its content? Really, what else is there to shoot for?
Second, the devs made the game this way. They had every intention of putting players on the DPS treadmill. The problem is that game knowledge is what really produces DPS. So the solution would be for the devs to revamp the game to have other things besides DPS as a focus, and teach people how to make builds.
Normalizing things between all people is not the answer. Each nerf makes me log in less. I've worked hard on my build, and space barbie, take more of it away and I'd probably play even less. Further, nerfing just causes viable builds to narrow, leading to less fun for players like me. This is because the goal of a given event is still DPS - until they fix that, a DPS hardcap is just silly.
I built a Sci/DPS build to be able to save any PUG on advanced from failure, I don't push beyond that because I don't want to. I find having that power to be fun. Sure, it may not be fun for you, but who's fun is more paramount over the other? The bottom line is that when you PUG, you assume the risk of encountering other people's fun. This is inherent to social interactions, if you can't handle that, you'd likely be better off playing this game as a single player game, or moving on entirely.
I often take my "iconic" ships out for a spin at lower tiers (my T4 Defiant, Intrepid, and Galaxy getting the most use). I have phasers and photons, subpar consoles and old un-upgraded rep equipment to equip these ships. I deselect traits, sometimes even rep passives if I remember to do so. While I have played queued events in these ships, I mostly take these ships into Foundry missions or Episodes. Playing some of the DR story arc in a canon-inspired Intrepid was a lot of fun.
The point, fun is everywhere if you look for it. Nothing is inherently fun.
What you're asking for, a DPS hardcap, is already in game. The only problem is that you want to impose your will on other people. The devs were smart to make much of the power creep we've experienced toggleable. Challenges are everywhere, the tools are there, the only limitation is your imagination.
(I can't believe how much of a white knight I am in this post
When I said similar build, I mean lt down to specializations, skills, traits, boffs, doffs, consoles, ship sets, etc, I loterally copied thier build, the only difference is I have a Nebula and they were in a Annorax. That should make enough difference to where I am firing off significantly less uses of GW and FAW.
Last thing I am interested in is reducing someone else's enjoyment of STO. Some people really enjoy finding out just how far a game will let them go. Who am I to ask their entertainment be reduced or curtailed because I personally do not think the game should be played that way?
I do know that making one of those 100k DPS runs in any STF is not generally a solo effort. It requires teamwork and practice. Lots of practice. By people who have set a goal for themselves and want to play this game as a group. I see no good reason at all to arbitrarily take all that away from them because I currently cannot make such a run myself.
And if I do encourage the Devs to nerf these players, how long is it until someone decides I am part of the problem and need to be nerfed as well?
In order for this to happen, your argument first has to have a core beyond your amorphous emotional appeal to people who resent being made to "feel useless" by better players.
Here are all the problems with this poll and the "argument" you think you are making.
1) It's totally unworkable and impractical as presented. There's no way to cap DPS to begin with, and even if there WAS a way to do it, it would cause all sorts of problems you seem incapable of recognizing (what happens to AOE powers? What happens to spike damage builds? etc) AND even if you solved those two problems, the solution of capping DPS doesn't fix the actual problem here unless you can demonstrate how throttling players back to whatever DPS you think is "fair" is going to help the multitudes who are struggling to do 5000 DPS somehow improve their play to something worthwhile. Capping me to 20,000 DPS doesn't make your inadequate DPS more useful, it just means the mission takes longer, so you get to experience being useless for longer. Yay?
2) It supposes a problem that probably doesn't even exist in the first place. I get that some people have hurt feelings over a mission being "too fast" or whatever, but how often does that even happen? If it's not very often (and this is what would match my experience), then basically grow up and suck it up. The risk with playing in the public queues is that you might encounter people who don't play how you like. That's life, and if it really bothers you, that's a YOU problem. On the other hand, if it really is every mission (or even most missions) where this is happening? That's even MORE a you problem. That's not a few random high performing outliers "ruining" the game for you, that's you being the outlier in the other direction. Up your game, or don't queue up. Oh, and if the problem isn't a comparative one (IE it's not "I'm upset that other players make me feel useless"), but rather simply "I don't like that missions are over so fast", then the solution is glaringly obvious - change your build to do less damage, and understand that not everyone plays the same you do, so you'll have to be willing to compromise in a public queue. If you can't do that, again, that's a YOU problem.
3) It misses that some of the proposed solutions actually have been attempted, in some limited ways, and quickly abandoned due to player outcry. For example, I don't know why people are treating "better AI" or "better powers" as hypotheticals - we've had several enemy types released with better power selection and better AI use, and the outcry from the casuals has been, again and again, that these enemies were too hard, or took too long to kill. Heck, there was a long thread about this very thing with the Na'kuhl just recently. Or, going back a ways, doesn't anyone else remember the D'deridex Defender fiasco? That last one was particularly telling - the great crime of the Defender was that it had some self-heals, like players do, and the casuals HATED it.
If you really want to close the gap between players to make the game more egalitarian and make the design work easier for Cryptic, the place to focus your energies is not on capping players who overperform, but rather on the players who simply don't make the grade. Bring the floor up, and I think youll see a lot less calls for tearing down the "unfair" high performers.
Except that devs would ensure this doesn't happen by the three existing difficulty levels and tuning the AI so that casuals and borderline non-gamers as well as gamers and those who play a lot have something to do with all of their skills and acquisitions.
So many game elements would suddenly come to life and play a vital role for actual team play (this is an MMO after all), and there'd be variety and new circumstances out of previously scripted and entirely predictable maps. As mentioned, many would leave, but how many would join or come back suddenly finding the game more attractive and popular because of this? I don't know the answer to that, but I'd rather them do something than continue along the same old path that's been done over and over.
Actually, the real issue with the D'deridex Defender wasn't it's heals, rather it's tendency to hit you with tractor beam, viral matrix and a series of high yield torps (not forgetting the thing's 360 degree firing arc) not unlike those now available through rep, if I recall correctly it was also equipped with a SNB which doesn't help matters. Heck that combo was a bit much for most of the above average players at the time. I remember having issues taking the edge off that amount of damage even without the VM making life harder.
They got close to the same issue with the Na'khul, between their duplicates and their cone of death, although I do question how people manage to miss the cone of death, missing the duplicates and the "Immune" in small font size in the middle of a one vs five (or more) engagement is rather easy when your build isn't based on perma-FAW.
Na'Khul in space are a little challenging. A little tedious. It's kind of a mix for me. I'm cool with the cones. The distortions are sometimes a little micro-management heavy. The immunity is fun to deal with. Overall they're a fine change of pace for me so far.
How are you all finding them?
Tell me, who knows more about combat: someone that knows how to fight a punching bag?
Or someone that knows how to fight a person?
Notice the difference? Problem is that at the moment, people are grenading and machine-gunning the punching bag and that's quite frankly embarrassing and not fun for everyone with the exception of a select few.
Think twice before you type next time.
Making APA work only on weapons in general would help even the gap, changing how APB works (beyond stacking) would harm sci and eng more than tac, as it is I frequently use APB on my sci because it's just so useful.
Sounds like good advice. Maybe you should follow it as well.
As a former US Army combat veteran who served in both the First Gulf War and Bosnia, I happen to know the difference between fighting a person and fighting a punching bag on a level most people probably do not. And when I fought it wasn't in some arena for some trophy or award. MOS 19K30. Google it. Unit was Task Force 1-32 Armor. Part of 2d Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division. Battle of the Ruhkri Pocket for starters and then engaging the Tawaklana Republican Guard Mechanized Division. Guess what happens in real battle? People die. No respawn points either. Which means a lot of the people around here probably would take a pass on it.
So, I suppose that settles the idea as to whether or not I can tell the difference between battling a real person and battling a punching bag. Anyone who thinks differently is probably some sort of overprotected, self-entitled, sanctimonius twit. I have other words I'd like to use here, but the profanity filter keeps removing them.
What I have taken from this thread is the OP feels the need to limit or reduce the way some people play this game. To make it easier for someone in a self-induced Diet Dew and Cheetos haze to understand what I am saying, I will use simple declarative sentences and small words.
People play this game to have fun.
Not everyone has the same ideas about fun.
Removing the way someone has fun in this game is bad.
I am always against such changing of the game.
I do not play for DPS.
Some people do.
Changing the game so they cannot is wrong.
Because it takes away their fun.
Fixing broken items, buffing wildly sub-optimal items and possibly automating some things.
This seems to me a case of timing to make the most out of abilities like AHOD, Attrition Warfare, Astrometric Synergy (or whatever else CD reduction you and they have slotted). For tac abilities, positioning is key to get aggro as well for Reciprocity to kick in.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!