test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
Energy Weapon and Torpedo Slots?
ddwarhorse
Member Posts: 14 Arc User
I think part of the problem of power creep in the game is largely to do with the lack of restrictions on Energy Weapons. It is way to easy to slot 8 beam arrays on a cruiser and spam BFAW at the moment and then I noticed that EvE Online has a very interesting workaround on this problem. EvE has both turret and launcher slots so that you can only equip specific weapons in those slots.
So why can't STO be like that, with some slots being energy weapons and other slots being for torpedoes/mines/missiles etc. This would force ships to diversify their weapon load-outs, lower the DPS problem and make ships more respective of canon (Federation vessels usually carry energy weapons and torpedoes?)
Giving players too much freedom with how they slot weapons is simply bad for the game.
So why can't STO be like that, with some slots being energy weapons and other slots being for torpedoes/mines/missiles etc. This would force ships to diversify their weapon load-outs, lower the DPS problem and make ships more respective of canon (Federation vessels usually carry energy weapons and torpedoes?)
Giving players too much freedom with how they slot weapons is simply bad for the game.
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yes, basically something like that but for all ships, so that ships need to have at least one torpedo both fore and aft.
Essentially yes, to prevent people from running 8 beams on a cruiser.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
My league already included respective build proposals as nobody seems to know for certain if we even talk about a DPS decrease or rather increase here when going for this option:
https://www.sto-league.com/vaadwaur-miracle-worker-juggernaut/
Be careful what you wish for OP, Cryptic attracts mixed weapon type builds more and more as of late. They do not do so to “lower any DPS problem”s you may encounter but rather hand out yet more power to the player.
They even hand it out for free with the endeavors currently where you can in fact see that a player with an energy + projectile build will get more for his effort than one who limits himself to either of which. My cannon + projectile + exotic build looks forward to it by the way.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Or you could just stop breaking the game?
Wait a second, Sloppygimpoo is that you?!?
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
ALL that being said, my bigger beef is why doesn't cryptic just FIX torpedoes? In EVERY series, and movies, and books, and cartoons, and EVERYTHING....torpedoes did NOTHING to shields, but one or two directly to hull was all it took to blow up ANYTHING. That would be a better fix I would think. Give torpedoes the shield penalty of....100% (except for specialty torps like transphesic where you sacrifice a LOT of damage but get a nice shield bleedthrough) and have torpedoes actually do a lot more damage to hull. Baseline for a photon should be like 50k hull, or something. Also, why not introduce the varying SIZE of torpedoes. TNG always had them firing "type 1" or "type 5" or whatever. Impression was that the bigger ones did more damage, but went slower or took longer to load or something. IDK. My 2 zen
I always run at least one torpedo fore in all my builds, then build the rest around that. Sometimes I put mines aft, or another torpedo. In the case of the Y'tijara, I have a torpedo and a mine aft and the rest turrets on one of my captains.
But whatever. I just don't like being forced to put weapons in certain slots, except the experimental weapon, but that's just one slot on Raiders/Escorts/Destroyers.
I would prefere a game mechanic that incite more to mix and match both weapons types.
The previous post is a great idea because it's canon. Kinetic torpedos are always used for destroy enemies ships when shields collaps.
Currently on the game, shields drop too fast, compared to the hull in general, and projectiles are not useful in this situation.
In fact lot of frustration we encounter in the game are from balancing problems.
So no, it's a bad idea.
Absolutely agree here. Torps shouldn't share the same slots as Energy Weapons. They should be 'Heavy Weapon' slots, because that's what they are. Had Cryptic opted to 'stick to canon' on hard-points and arcs, you'd see alot more variety too.
Except that torpedo boats are another made up way to play this game. Similar to the OP having issues with beam FAW. Currently we have to go all beam or torpedo boat or sci/space magic to chase DPS. As the game is, you can do whatever you want and do a build however you want. Torpedo boats are a very very very tiny fraction of all the builds. In GENERAL, the change would be good. Having projectiles and shields work the way they have in every canon mention of Star Trek would help in more ways than one. Besides being canon, it would encourage team play for the DPS chasers. So if you MUST play a torpedo boat, you would have to rely on a team member to drain shields (thus encouraging drain builds and/or non projectile builds, and they would need you to do hull damage (as again, in canon beams can do damage to hull, but very slowly compared to projectiles). But for the VAST majority of players that run both projectiles and energy builds, it would just be a tweak to how we play the game.
The canon argument is silly, especially since no one is stopping you from giving your own ships a canon build.
Don't tell other players that their fun is wrong, as long as they aren't harassing others or intentionally failing a TFO.
That makes no logical sense.
Why do people want more rules when all they really have to do is use thier own self control and build what they like?
Why does there have to be a rule or restriction?
Why do people try to repress themselves, even in pretendy-happy-fun-time?
This whole controlling bent some humans have is terrifying, TBH.
Never said your way of play, or ANY way was wrong or that any other way was "right"?
Just saying that as a basic forum search would show, a lot of players would like torpedoes to be more authentic. Also my reference initially WAS my personal preference to play canon loadouts, but in my reply to you my reference to canon was in what torpedoes vs energy weapons do to shields and hull. In the Star Trek universe, a torpedo boat shouldn't ever exist, couldn't ever exist, and never did exist. Because they can't. That was kinda my point. I love that the game now allows you to do that if that's your thing, my post was stating that STAR TREK Online should move slightly back into the realm of STAR TREK. Doesn't matter what series or season or movie, the projectile weapons in THIS game have nothing to do with the projectiles in Star Trek.
So, correcting an error would add more difficulty to the game, and generally the majority of players wouldn't simply tweak their builds was my argument. Even Torpedo Boats would find a way to manage. But in the universe this game is based, torpedo boats CAN'T exist because torpedoes take a finite amount of space on a ship (except for plasma, but debates still rage if those involve a casing of some sort or not). So I'm not saying create a ship commodity that has to be reload or anything, but going into a mission, your ship should have X number of projectiles. That's why in the Star Trek universe, there were never a whole lot of raiders and small ships (yes there were some, but not in massive quantities) and ZERO torpedo boats, because escorts were inherently short range due to lack of stores and weapons space. That was the limiting factor to projectiles in Star Trek, and why most ships had 1 single torpedo launcher fore, and 1 aft. A few ships had perhaps 2 fore launchers.
But again, that's kind of the point to fixing projectiles. You don't NEED 8 launchers with infinite supplies. Even MASSIVE ships took 1 or 2 or a torpedo spread and were vaporized.
And there is basis for it, weapons are constantly buffed and boffed by the devs. Reload times change, damage procs are added and removed, they did the damage vs range modifier and it didn't break the game. They have actually tried to mostly make the game match the universe it comes from, hence my suggestion to do SOMETHING with projectiles.
The Akira class would like to have a word with you.
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Akira_class
I dont have a single character that doesnt use at least 1 torpedo.
Also, this change would ruin scitorp builds which typically slot 2-3 torpedoes on forward arcs and forgo energy weapons almost entirely.
No thank you. Dont fix what isnt broken.
Why would a player want to be restricted? Isn't it better to play a game that lets you play any way you want, rather than restricting you?
Let people who want to fly a mono-weapon boat do so. Same for mixed, or heck rainbow. No matter how daft someone's playstyle might seem to others it isn't cool to take it away from them. Let people have fun. Restrictions should be removed not increased.
And just why does the game have to be balanced any way? What is so wrong with allowing people to build their ships in ways to create more or less challenge? Maybe I want to fly an all turret ship once in a while (I don't but I don't see why I shouldn't be able to if I experience a bout of space madness)
I always see people harping on about balance. But what they really mean is, they want the deck re-shuffled to put their playstyle at the top. Which is fair enough, nothing wrong with wanting that, but let's not call it balance.
To truly balance a game means to make all playstyles the same, which i dont think is conducive to fun. Is that really what most people want? To have everything be the same, but with maybe a different visual effect?
I think the bigger issue is that maintaining power levels has been relegated to something minor with the amount ways for buffing your power levels., but if we saw a change to the power system to make maintaining an balancing your power levels an needs on your ship it might lead to it being more appealing to slot something other than energy weapons. Though also giving more importance to the different power systems to make specializing into buffing specific ones might be a good change as well, even something like higher shield power gives your shields more resistance or higher hp might be interesting than merely higher regen.
I would not say that it should be zero damage as even in the shows a hit to the shields by a torpedo would rock the ship an do some damage, just not nearly as much, but as the shields go down the damage would improve. I would just wish it was more a case of the remaining shield hp would impact the damage reduction on torpedo impacts, though i would much rather see it be that higher shield power you have on your ship impacted how much of a penalty your shields had on torpedo damage would make running high shield power actually worthwhile.
I think one of the reasons for outcries about 'balance' is MOBAs, Fornite, and other similar games.
Seen multiple references of late on the idea that 'every' game should be built around the idea of picking pre-exsting, pre-built game pieces to use over creating them.
Some people like to play chess, others like to play table-top RPGs, some love limits, others like to be creative.
It bogges my mind that so many people want to be told what to do and how to do it, rather than experiment and create, but to each thier own...
Also I don't get the appeal of Fortnite and other so called "Battle Royale" games. Its glorified Free for All with a shrinking map. That's all it is.
If you want more viable build options that include a 6 energy weapons +2 torpedoes, identify how new abilities (traits, consoles, items and what not) or minor tweaks can achieve this without wrecking existing build strategies.
How many Star Trek MOBAs do you know, though? I can understand that some people would like STO to be one, but they'll have to accept compromises so that Star Trek Online also works for all the people that play the game for what it is.
Most canon ships have way more weapon hardpoints then 8.
That said one of the charms of STO for me is that you aren't restricted to "canon builds" and can build your ship what ever way you want, personally I like building my ships around a specific theme, they're rarely meta but they're good enough.
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
The best way to make people do something is to incentivise it, not radically change the foundation of the game. This is a great idea, if you want to cause the next Delta Rising. Otherwise, you could do the smart thing, and give people bonuses for intentionally sacrificing the optimal gameplay strategies you're so fond of hating.
I'm all for nerfs and rebalances and meta shifts, but when it's this closely entwined with the very basis of combat, you can't just go haphazardly slapping pointless restrictions because YOU think it's better.
there are exceptions of course. Look at the Defiant. non known rear hardpoints at all? And Galaxy and MOST TNG era ships had 1 massive beam array on top and one below the saucer. Plus 1 torpedo tube forward and 1 aft. And I believe 1 small beam array on the outside of the nacelle pylons?
Ent A and Excelsior obviously had two very obvious forward torpedo tubes, but take the Ent A, she had 3 obvious DBB banks on the top of the saucer, and 3 below. Nothing on the neck or hull for beams.
The Akira 100% supports my comment that there were escorts (short ranged) that had multiple torpedo launchers. But again the average among 99% of Star Trek canon ships, ships had 2-3 launchers total. And in every case where we had interaction with the crew (i.e. dialogue) or a technical manual, there is always reference to a set number of torpedoes in inventory. We often saw the actual torpedoes on the Defiant in DS9, and several times saw the black tube torpedoes in TNG. Many cases of "we are out of torpedoes, sir" or needing to resupply. Etc.
Nebula canon, same as Galaxy since it was hobjobbed from the Ent D model. New orleans...in the few screen shots and the model we saw makes it appear to have more than normal torpedo launchers, but again same beam arrays as the Ent D. Voyager had 2 forward tubes, 1 aft, and again the normal beam array on top of the saucer, and below. and two smaller ones on top of the aft hull, one below.
The Galaxy Class has plenty of beam arrays even visible on the model, though you rarely see them firing.
"Broadsiding" doesn't really seem a thing however.
I think a better "simulation" of Star Trek ships might have not given us multiple weapon slots, but more something like a "weapon system" that covers all the different weapon emitters the ship has. So if you slot a Phaser Weapon System, all your energy emitters fire phasers. If you slot a Tetryon Weapon System, all your energy emitters fire Tetryons.
There might be something like a primary and secondary weapon system for both energy and kinetics to add some variety. A Defiant might have Pulse Phasers as Primary Energy Weapon and Phaser Beams as Secondary Energy Weapon, for example, while a Galaxy Class or Intrepid Class would normally use Phaser Beams for both. A Sovereign might use Phaser Beams as primary and secondary energy weapon, quantum torpedoes as primary kinetic and photon torpedoes as secondary kinetic weapon.
But that's not what we have, so more theorycrafting for alternate Star Trek Games that could do it that way.