test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
DPS needs MORE nerf...leave SCI alone. This is SCI love thread<3<3<3 SCI haters make your own thread
bubblegirl2015
Member Posts: 830 Arc User
For all the insane talk about drains and other smaller SCI buffs...DEVs please keep addressing the BIGGER elephant in the room which is TACT DPS and not SCI drains. When it comes to it the I WIN button still out there and IMHO DPS has not been curtailed far enough. Yet those whining about SCI not being nerf enough fail to see the negligence to address what has bugged this game for many years...DPS power creep.
DPS is the problem and not SCI. Years ago SCI was nerfed to oblivion and yet DPS creep still rules this game. If there is a need to balance the game the overall system of the game needs to be taken into account rather than to listen to the whining of the forums. Nobody plays PvP anymore since most are still DPS centric to ridiculous levels.
DPS is the problem and not SCI. Years ago SCI was nerfed to oblivion and yet DPS creep still rules this game. If there is a need to balance the game the overall system of the game needs to be taken into account rather than to listen to the whining of the forums. Nobody plays PvP anymore since most are still DPS centric to ridiculous levels.
Wiki editor http://sto.gamepedia.com
Original STO beta tester.
Original STO beta tester.
0
Comments
Awoken Dead
Now shaddup about the queues, it's a BUG
You are in a PvE and are simply overwhelmed by shear force as the NPC carries more firepower than you.
Frustrated the cry is this games to hard.
You are in a PvE and get caught in a Gravity Well, have Shields disabled and are hit by feedback pulse and crushed by that combination.
Frustrated the cry isn't the games to hard its Gravity Well is overpowered, subsystem disables are overpowered and feedback pulse is overpowered they need a nerf.
Hence why when it comes to PvP Science is the Nerf bats TRIBBLE.
Hello rubber banding my old friend, time to bounce around the battlezone again, where are all my bug reports going?, out of love with this game I am falling, As Cryptic fail to acknowledge a problem exists, Shakes an angry fist, And from Support all I'm hearing are the sounds of silence.
Current highest DPS for a tactical toon is 208k - using FAW.
Current highest DPS for a science toon is 153k - using pure EPG science magic.
(Just for comparison, current highest DPS for an engineer toon is 128k - again with FAW.)
All numbers are taken from SCM leaderboards, ISA, post-S13 rebalance.
U.S.S. Buteo Regalis - Brigid Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer build
R.R.W. Ri Maajon - Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird build
My Youtube channel containing STO videos.
And the previous high was +500k DPS. Like 565 I think cant remember exactly.
@bubblegirl2015
Please, do be specific. You don't help the situation by broadstroking/generalizing, and making vague claims about something or rather....
"DEVs please keep addressing the BIGGER elephant in the room which is TACT DPS and not SCI drains"
Tacs can also drain, and more effectively then a sci. What are you on about ? Are you unhappy with Tac captain abilities or Sci captain abilities, or boff abilities ? Please try not to be so vague. No one has any clue what you're talking about. Sheesh.
Further, if you're referring to Leech, it still works well enough. If you're referring to Tyken's- Yes its way over performing..
So in your little rant, it seems like you want to leave drains alone...
-News Flash friend- Tacs can make better use of Tykens then a Sci captain can....so uhh what ?
"When it comes to it the I WIN button still out there and IMHO DPS has not been curtailed far enough."
Please, do elaborate... What is the I WIN button ? What DPS number do you feel is out of hand ?
50k ?
75k ?
+150k ?
Where is your benchmark for "Too much DPS".
"DPS is the problem and not SCI."
Uhmmm Sci's are perfectly capable of DPS'ing....................
"If there is a need to balance the game the overall system of the game needs to be taken into account rather than to listen to the whining of the forums."
Please clarify. What is the specific issue you wish to discuss ? Nobody can tell what you're talking about.
"Nobody plays PvP anymore since most are still DPS centric to ridiculous levels."
Huh ?
Are you implying people who PvE have vastly different skill trees then PvP players, therefore they don't want to PvP ?
Not sure what you're getting at... elaborate please.
Really poor quality OP.
No details, vague innuendo, and sweeping generalizations.
We can't even start to have a civilized, productive discussion until you've provided specifics. As it stands right now this thread is nothing more then Bait.
And it would appear you're the one whining on the forums at this point.
Might be a different story if we could tell what in God's name you're going on about.
Also you say this a Love Sci thread... Yet you sound like you're frustrated and hate playing a sci. Just an observation
It's always funny when someone starts whining about the 'whining' here... in a newly created thread on the same Forum where you don't want to see said whining.
It's quite ironic actually. You're suggesting that your own post should be ignored OP. Why put so much work in it then?
Don't see a huge problem?
Sci is performing 25% worse than Tac...Eng more than 33% worse...and that is with top builds...what about the people who can't afford the best gear and junk?
In a game that is all about DPS all 3 classes should be much more equal...obviously the trinity is dead...so all 3 should be much more equalized.
But every time they nerf Tac then people whine like babies and get them to revert those nerfs...and the devs give in like pushovers...
In all fairness, I suppose they could close the gap a little. You make a fair point.
But I'd warn against taking that list as a scientific comparison.
Like @tunebreaker said, one is a FaW boat, one is pure EPG, the other an Engi in a FaW boat...
If we want to get scientific about this we'd need to see Tac, Eng and Sci all in the same ship with same build, same weapons same traits same specs to get a better idea.
Would also help if they ran about 20 parses each and averaged the results, tossing the best round and worst round for each class.
Yes, there is a P2W button, too.
But there is no substitute for educating yourself & putting in a bit of work. Since you like Science, think of STO as a laboratory - it requires more of the former & less of the latter.
I think the problem isn't necessarily DPS creep it's the fact that in the current game Science and Engineer don't bring anything unique to the table because the way to win at this game is DPS. If you want to complain and ask for changes I would suggest starting there rather than asking for nerfs.
Let's ask the Devs to make Science and Engineer Captains bring something useful/needed and unique to the table.
Seriously though, "150k in ISA" is a worthless statistic. Has been for years. The ability to deal damage does not 100% reflect the ability to complete missions and queues.
For example: a 150k DPS boat is worthless in a queue that requires strategy rather than fighting, like some of the delta queues and the new competitive ones.
Another example: my 30k average spike PvP escort can wreck a 150k DPS boat in core assault or a tank, but a sci captain will send me back to respawn so quickly that I'll be wondering 'what happened' for a week, without having to even breaking 20k DPS.
My point is.
DPS should not be a statistic by which to measure STO's current state in terms of balance and space combat mechanics/systems.
The statistics that should be used are the individual performance of powers/abilities/consoles/equipment in relation to each other so that no one thing is giving an unfair advantage in power to an individual player.
Balance requires rules, rules are irritating, but all good games have a good set of rules.
The "rules" (space combat system) of STO have been twisted and made over-complicated by years of neglect from developers (to their own detriment) and the loud majority that went up in arms against any thread crying for a balance nerf. that is the problem.
IMO, throwing away the trinity was the worst thing the Devs and the PvE community did.
25-35% better than the competition in a game that is based purely around DPS?
Biased player is (obviously) biased.
Tyken's probably needs a bit of tweaking, as it appears slightly broken.
No, current numbers are not problematic at all. Tacticals doing in best scenarios 500k+ (I believe the highest was just a bit below 600k), while scis and engs barely managing to break 300k was problematic - that was the case before S13. However, with all the damage boosting abilities tacticals have, they ought to have slightly better dmg output than other classes, so I don't consider 25% to be huge at all. (That comes from a player who plays sci toon as main).
U.S.S. Buteo Regalis - Brigid Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer build
R.R.W. Ri Maajon - Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird build
My Youtube channel containing STO videos.
Pretty much everything the tactical Captain has in buffs are damage buffs. If that doesn't yield in extra damage compared to Engineers and Science Captains, what would be the purpose of playing a Tactical Captain? Science Captains can nuke buffs, grant resistances and damage buffs to nearby allies, grant resistance penalties to the enemy, summon support ships. Engineers can heal and harden themself, buff power levels, resist power drains. If all the tactical captain has is deal more damage, science and engineering captains can't possibly deal as much damage, because they also get other stuff.
And I don't think that any parsers can actually track the DPS contribution of a Science Captain that inflicts resistance penalties or grants an AoE team buff.
Now if we are talking about the issue of some lower geared/knowledgeable players in content with a much higher geared/knowledgeable player than that is a fact of match-making being an issue not damage. If they had a damage cap based on the difficulty of the different ques, than the large spread of damage output possible between players across the game would be reduced to a more manageable spread that all in the content would need to contribute.
The only change I wouldn't mind seeing to tyken's rift would be making it have a reduced power drain on those affected, but that being under the effect of the rift would reduce the cap of your power sub-system an maybe even reducing the power transfer rate of those affected. Hell one idea I always liked was to completely take away the power drain of the tyken's rift, but make it a targetable anomaly that if you use power syphon on it would chain the syphon to a certain number of affected targets, but that the rift itself would only reduce the power transfer rate an caps of the sub-systems of the affected targets.
^^ A sensible post.
in other words, you can't have the most practical abilities do also the most amount of dmg, that would only shift the favour towards sci builds.
*I love long sentences
Won't someone think of the engineers? We're always slaving away while Mr. Pew Pew Wonderful or Sciencey McScience gets us in to trouble only to call down to us EVERY DAMN TIME saying, "Chief! We need warp speed this! Or phaser power that! Or deflector my targeting majinger the other thing!"
LOL I got a chuckle out of that...
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
In fairness, Engi's get what Scotty always wanted. Moar Powah.
Instead of using ISA to measure the effectiveness of a build, which is the equivalent of testing a brand new sniper rifle in a shooting range at point blank range, try testing it against a player.
I'm not saying go into Ker'rat, I'm saying pick someone in a fleet you know well, a skilled player, and see how your build holds up against them. You might find that DPS is useless everywhere except ISA and CCA.
Case in point, PvP builds have far lower DPS than a PvE build and yet, which build is more powerful in core assault?