Fire on my mark should only work though if everyone actually fires on that target lol.
And there should possibly be a penalty (like confusion among the team) if multiple players use it at the same time.
And of course it makes little sense to have area of effect abilities benefit from something that should encourage focussing fire.
Don't forget to mention that the Tac damage bonuses all stack and mulitply. In other words, those +49% and those +25% don't become +74% when you combine them, but +86,25%... and each and every additional damage bonus increases this even further...
This is incorrect. Attack Pattern Alpha 3's 49.8% Bonus Damage and Tactical Fleet 3's 37.35% Bonus Damage, activated together, give your character 87.15% Bonus Damage, not 105.7503%. All sources of Bonus Damage increases are added to each other, not multiplied. The sum of Bonus Damage increases (as players call them, "Category 2") is multiplicative with the sum of what players have termed "Category 1" Damage increases, but both of those groups are additive within themselves.
There are incredibly few sources of "true multipliers" like you alleged Tactical Captains get in STO - true multipliers are currently only used by the Weapon [Dmg] modifier (and variants of it such as weapon Epic modifiers) and critter difficulty increases on Advanced and Elite.
Don't forget to mention that the Tac damage bonuses all stack and mulitply. In other words, those +49% and those +25% don't become +74% when you combine them, but +86,25%... and each and every additional damage bonus increases this even further...
This is incorrect. Attack Pattern Alpha 3's 49.8% Bonus Damage and Tactical Fleet 3's 37.35% Bonus Damage, activated together, give your character 87.15% Bonus Damage, not 105.7503%. All sources of Bonus Damage increases are added to each other, not multiplied. The sum of Bonus Damage increases (as players call them, "Category 2") is multiplicative with the sum of what players have termed "Category 1" Damage increases, but both of those groups are additive within themselves.
There are incredibly few sources of "true multipliers" like you alleged Tactical Captains get in STO - true multipliers are currently only used by the Weapon [Dmg] modifier (and variants of it such as weapon Epic modifiers) and critter difficulty increases on Advanced and Elite.
Even with sophlogimo's small calculation error, I hope you guys will still give some honest thought on how uneven things are between Tactical Captains and the rest. Because, as the same sophlogimo's sugggested, at the end of the day, it's not Engineers who are underpowered, nor Science Captains, but Tactical Captains who are grossly overpowered. Even just saying "87.15% Bonus Damage" out-loud bears witness to the fact.
I'm not sure I'd go so far as to call Tactical captains overpowered, as DPS is supposed to be their thing. They're supposed to be high-end damage dealers. I'm not sure I'd call Science captains underpowered, either, as the science powers they can use do nearly as much, or even just as much, damage as directed energy weapons if you build correctly for it. Also, the Science ultimate is so good that Tactical captains who want to do top DPS leave their own Ultimate be in order to get it.
That leaves Engineers. Engineers can do decent DPS. If you trait heavily into Science to do it and go with a crit-heavy build. They still won't do as much damage as a Tac Captain using the same build, nor should they. But our roles as Tanks and Healers really need some attention, as both Science and Tactical skills outstrip our abilities to do either.
Don't forget to mention that the Tac damage bonuses all stack and mulitply. In other words, those +49% and those +25% don't become +74% when you combine them, but +86,25%... and each and every additional damage bonus increases this even further...
This is incorrect. Attack Pattern Alpha 3's 49.8% Bonus Damage and Tactical Fleet 3's 37.35% Bonus Damage, activated together, give your character 87.15% Bonus Damage, not 105.7503%. All sources of Bonus Damage increases are added to each other, not multiplied. The sum of Bonus Damage increases (as players call them, "Category 2") is multiplicative with the sum of what players have termed "Category 1" Damage increases, but both of those groups are additive within themselves.
There are incredibly few sources of "true multipliers" like you alleged Tactical Captains get in STO - true multipliers are currently only used by the Weapon [Dmg] modifier (and variants of it such as weapon Epic modifiers) and critter difficulty increases on Advanced and Elite.
Even with sophlogimo's small calculation error, I hope you guys will still give some honest thought on how uneven things are between Tactical Captains and the rest. Because, as the same sophlogimo's sugggested, at the end of the day, it's not Engineers who are underpowered, nor Science Captains, but Tactical Captains who are grossly overpowered. Even just saying "87.15% Bonus Damage" out-loud bears witness to the fact.
Indeed. Besides, I think the main point he wanted to make is that tactical officers are the only ones who get so many innate boosts just because they happen to be the 'right' career.
Even if the boosts are a bit less impressive than @sophlogimo calculated, then it's still the case that tacs get damage boost abilities whereas the other careers don't get those types of buffs at all.
Anyway, I'm not sure if nerfing or correcting tacs would be necessary or a good idea. Maybe bringing them down and buffing engineers a bit wouldn't hurt, but I can understand why they wouldn't want to touch tacs... imagine the responses they'd get when they would consider it. That's why I suggested to boost engineers, because while I agree that tacs are OP, it may be best to leave it like that but at least giving some attention to engineers would be fair I think.
I agree, I don't think it's as much of a "we need to nerf tactical" problem as it is "engineering is failing to do what it's supposed to do extremely well."
I agree, I don't think it's as much of a "we need to nerf tactical" problem as it is "engineering is failing to do what it's supposed to do extremely well."
So you would say Science is fine compared to Tactical?
Some of the abilities science has are fine, some aren't (for pve). Subnucleonic beam is one, it's great in pvp but since NPCS rarely use abilites, it's kinda worthless in pve. Science is still much better off than engineering.
Also, keep in mind science isn't supposed to be the damage dealer like tactical is. So science actually might be fine now that I think about it, since it's all about debuffing and stuff like that.
I dont think we need more DPS, just better mitigation/healing abilities. I like the ground abilities lots, and have MW slotted with the passive and it helps -lots but it needs a bigger heal for sure.
Jeisun
StarFleet Engineer U.S.S. Diana
Alita Heavy Escort
There are incredibly few sources of "true multipliers" like you alleged Tactical Captains get in STO - true multipliers are currently only used by the Weapon [Dmg] modifier (and variants of it such as weapon Epic modifiers) and critter difficulty increases on Advanced and Elite.
((raises hand)) Do [Dmg] tags multiply each other then? Is [Dmg]x4 giving 12% or 12.55%?
After spending half an hour reading this surprisingly long and civil thread, I am inclined to agree with many points brought up here.
I agree that nerfing tacs and scis will probably result in riots. And tbh, cryptic is often too heavy with their nerf bats anyways, so let's stay away from nerfs please.
But on the flip side, what exactly could you do to buff engis? Adding more effects to their abilities would just be cause for more bugs (and we all know how good cryptic's exterminators are... they aren't...). Making the abilities stronger would be one way to go, but as was stated, those abilities have no real place in the current meta.
There's no need for a power drain reducer (NI), when you can get the exact same thing (albeit not as powerful) from a PL and a spire core combined with good EPS. But then again, having almost zilch power drain isn't even needed in most cases, because you can overclock so many of your SS power levels to insane levels with just BOff abilities that 90% of the time, even with full energy builds, you barely notice any power level drops at all (unless you're getting hit by polaron weapons, and let's face it, the proc chance on that is so low you'd need an armada and a half firing on you to even consider worrying about that, and then again, drain expertise will eliminate most of the drain outright).
You don't need a MASSIVE power boost to all SS, again because there is a soft cap on SS power that you'll likely hit with just PL, and the bonus power transfer rate? You can get that with two spec points. And then some. So even if that was +100 power and +1000 transfer rate, it's not needed. It's a nice to have, and an interesting little perk, but it's nowhere even close to a necessity.
RSF is maybe the only one that I consider borderline useful (yes yes, I know, people have been saying it's silly on this thread, and I agree, hence my usage of "borderline"). You get a shield hardness bonus, a tiny heal, and some regen. BUT (here it comes) you can get the exact same thing from EPtS. And high shield power. And maybe a TSS if you really want to go there. Often it's at the point where your shield power is already at 110-125 so the RSF isn't even noticeable, except for the cool little animation and SFX. BUT (yes, another one). If that power was buffed, it would be incredibly good. Ish. Make the shield hardness even greater, boost the regen, boost the heal, and for the love of god, please please PLEASE reduce the cooldown. But even then, still no real place in a DPS focused game.
And now the kicker. Miracle Worker. Honestly, everything I would have to say on this power has already been said. So I won't waste your time with a paragraph on it. The only fix to that would be reduce the cooldown even more. But that won't happen, so moving on.
Engineering Fleet. Supposedly the "end all be all" of the class. It's ok. For what it is. But if you gave it a straight 25-30% buff, it actually might be viable. Ish. Maybe (yeah yeah, I know I'm reaching here).
But as was stated before. There's just no point for an engi anymore. Where in this game do you need uber tanking? Where in this game would extreme survival do better than just obliterating everything in your path? Pretty much nowhere. MAYBE some of the Voth encounters (you cannot deny that their ships can sometimes dish out insane levels of damage, esp right after they subnuc you), MAYBE some of the Vaadwaur encounters, but short of that? Nope.
And now the whole point of this long post. The Engi class could probably benefit the most from a total revamp. As in take it back to the drawing board and completely remake it. As is, it's role is now... well... completely obsolete. This isn't a Terminator 3 level obsolete where even the old T100 model can down a TX with some luck and a nuke from it's chest. This is a World War II Polish mounted cavalry vs German Panzer obsolete. Amusing, but in the end pointless and possibly even pathetic.
So what would we then make engis? What role could they fill/create that would match the concept and duty of an engineer (problem solver), but not encroach on the roles of the other two classes?
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
There are incredibly few sources of "true multipliers" like you alleged Tactical Captains get in STO - true multipliers are currently only used by the Weapon [Dmg] modifier (and variants of it such as weapon Epic modifiers) and critter difficulty increases on Advanced and Elite.
((raises hand)) Do [Dmg] tags multiply each other then? Is [Dmg]x4 giving 12% or 12.55%?
They do. A weapon with one [Dmg] modifier does 1.03x the damage it would without that modifier. A weapon with two [Dmg] modifiers does 1.0609x the damage it would without those modifiers, not 1.06x. A weapon with four [Dmg] modifiers and the [Ac/Dm] modifier does ~1.193x (precisely, (1.03^4)*1.06)the damage it would without those modifiers, not 1.18x.
But as was stated before. There's just no point for an engi anymore. Where in this game do you need uber tanking? Where in this game would extreme survival do better than just obliterating everything in your path? Pretty much nowhere.
Sorry to cut your excellent post short: I agree with all, a full 100%. But what you said here is the crux: Engineer, as a whole, has become de facto obsolete. Like I mentioned, a few posts earlier, I'm now flying my Rom Tact alt (that I didn't touch since DR), with just the 'out-of-box' VR Mk XII Borg space set. And guess what?! I'm doing just fine with it, surprisingly. Slapped on the Valdore console, and voila, done! I have HE2, which is better than Miracle Worker, and I'm golden. And that's sad, really. And my power levels, that were traditionally much lower on a Rom Tact, they're nearing 100 anyway. My Engineer main does a bit better, of course, in that regard, but not where it matters: I stay alive just fine; and where I don't, I just kill everything in sight with my Tact ueber-powers.
So what would we then make engis? What role could they fill/create that would match the concept and duty of an engineer (problem solver), but not encroach on the roles of the other two classes?
Here you're touching upon an even deeper issue: namely, that the whole Trinity is a great notion, but ultimately fail for an MMO. Why, you ask? Because having different roles is a fantastic team concept, but, at the end of the day, the marketing model is set up in such a way, that *everyone* can be completely self-sufficient. And here's the sadder part: you can readily see, from running your average PUG, and the usual dismal teamwork therein, that people really *do* need to be self-reliant too, or they'd all quit in frustration.
Tl;dr: Tacts can survive on their own just fine: Engineers aren't really needed. Not saying we can't be useful, but Tacts can live without us. If you have a solution to this problem, I'll gladly hear it, cuz I'm stumped for the moment.
There are incredibly few sources of "true multipliers" like you alleged Tactical Captains get in STO - true multipliers are currently only used by the Weapon [Dmg] modifier (and variants of it such as weapon Epic modifiers) and critter difficulty increases on Advanced and Elite.
((raises hand)) Do [Dmg] tags multiply each other then? Is [Dmg]x4 giving 12% or 12.55%?
They do. A weapon with one [Dmg] modifier does 1.03x the damage it would without that modifier. A weapon with two [Dmg] modifiers does 1.0609x the damage it would without those modifiers, not 1.06x. A weapon with four [Dmg] modifiers and the [Ac/Dm] modifier does ~1.193x (precisely, (1.03^4)*1.06)the damage it would without those modifiers, not 1.18x.
I see a lot of different people talking about specific TAC/SCI/ENG comparisons which is also influenced by how they spent their space skills. Still it was nice to see Spartan correct a misunderstanding.
Still I think generally everyone agree's reduced damage resistance should be more limited to ENG/SCI bridge officer's or captain's given the huge damage boost's TAC get to Damage, Critical Chance, and Severity already. I'd welcome attack patterns reducing or removing the damage resistance from two of the attack pattern bridge officer abilities for modified ENG abilities like someone commented on like Buckle Hull or variation of Aceton Beam / Eject Warp Plasma where radiation damage impairs hull platings.
I don't want to see a nerf so much to TAC but greatly expanded base damage & critical hits is a lot and adding reduced resistence is just crazy. SCI captain's can still do comparable damage with some exotic abilities but ENG's in space need a little better Hull Regeneration at (+85 - +105) as I noticed earlier in the thread and damage resistence abilities should be mostly an ENG benefit and possibly to a lessor extend a SCI.
@sophlogimo Not sure why you're comparing the abilities of different classes to each other when each class is designed to be completely different from each other. What I'm saying is that Science does well at it's intended role, much better than Engineering it's role.
For example, Sensor Scan is an excellent debuff and few overall debuffs rival it, especially if you use it when enemies are all clumped together. Scattering Field is an interesting ability that provides a damage resistance buff to self and all surrounding allies within a certain distance. While not super important in a lot of PvE missions, Subnucleonic Beam is a powerful ability against players and NPCs that do use abilities. When it comes to the Fleet abilities, Science Fleet might actually be better for tanking than Engineering Fleet is, due to the fact that Science Fleet gives a percent based increase to shield damage resistance while Engineering Fleet gives a flat +33 hull damage resistance. On the other side, you have Miracle Worker, which is often outhealed by traits or consoles anyone can get, such as desperate repairs or regenerative integrity field. The power boost ability and drain resistance ability are almost worthless now because of all the power boosts available. Rotate Shield Frequency gives a tiny shield heal over time and a sizable shield hardness buff (which is not really needed a lot anymore thanks to many other shield hardness buffs and the fact that there is a lot of shield pen/drain now). Honestly, Transfer Shield Strength 3 outclasses it in terms of healing.
What I'm saying is not that Science is better than Tactical, or that Tactical is better than Enhinnering. I'm saying that each class should be the best at what it's intended strength is. Engineering doesn't perform as well as it should anymore, whether it's in healing, tanking, or power management. It needs a change, whether you like it or not.
EDIT: Had to tag you because the reply button just shows up as null in the text box when I am using my iPhone.
I think tacs are mainly fine as they are right now. They could do with a few minor nerfs, but nothing big. It's engineers and scis that need to be touched on big time
@sophlogimo
Not sure why you're comparing the abilities of different classes to each other when each class is designed to be completely different from each other. What I'm saying is that Science does well at it's intended role, much better than Engineering it's role.
For example, Sensor Scan is an excellent debuff and few overall debuffs rival it, especially if you use it when enemies are all clumped together. Scattering Field is an interesting ability that provides a damage resistance buff to self and all surrounding allies within a certain distance. While not super important in a lot of PvE missions, Subnucleonic Beam is a powerful ability against players and NPCs that do use abilities. When it comes to the Fleet abilities, Science Fleet might actually be better for tanking than Engineering Fleet is, due to the fact that Science Fleet gives a percent based increase to shield damage resistance while Engineering Fleet gives a flat +33 hull damage resistance. On the other side, you have Miracle Worker, which is often outhealed by traits or consoles anyone can get, such as desperate repairs or regenerative integrity field. The power boost ability and drain resistance ability are almost worthless now because of all the power boosts available. Rotate Shield Frequency gives a tiny shield heal over time and a sizable shield hardness buff (which is not really needed a lot anymore thanks to many other shield hardness buffs and the fact that there is a lot of shield pen/drain now). Honestly, Transfer Shield Strength 3 outclasses it in terms of healing.
What I'm saying is not that Science is better than Tactical, or that Tactical is better than Enhinnering. I'm saying that each class should be the best at what it's intended strength is. Engineering doesn't perform as well as it should anymore, whether it's in healing, tanking, or power management. It needs a change, whether you like it or not.
EDIT: Had to tag you because the reply button just shows up as null in the text box when I am using my iPhone.
Well said Kyle. I'll also add here that engineering powers don't really make much of a difference in endgame play nowadays because their abilities are so weak. Right now, the best tanking careers go as follows: tac > sci > engineer. This is not supposed to happen. However, as threat is primarily damage based and due to the abundance of extremely potent heals available to the other classes, engineers are the worst at tanking, something they're supposed to be the best at. I think the main problem here is that the tac's damage capabilities and sci debuff/control abilities are never limited in effectiveness. The more you have, the more powerful your ship is. Engineering captain abilities, however, are limited in how effective they can be. All the power levels are capped at 125 and engineers cannot raise the cap (something I feel like they should be able to do). Also, too much healing becomes pretty much pointless in endgame content. Sure, tacs and scis may need to sacrifice a console slot and a few traits to do something that an engineer can do "freely" but these traits and consoles will far outstrip anything the innate engi abilities can offer. In fact, engineering captain abilities are so weak that most engineers also have to run supremecy, leech, RIF, etc because their own captain abilities cannot make much of a difference in prolonged combat.
SCI captain's can still do comparable damage with some exotic abilities
Compared to who? A tactical captain? Not really close to be honest. Remember, tactical damage buffs also buff exotic damage. They are also better at Sci damage than Sci captains are.
IMO improvements to Engineering shouldn't come from healing. @snoggymack22 outlined it a few posts ago. The traits, items, DOffs and BOff abilities that help them heal as much or more than a vanilla Engineer are also available for Engineers. Buffing healing and to an extent, damage resistances can only go so far when the mobs you are fighting can only hit you so hard. Case and point is how @meimeitoo and a whole lot of other players do fine with just HE2 as an active BOff heal.
It is also true that the crux of the problem isn't Engineers (or Science) being underpowered, but how Tactical captains are vastly superior in the game's most useful stat (damage). But as stated here and in many other threads both here and in Reddit, nerfing Tacs would pretty much create a riot and can be more harmful towards Cryptic than Delta Rising was.
Another option that would not require nerfs, is to increase STF difficulty. This will increase the need for proper tanking builds, increase the importance of healing and damage resistance and increase the need for debuffing. However, this will hurt the mostly casual playerbase of the game. Even when you do this, it is still likely that the current 1% (Tacs) won't be challenged much.
So now we are left with only one viable option: buff Science and Engineers (captains, not BOff abilities) to narrow that gap. Buffing both those classes won't add true powercreep, since we aren't actually raising the damage ceiling (which will still be held by Tacticals).
For example, Science could receive an exclusive science buff (flat bonus to exotic damage, drain effectiveness and control effectiveness for 30 secs for instance) while Engineers could be given an energy weapons buff (either damage or haste or even both for 30 seconds), a team heal with DR buff along with a Taunt (this can be the new Miracle Worker) and its own aura debuff (either control based such an ability to take subsystems offline and NPC outgoing damage debuff).
They do. A weapon with one [Dmg] modifier does 1.03x the damage it would without that modifier. A weapon with two [Dmg] modifiers does 1.0609x the damage it would without those modifiers, not 1.06x. A weapon with four [Dmg] modifiers and the [Ac/Dm] modifier does ~1.193x (precisely, (1.03^4)*1.06)the damage it would without those modifiers, not 1.18x.
[...]
So what would we then make engis? What role could they fill/create that would match the concept and duty of an engineer (problem solver), but not encroach on the roles of the other two classes?
I believe it is consensus that Engineers are fine on the ground. So why not change the Space captain abilities more towards what they do on the ground.
As a reminder, on the ground, engineers get:
Cover Shield (a summonable cover - in essence, a tanking aid)
Engineering Proficiency (bonus to shields - again, a tanking aid)
Orbital Strike (Massive AOE damage)
Reroute Power To Shields (recharge shields - again, a tanking aid)
Support Drone (summon an exocomp to aid in combat)
So three tanking aids and two offensive abilities. In space, however, the potentially offensive abiltiies (Nadion Inversion and EPS Power Transfer) are not really all that offensive. Why not just replace them with a space version of Orbital Strike and Support Drone? Let's call them, say, Barrage (for using the ship's weapons to do massive AOE damage around a given target) and Launch Support Drone (for a small automated ally ship that was just replicated in the ship's hangar and will eventually collapse because it is a one-use design). Both abilities should, of course, scale with the ship.
If then the remaining tanking abilities are scaled up a bit (and scale up with the ship), that might actually do it.
That's a good idea. I never thought about that before. Weirdly enough, it also seems like the Engineer's ground tanking powers (as you pointed out) are much stronger than their space counterparts. Engineering Proficiency (the ground Engineering Fleet) outclasses Engineering Fleet, as it provides a heal on top of the damage res boost. You have to use the Fleet Technician trait to give Engineering Fleet a heal, and even then it's not a very good heal. I'm pretty sure Reroute Power to Shields does a much better job of keeping your shields up on ground than Rotate Shield Frequency does at keeping your shields up in space. Then of course, we don't have anything like Cover Shield in space. Not sure what the intended counterpart was supposed to be. Maybe a space version could make some sort of AoE Shield bubble like the T5 Undine rep trait does, but having a different effect like shield penetration mitigation or something like that. (Though I do still believe RSF should mitigate shield penetration)
I guess in space, support drone would probably translate to calling in some support ship to heal and buff you. With orbital strike, I have no idea how that would translate to space.
Comments
And there should possibly be a penalty (like confusion among the team) if multiple players use it at the same time.
And of course it makes little sense to have area of effect abilities benefit from something that should encourage focussing fire.
Tactical captain skills could totally get some numbers shaved and still be the best at their designated job compared to the other two choices.
Not gutted. Shaved.
This is incorrect. Attack Pattern Alpha 3's 49.8% Bonus Damage and Tactical Fleet 3's 37.35% Bonus Damage, activated together, give your character 87.15% Bonus Damage, not 105.7503%. All sources of Bonus Damage increases are added to each other, not multiplied. The sum of Bonus Damage increases (as players call them, "Category 2") is multiplicative with the sum of what players have termed "Category 1" Damage increases, but both of those groups are additive within themselves.
There are incredibly few sources of "true multipliers" like you alleged Tactical Captains get in STO - true multipliers are currently only used by the Weapon [Dmg] modifier (and variants of it such as weapon Epic modifiers) and critter difficulty increases on Advanced and Elite.
Even with sophlogimo's small calculation error, I hope you guys will still give some honest thought on how uneven things are between Tactical Captains and the rest. Because, as the same sophlogimo's sugggested, at the end of the day, it's not Engineers who are underpowered, nor Science Captains, but Tactical Captains who are grossly overpowered. Even just saying "87.15% Bonus Damage" out-loud bears witness to the fact.
That leaves Engineers. Engineers can do decent DPS. If you trait heavily into Science to do it and go with a crit-heavy build. They still won't do as much damage as a Tac Captain using the same build, nor should they. But our roles as Tanks and Healers really need some attention, as both Science and Tactical skills outstrip our abilities to do either.
Indeed. Besides, I think the main point he wanted to make is that tactical officers are the only ones who get so many innate boosts just because they happen to be the 'right' career.
Even if the boosts are a bit less impressive than @sophlogimo calculated, then it's still the case that tacs get damage boost abilities whereas the other careers don't get those types of buffs at all.
Anyway, I'm not sure if nerfing or correcting tacs would be necessary or a good idea. Maybe bringing them down and buffing engineers a bit wouldn't hurt, but I can understand why they wouldn't want to touch tacs... imagine the responses they'd get when they would consider it. That's why I suggested to boost engineers, because while I agree that tacs are OP, it may be best to leave it like that but at least giving some attention to engineers would be fair I think.
Some of the abilities science has are fine, some aren't (for pve). Subnucleonic beam is one, it's great in pvp but since NPCS rarely use abilites, it's kinda worthless in pve. Science is still much better off than engineering.
Also, keep in mind science isn't supposed to be the damage dealer like tactical is. So science actually might be fine now that I think about it, since it's all about debuffing and stuff like that.
StarFleet Engineer
U.S.S. Diana
Alita Heavy Escort
((raises hand)) Do [Dmg] tags multiply each other then? Is [Dmg]x4 giving 12% or 12.55%?
I agree that nerfing tacs and scis will probably result in riots. And tbh, cryptic is often too heavy with their nerf bats anyways, so let's stay away from nerfs please.
But on the flip side, what exactly could you do to buff engis? Adding more effects to their abilities would just be cause for more bugs (and we all know how good cryptic's exterminators are... they aren't...). Making the abilities stronger would be one way to go, but as was stated, those abilities have no real place in the current meta.
There's no need for a power drain reducer (NI), when you can get the exact same thing (albeit not as powerful) from a PL and a spire core combined with good EPS. But then again, having almost zilch power drain isn't even needed in most cases, because you can overclock so many of your SS power levels to insane levels with just BOff abilities that 90% of the time, even with full energy builds, you barely notice any power level drops at all (unless you're getting hit by polaron weapons, and let's face it, the proc chance on that is so low you'd need an armada and a half firing on you to even consider worrying about that, and then again, drain expertise will eliminate most of the drain outright).
You don't need a MASSIVE power boost to all SS, again because there is a soft cap on SS power that you'll likely hit with just PL, and the bonus power transfer rate? You can get that with two spec points. And then some. So even if that was +100 power and +1000 transfer rate, it's not needed. It's a nice to have, and an interesting little perk, but it's nowhere even close to a necessity.
RSF is maybe the only one that I consider borderline useful (yes yes, I know, people have been saying it's silly on this thread, and I agree, hence my usage of "borderline"). You get a shield hardness bonus, a tiny heal, and some regen. BUT (here it comes) you can get the exact same thing from EPtS. And high shield power. And maybe a TSS if you really want to go there. Often it's at the point where your shield power is already at 110-125 so the RSF isn't even noticeable, except for the cool little animation and SFX. BUT (yes, another one). If that power was buffed, it would be incredibly good. Ish. Make the shield hardness even greater, boost the regen, boost the heal, and for the love of god, please please PLEASE reduce the cooldown. But even then, still no real place in a DPS focused game.
And now the kicker. Miracle Worker. Honestly, everything I would have to say on this power has already been said. So I won't waste your time with a paragraph on it. The only fix to that would be reduce the cooldown even more. But that won't happen, so moving on.
Engineering Fleet. Supposedly the "end all be all" of the class. It's ok. For what it is. But if you gave it a straight 25-30% buff, it actually might be viable. Ish. Maybe (yeah yeah, I know I'm reaching here).
But as was stated before. There's just no point for an engi anymore. Where in this game do you need uber tanking? Where in this game would extreme survival do better than just obliterating everything in your path? Pretty much nowhere. MAYBE some of the Voth encounters (you cannot deny that their ships can sometimes dish out insane levels of damage, esp right after they subnuc you), MAYBE some of the Vaadwaur encounters, but short of that? Nope.
And now the whole point of this long post. The Engi class could probably benefit the most from a total revamp. As in take it back to the drawing board and completely remake it. As is, it's role is now... well... completely obsolete. This isn't a Terminator 3 level obsolete where even the old T100 model can down a TX with some luck and a nuke from it's chest. This is a World War II Polish mounted cavalry vs German Panzer obsolete. Amusing, but in the end pointless and possibly even pathetic.
So what would we then make engis? What role could they fill/create that would match the concept and duty of an engineer (problem solver), but not encroach on the roles of the other two classes?
They do. A weapon with one [Dmg] modifier does 1.03x the damage it would without that modifier. A weapon with two [Dmg] modifiers does 1.0609x the damage it would without those modifiers, not 1.06x. A weapon with four [Dmg] modifiers and the [Ac/Dm] modifier does ~1.193x (precisely, (1.03^4)*1.06)the damage it would without those modifiers, not 1.18x.
Sorry to cut your excellent post short: I agree with all, a full 100%. But what you said here is the crux: Engineer, as a whole, has become de facto obsolete. Like I mentioned, a few posts earlier, I'm now flying my Rom Tact alt (that I didn't touch since DR), with just the 'out-of-box' VR Mk XII Borg space set. And guess what?! I'm doing just fine with it, surprisingly. Slapped on the Valdore console, and voila, done! I have HE2, which is better than Miracle Worker, and I'm golden. And that's sad, really. And my power levels, that were traditionally much lower on a Rom Tact, they're nearing 100 anyway. My Engineer main does a bit better, of course, in that regard, but not where it matters: I stay alive just fine; and where I don't, I just kill everything in sight with my Tact ueber-powers.
Here you're touching upon an even deeper issue: namely, that the whole Trinity is a great notion, but ultimately fail for an MMO. Why, you ask? Because having different roles is a fantastic team concept, but, at the end of the day, the marketing model is set up in such a way, that *everyone* can be completely self-sufficient. And here's the sadder part: you can readily see, from running your average PUG, and the usual dismal teamwork therein, that people really *do* need to be self-reliant too, or they'd all quit in frustration.
Tl;dr: Tacts can survive on their own just fine: Engineers aren't really needed. Not saying we can't be useful, but Tacts can live without us. If you have a solution to this problem, I'll gladly hear it, cuz I'm stumped for the moment.
I see a lot of different people talking about specific TAC/SCI/ENG comparisons which is also influenced by how they spent their space skills. Still it was nice to see Spartan correct a misunderstanding.
Still I think generally everyone agree's reduced damage resistance should be more limited to ENG/SCI bridge officer's or captain's given the huge damage boost's TAC get to Damage, Critical Chance, and Severity already. I'd welcome attack patterns reducing or removing the damage resistance from two of the attack pattern bridge officer abilities for modified ENG abilities like someone commented on like Buckle Hull or variation of Aceton Beam / Eject Warp Plasma where radiation damage impairs hull platings.
I don't want to see a nerf so much to TAC but greatly expanded base damage & critical hits is a lot and adding reduced resistence is just crazy. SCI captain's can still do comparable damage with some exotic abilities but ENG's in space need a little better Hull Regeneration at (+85 - +105) as I noticed earlier in the thread and damage resistence abilities should be mostly an ENG benefit and possibly to a lessor extend a SCI.
Not sure why you're comparing the abilities of different classes to each other when each class is designed to be completely different from each other. What I'm saying is that Science does well at it's intended role, much better than Engineering it's role.
For example, Sensor Scan is an excellent debuff and few overall debuffs rival it, especially if you use it when enemies are all clumped together. Scattering Field is an interesting ability that provides a damage resistance buff to self and all surrounding allies within a certain distance. While not super important in a lot of PvE missions, Subnucleonic Beam is a powerful ability against players and NPCs that do use abilities. When it comes to the Fleet abilities, Science Fleet might actually be better for tanking than Engineering Fleet is, due to the fact that Science Fleet gives a percent based increase to shield damage resistance while Engineering Fleet gives a flat +33 hull damage resistance. On the other side, you have Miracle Worker, which is often outhealed by traits or consoles anyone can get, such as desperate repairs or regenerative integrity field. The power boost ability and drain resistance ability are almost worthless now because of all the power boosts available. Rotate Shield Frequency gives a tiny shield heal over time and a sizable shield hardness buff (which is not really needed a lot anymore thanks to many other shield hardness buffs and the fact that there is a lot of shield pen/drain now). Honestly, Transfer Shield Strength 3 outclasses it in terms of healing.
What I'm saying is not that Science is better than Tactical, or that Tactical is better than Enhinnering. I'm saying that each class should be the best at what it's intended strength is. Engineering doesn't perform as well as it should anymore, whether it's in healing, tanking, or power management. It needs a change, whether you like it or not.
EDIT: Had to tag you because the reply button just shows up as null in the text box when I am using my iPhone.
Well said Kyle. I'll also add here that engineering powers don't really make much of a difference in endgame play nowadays because their abilities are so weak. Right now, the best tanking careers go as follows: tac > sci > engineer. This is not supposed to happen. However, as threat is primarily damage based and due to the abundance of extremely potent heals available to the other classes, engineers are the worst at tanking, something they're supposed to be the best at. I think the main problem here is that the tac's damage capabilities and sci debuff/control abilities are never limited in effectiveness. The more you have, the more powerful your ship is. Engineering captain abilities, however, are limited in how effective they can be. All the power levels are capped at 125 and engineers cannot raise the cap (something I feel like they should be able to do). Also, too much healing becomes pretty much pointless in endgame content. Sure, tacs and scis may need to sacrifice a console slot and a few traits to do something that an engineer can do "freely" but these traits and consoles will far outstrip anything the innate engi abilities can offer. In fact, engineering captain abilities are so weak that most engineers also have to run supremecy, leech, RIF, etc because their own captain abilities cannot make much of a difference in prolonged combat.
Compared to who? A tactical captain? Not really close to be honest. Remember, tactical damage buffs also buff exotic damage. They are also better at Sci damage than Sci captains are.
IMO improvements to Engineering shouldn't come from healing. @snoggymack22 outlined it a few posts ago. The traits, items, DOffs and BOff abilities that help them heal as much or more than a vanilla Engineer are also available for Engineers. Buffing healing and to an extent, damage resistances can only go so far when the mobs you are fighting can only hit you so hard. Case and point is how @meimeitoo and a whole lot of other players do fine with just HE2 as an active BOff heal.
It is also true that the crux of the problem isn't Engineers (or Science) being underpowered, but how Tactical captains are vastly superior in the game's most useful stat (damage). But as stated here and in many other threads both here and in Reddit, nerfing Tacs would pretty much create a riot and can be more harmful towards Cryptic than Delta Rising was.
Another option that would not require nerfs, is to increase STF difficulty. This will increase the need for proper tanking builds, increase the importance of healing and damage resistance and increase the need for debuffing. However, this will hurt the mostly casual playerbase of the game. Even when you do this, it is still likely that the current 1% (Tacs) won't be challenged much.
So now we are left with only one viable option: buff Science and Engineers (captains, not BOff abilities) to narrow that gap. Buffing both those classes won't add true powercreep, since we aren't actually raising the damage ceiling (which will still be held by Tacticals).
For example, Science could receive an exclusive science buff (flat bonus to exotic damage, drain effectiveness and control effectiveness for 30 secs for instance) while Engineers could be given an energy weapons buff (either damage or haste or even both for 30 seconds), a team heal with DR buff along with a Taunt (this can be the new Miracle Worker) and its own aura debuff (either control based such an ability to take subsystems offline and NPC outgoing damage debuff).
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Excellent. Thank you for clarifying
That's a good idea. I never thought about that before. Weirdly enough, it also seems like the Engineer's ground tanking powers (as you pointed out) are much stronger than their space counterparts. Engineering Proficiency (the ground Engineering Fleet) outclasses Engineering Fleet, as it provides a heal on top of the damage res boost. You have to use the Fleet Technician trait to give Engineering Fleet a heal, and even then it's not a very good heal. I'm pretty sure Reroute Power to Shields does a much better job of keeping your shields up on ground than Rotate Shield Frequency does at keeping your shields up in space. Then of course, we don't have anything like Cover Shield in space. Not sure what the intended counterpart was supposed to be. Maybe a space version could make some sort of AoE Shield bubble like the T5 Undine rep trait does, but having a different effect like shield penetration mitigation or something like that. (Though I do still believe RSF should mitigate shield penetration)
I guess in space, support drone would probably translate to calling in some support ship to heal and buff you. With orbital strike, I have no idea how that would translate to space.
lol
"Scotty, why aren't we at warp?!" "The nacelles sir . . . they're gone."
Must have been separation pets then: gone when detached. :P