test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

I don't understand the "let it rot" theory of design

mattingly1mattingly1 Member Posts: 172 Arc User
Power creep is unavoidable in a game like STO. New mechanics are introduced; the community gradually comes to establish knowledge of a meta; certain stats are just inherently imbalanced against others. Frankly, I'm fine with power creep overall - it means you're dealing with a product and a playerbase that has fully maturated.

What I am NOT okay with - and it is a behavior that Cryptic is wildly guilty of - is leaving older ships, weapons, etc. in a non-competitive state once the tide has rolled out. No, PvP isn't a big deal in STO, and yeah, the endgame is kind of a joke. But, IMO, that's all the more reason that it's completely unacceptable to leave dozens upon dozens of ships in a state of deficiency - you're asking people to essentially make their own content, and for a lot of us, that boils down to min-maxing builds and trying to throw big numbers. Broken or badly-designed starships don't fit into that equation.

So many of the ships - on the C-store, on the fleet vendor, or from lockboxes - are either outright garbage or a hair's breadth from being in that state. Worse, a large portion of these are still 'for sale' in one way or another. Cryptic is literally asking the same money for a Gegarin as they are a Europa - and people (many of them too new to understand the difference [especially since the game does such an outright horrid job explaining how nearly all its systems function]) throw hundreds or even thousands of dollars after vessels that are woefully out of date, with no hope of them ever being brought closer to par.

I just think it's silly that more of an effort isn't made to occasionally do a pass over on some of these older products in order to clean them up a bit, or to reconcile them with ships that would be released in the present day. Cryptic doesn't have to spend hundreds of hours re-texturing models, nor do they have to tackle the massive pile of antiquated boats all at once - just pick one or two dated ships a month, move a few consoles around, check the boffs, add or exchange a mechanic or two, and call it good.

Not only is this a low-cost means to regenerate interest in older ships (since, very obviously, the bulk of design time is spent on the models [if the changes done to the ships in the anniversary bundle are proof of anything, it's that stat alterations can apparently be made on the fly]), but it's also simply a good way to keep people playing (since the more ships were tinkered with, the fewer that people could just shrug and write off as 'useless trash'). Frankly, I don't see a downside here - there's financial motive to act on these derelicts, and Cryptic themselves has now shown that such changes can essentially be done while firing from the hip. It's time to stop letting so many of the spaceframes in STO rot in disuse.
«1

Comments

  • n0vastaronen0vastarone Member Posts: 264 Arc User
    its cryptic, judging by the fact there are still bugs that are years old in game, I honestly don't think their two man dev team gives a TRIBBLE, much less can do anything about it, not when they are putting all their effort into bringing us more lockbox and overpriced bundles

    NCXpfZw.jpg
    Join Date. Dec 2007
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 8,815 Arc User
    Cryptic doesn't have to spend hundreds of hours re-texturing models, nor do they have to tackle the massive pile of antiquated boats all at once - just pick one or two dated ships a month, move a few consoles around, check the boffs, add or exchange a mechanic or two, and call it good.

    Cryptic can't remove any existing feature from old ships because players will scream "fraud", "I paid good money for 5 engineering consoles", "My build counts on 3 tac seats and just ensign eng and sci", "rabble rabble rabble"

    About all that cryptic could do is change seats to universal, add or increase a specialization level (e.g. Lt C => Commander), add a console slot, etc. anything removed or changed will fire up the lynch mob.

    Power creeping would be OK, rebalancing ships where someone loses something would not.

    That said, I agree in general that power creeping some old ships wouldn't be a bad thing. Make a seat universal to fix excessively tac heavy seating, add a hangar or extra pet buffs to true carriers so they have a reason to exist, ...?
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 23
    STO is a game so easy that even a T5 ship, with MK12 gear, is able to smoke pretty much all of the content with ease.

    There is nothing T5 onward that isn't usable. It may not be meta, but not being meta =/- not being competitive. The meta is itself wholly irrelevant as an argument since devs do not design around the meta. Most MMO players are casuals who don't care about the meta, nor is the meta necessary to do well in the game.

    Likewise, you don't want to update older ships to be more inline with the meta because the meta is always designed around being as exploitative of the game's mechanics as possible, to get as high of DPS as possible. Trying to bring non meta ships to that level just increases the problem of power creep, which is the exact opposite of what you want to do.

    If anything, Cryptic would want to look at supremely meta ships/consoles and edit those to be more inline with the rest of the ships/consoles in the game. If you have a handful of things that are massively OP, you don't make everything as OP as them, you make them less OP.(not that they would do this due to how much forum rage there would be)

    It isn't an issue for Cryptic because it isn't an issue to most people who play the game.
  • mattingly1mattingly1 Member Posts: 172 Arc User
    > @somtaawkhar said:
    > STO is a game so easy that even a T5 ship, with MK12 gear, is able to smoke pretty much all of the content with ease.
    >
    > There is nothing T5 onward that isn't usable. It may not be meta, but not being meta =/- not being competitive. The meta is itself wholly irrelevant as an argument since devs do not design around the meta. Most MMO players are casuals who don't care about the meta, nor is the meta necessary to do well in the game.
    >
    > Likewise, you don't want to udpate older ships to be more inline with the meta because the meta is always designed around being as exploitative of the game's mechanics as possible, to get as high of DPS as possible. Trying to bring non meta ships to that level just increases the problem of power creep, which is massive in MMOs to begin with.
    >
    > If anything, Cryptic would want to look at supremely meta ships/consoles and edit those to be more inline with the rest of the ships/consoles in the game. If you have a handful of things that are massively OP, you don't make everything as OP as them, you make them less OP.(not that they would do this due to how much forum rage there would be)

    You're kind of arguing in circles here. Either the meta doesn't matter because the endgame is a joke, or you're concerned about ships becoming OP - it can't be both. If the endgame is a joke, 'OP' is meaningless. If it isn't a joke, meta does matter.
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 24
    mattingly1 wrote: »
    You're kind of arguing in circles here. Either the meta doesn't matter because the endgame is a joke, or you're concerned about ships becoming OP - it can't be both. If the endgame is a joke, 'OP' is meaningless. If it isn't a joke, meta does matter.
    It absolutely can be both.

    The meta doesn't matter from a developer design standpoint when making new ships. They don't sit there and go "yeah man, this ship needs to be on the same level of power as this meta ship", since being on meta level isn't necessary, as the game isn't designed to require players be on the meta to do even remotely well at it.

    At the same time, you do want to keep a lid on just how far power creep can go to ensure the game doesn't become even more easy then it is originally designed. That just allows for things like mass farming, and exploiting, and ruins the game for other people who go into TFOs, only to be basically unable to play them since someone is blasting everything before they can get a shot off.
  • feiqafeiqa Member Posts: 2,407 Arc User
    Just a counter thought. But why should you buy a new ship if your old one will be brought up to spec with whatever new idea is at hand?
    Also what if some players want an old ship to show "How it used to be done"?

    Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
    Network engineers are not ship designers.
    Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
  • kiralynkiralyn Member Posts: 1,419 Arc User
    It must be so stressful going through life thinking that anything that's not The Best is Utter Trash.


    (and remember - Space Barbie Is Endgame™. I'd much rather fly a Europa than a Gagarin.)
  • davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 8,815 Arc User
    edited February 24
    kiralyn wrote: »
    (and remember - Space Barbie Is Endgame™. I'd much rather fly a Europa than a Gagarin.)

    That's true for many of us :) . My captains fly ships and select gear based on their theme, not based on maximizing DPS. My Liberated Borg Romulan flies a Tal Shiar ship with plasma beams and Borg consoles regardless of DPS. The "assimilate a ship you blow up" console isn't meta, but it's Borg so into a slot it goes. Kinetic Cutting Beam and console? Borg, so they're equipped.

  • annemarie30annemarie30 Member Posts: 1,997 Arc User
    kiralyn wrote: »
    (and remember - Space Barbie Is Endgame™. I'd much rather fly a Europa than a Gagarin.)

    That's true for many of us :) . My captains fly ships and select gear based on their theme, not based on maximizing DPS. My Liberated Borg Romulan flies a Tal Shiar ship with plasma beams and Borg consoles regardless of DPS. The "assimilate a ship you blow up" console isn't meta, but it's Borg so into a slot it goes. Kinetic Cutting Beam and console? Borg, so they're equipped.

    it may not be meta but assimilating the Voth city ship is freaking hilarious
    giphy.gif
    We Want Vic Fontaine
  • gaevsmangaevsman Member Posts: 2,922 Arc User
    Odd.. i remember that games are for having fun... experimenting with builds, advancing the stories.. not for meta or DPS or any other thing.. or also collecting ships because you like them.. ohh, well.. i must be weird then.. :lol:
    The forces of darkness are upon us!
  • annemarie30annemarie30 Member Posts: 1,997 Arc User
    yep. and if you have reached the "meta" and vaporize elite mode Tac cube just by farting in thier general direction, it's time to dust off those old T 2,3,4 ships and run it again. there USE to be a group of players who were running around in the T2 Connies. it was fun to watch these really good players running through content they were never meant for
    giphy.gif
    We Want Vic Fontaine
  • reyan01reyan01 Member Posts: 14,378 Arc User
    edited February 24
    kiralyn wrote: »
    It must be so stressful going through life thinking that anything that's not The Best is Utter Trash.


    (and remember - Space Barbie Is Endgame™. I'd much rather fly a Europa than a Gagarin.)

    This.

    Hence why I fly an outdated T5 ship (well, T5U-X at this point) with a terrible quality, canon inaccurate, model dating back to the game's beta (and no real indication that a T6 version will be forthcoming any time soon).
    However, flaws notwithstanding, said ship has been my favourite since the moment it first graced our TV screens and despite the fact its still T5, is lacking quality and there has been a consistent lack of interest in it from ship design Devs (who seem more inclined to indulge in making what they want rather than what players ask for) the only thing that would take me away from this ship would be a quality improved version of the same ship.



  • mirrorchaosmirrorchaos Member Posts: 9,817 Arc User
    The moment these consoles, ship classes and object abilities were messed around with or added in the more it was going to be turned around until you get builds that are so far beyond intended design it may as well be a full exploit (in a sense) and worse, the developers don't care to address it by putting hard limits in place on the potential each object can achieve. Set pieces should only work to benefit that set and not create unintended benefits with other set pieces not related to it, in fact there should be no benefit at all.

    Further still i think you should only be allowed to use one specific set on your ship so you can't take pieces from here and there and stick them together. So if you got 3/4 of an aegis set and 1/2 of a borg set, the aegis set works while the borg set doesn't work until the aegis set is removed or is reduced to 1/4 so the borg set automatically takes over. however to get the most from that set you need the full set and stick with it or change it to another set after you leave the mission or TFO. The KCB won't activate if you have it slotted and the borg set isn't working, so you are just wasting a weapons slot.

    I also think that certain types of builds should not be allowed to happen, for example cross cannon-omni beam builds, it is either full cannon-turret or full beam-wide beam-omni beam builds, but torpedoes will be allowed on either.

    This should prevent insane builds from happening and limit the abuse as there is a hard limit to the potential an object can achieve. This will allow other users to get in on the action instead of having one user running around with a 140k build doing TFO's in 45 seconds, which frankly is not what this game is about. It is there to have some fun and to enjoy it and where is the enjoyment in destroying everything in less than half a second? it wasn't designed to be like that, you have powers there to help heal your ship, control your enemies and they aren't being used and neither will you ever sense the threat of being destroyed.
    T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW.
    Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
  • annemarie30annemarie30 Member Posts: 1,997 Arc User
    reyan01 wrote: »
    kiralyn wrote: »
    It must be so stressful going through life thinking that anything that's not The Best is Utter Trash.


    (and remember - Space Barbie Is Endgame™. I'd much rather fly a Europa than a Gagarin.)

    This.

    Hence why I fly an outdated T5 ship (well, T5U-X at this point) with a terrible quality, canon inaccurate, model dating back to the game's beta (and no real indication that a T6 version will be forthcoming any time soon).
    However, flaws notwithstanding, said ship has been my favourite since the moment it first graced our TV screens and despite the fact its still T5, is lacking quality and there has been a consistent lack of interest in it from ship design Devs (who seem more inclined to indulge in making what they want rather than what players ask for) the only thing that would take me away from this ship would be a quality improved version of the same ship.

    Great-Carnac-Hero-08-17-650x468.jpg

    The Great Karnak says, "Nova"
    giphy.gif
    We Want Vic Fontaine
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 4,529 Arc User
    edited February 24
    STO is a game so easy that even a T5 ship, with MK12 gear, is able to smoke pretty much all of the content with ease.

    That's your opinion, and that's fine. But your experience is not representative of everyone else's, and you can't claim how easy or difficult the game is for other people with X gear.

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 24
    That's your opinion, and that's fine. But your experience is not representative of everyone else's, and you can't claim how easy or difficult the game is for other people with X gear.
    Just because you disagree with someone doesn't make it an opinion.

    You can do it, that is fact. That people aren't able to is due to their lack of building the ship well, not an inability to actually do so in the game. And that is a different matter in its entirety, as people also have the same issue in T6 ships.

    Your ability to make rational arguments just keeps slipping.
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 4,529 Arc User
    That's your opinion, and that's fine. But your experience is not representative of everyone else's, and you can't claim how easy or difficult the game is for other people with X gear.
    Just because you disagree with someone doesn't make it an opinion.

    You can do it, that is fact. That people aren't able to is due to their lack of building the ship well, not an inability to actually do so in the game. And that is a different matter in its entirety, as people also have the same issue in T6 ships.

    Your ability to make rational arguments just keeps slipping.

    Sorry, but you're still trying to pass off your opinion as a fact. Saying STO is "easy" with (whatever) ship or gear is an opinion. Easy is a completely subjective word, and that experience will vary depending on who is playing.

    I happen to agree with the opinion that STO is an easy game, but that's still just an opinion. Yours and my subjective experience doesn't prove anything to someone else who may be having a harder time for various reasons.

    Again, stop claiming your opinion is a fact.

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 4,529 Arc User
    Again, stop claiming your opinion is a fact.
    I'm not.

    Great, glad we're on the same page now.

    So just to recap: OP feels like certain ships have become outdated and are no longer viable based on their personal experience in the game. It's a opinion, and is neither right or wrong. You disagree, and think the ships in question are still viable based on your personal experience in the game. Both opinions are valid, and neither is more right than the other.

    So here is mine: this is nothing new to MMOs or exclusive to STO. Power creep always catches up with older gear/items, and things that were once uber eventually feel less and less so. So when you are using those older items in newer content (which may involve new types of NPCs with new powers that didn't exist before, OR a change in design where you are facing unlimited swarms of enemies until a timer runs out which didn't exist in older content) you may find yourself having a harder time. IMO :)

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 9,290 Arc User
    Will you take my extremely casual observation as fact? Because I can fly through pretty much everything this game has to offer in my T5U Risian cruiser, RXS Latinum Princess. (Perhaps you've seen me about?)
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 24
    OP feels like certain ships have become outdated and are no longer viable
    What the OP feels about ships being outdated, and no longer viable, is irrelevant to the point that they are not. As not only I, but other people on this thread, have pointed out.

    You talk about wanting to keep it civil in other threads, but go out of your way to target me specifically for stating something true, that other people have likewise stated.
    you may find yourself having a harder time.
    Having a harder time in older content doesn't make the ships/items you are using not viable, or competitive. It just makes them not as good, which is a different matter entirely. Now you're just trying to move goalposts.
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 4,529 Arc User
    OP feels like certain ships have become outdated and are no longer viable
    What the OP feels about ships being outdated, and no longer viable, is irrelevant to the point that they are not. As not only I, but other people on this thread, have pointed out.

    You talk about wanting to keep it civil in other threads, but go out of your way to target me specifically for stating something true, that other people have likewise stated.

    Actually, yours was simply the first post in the thread to disagree with the premise of the OP: that older ships need updating. And your basis for disagreeing was your personal experience that the game was "easy". That's a valid opinion, and one I share. But it's still just an opinion, and doesn't mean the OP is wrong.

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 24
    Actually, yours was simply the first post in the thread to disagree with the premise of the OP: that older ships need updating. And your basis for disagreeing was your personal experience that the game was "easy". That's a valid opinion, and one I share. But it's still just an opinion, and doesn't mean the OP is wrong.
    Wrong again. I used no personal experience in my post. I don't fly tier 5s. Haven't for years.

    You really have no idea what you are talking about do you?
  • discojerdiscojer Member Posts: 513 Arc User
    If you think the game is easy, consider starting a new account and starting completely from scratch.
  • westmetalswestmetals Member Posts: 5,269 Arc User
    Even just adding passive benefits to ship consoles would be a nice improvment.

    Let's take for example the Intrepid's Ablative Generator console. It has a very nice clicky effect which is extremely applicable to the most popular type of build done on this ship (science/torpedo builds)... yet because of its total lack of a passive, is almost never actually used in such builds. Adding, say, 40-50 points of EPG or Control skill, or a mixture of both, or an Exotic Damage or a Projectile Damage booster, would at least make it palatable...

    Similar could be done to... just about every ship console I can think of.
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 4,529 Arc User
    Actually, yours was simply the first post in the thread to disagree with the premise of the OP: that older ships need updating. And your basis for disagreeing was your personal experience that the game was "easy". That's a valid opinion, and one I share. But it's still just an opinion, and doesn't mean the OP is wrong.
    Wrong again. I used no personal experience in my post.

    I'm referring to your statement that the game is "easy". That is your subjective experience and not representative of everyone, so you can't use that as any kind of basis for an argument that someone is wrong.

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • somtaawkharsomtaawkhar Member Posts: 9,034 Arc User
    edited February 24
    I'm referring to your statement that the game is "easy". That is your subjective experience and not representative of everyone, so you can't use that as any kind of basis for an argument that someone is wrong.
    That isn't my subjective opinion.

    As shown by the fact that when people claim the game is hard its shown to be because they didn't put effort into making an even halfway decent build, and not because the game is actually hard by design.

    Your again confusing individual's problems as problems with the game, instead of those people.
  • thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 4,529 Arc User
    > @somtaawkhar said:
    > That isn't my subjective opinion.
    >


    Yep, it is. Your opinion of what is a "decent build" is also completey subjective. And that's fine. It just isn't ever going to prove anything.

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • mattingly1mattingly1 Member Posts: 172 Arc User
    Actually, yours was simply the first post in the thread to disagree with the premise of the OP: that older ships need updating. And your basis for disagreeing was your personal experience that the game was "easy". That's a valid opinion, and one I share. But it's still just an opinion, and doesn't mean the OP is wrong.
    Wrong again. I used no personal experience in my post. I don't fly tier 5s. Haven't for years.

    You really have no idea what you are talking about do you?

    There's a kind of desperation in your post patterns that's really... telling. I've noticed that, when compared to the reddit, there are an inordinate number of people present on these forums that are attempting to "win" threads, and you're probably the chief culprit. You need to learn to stop trying to dominate people, and start actually communicating.

This discussion has been closed.