test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

Vanity slots for weapons

imelchori42imelchori42 Member Posts: 80 Arc User
im surprised this isnt available yet, but it would be really cool if you could put weapons like beam arrays, torpedos, and cannons into a vanity slot on your ship similar to the shields and it overrides the color and sound effect of your weapons with the vanity gear.

it would be awesome if we didnt have to compromise between style and putting a proper build together.

one of my characters is a 23rd century starfleet, and i used my free t5 token for the ranger to unlock the skin for the paladin and give him a TOS style ship. now it would be cool if i could equip 23rd century twin phaser beam arrays and photon torpedos on the ship for the sound effect and visuals without sacrificing style for effectiveness of my phaser build.

there is still a bit of room on the visuals page of the ship for the fore weapons and aft weapons.
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
«1

Comments

  • Options
    athan#5519 athan Member Posts: 78 Arc User
    ^ I second this.
  • Options
    thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 5,165 Arc User
    I think the problem with this would be it defeats the purpose of all the of top tier version of all of the various different weapon types.

    For example, let's say you already have a top tier phaser(standard orange version) but wanted a TOS look. You could just buy a cheap low level TOS phaser off the exchange, place it in your vanity slot, then have the TOS visuals.

    But they created an entire fleet holding just to sell top tier TOS weapons. So by letting people simply get the TOS look using a visual slot, it would kind of invalidate the fleet holding they created.

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • Options
    imelchori42imelchori42 Member Posts: 80 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    I think the problem with this would be it defeats the purpose of all the of top tier version of all of the various different weapon types.

    For example, let's say you already have a top tier phaser(standard orange version) but wanted a TOS look. You could just buy a cheap low level TOS phaser off the exchange, place it in your vanity slot, then have the TOS visuals.

    But they created an entire fleet holding just to sell top tier TOS weapons. So by letting people simply get the TOS look using a visual slot, it would kind of invalidate the fleet holding they created.

    yes... thats the whole point of vanity gear. that you can chose the looks while keeping the stats of the high end item.

    i think we have very different definitions of the word "problem".

    as far as the fleet holding goes. do those weapons have anything special about them? like do they have unique procs or something else about them thats different from other phaser weapons?

    because for most weapons, including lockbox stuff and high end gear, they dont just change the looks.

    there are different variations of (romulan) plasma beam arrays for example and they dont just change the visuals of the weapon, but have different procs.

    if youre using a specific type of weapon, including those fleet weapons you mentioned, then you would chose them for their perfomance anyway.

    but in a proper build youre mixing a lot of visually different weapons of the same type together. if youre going for an actual phaser build, youd probably not sacrifice, say a terran task force phaser for a regular 23rd century phaser just so the looks stay consistent with the 23rd century theme youre going for.

    so it would be really nice if you could change the visuals and sound effects of that item.
  • Options
    lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,825 Arc User
    The Devs have said this was vetoed long ago, I think because of CBS? I don't remember exactly but they Devs have said no already
  • Options
    thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 5,165 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    i think we have very different definitions of the word "problem".

    Yeah, I'm not going to argue semantics with you. Just replace the word "problem" with "issue" or even "thing" and my point remains exactly the same.
    as far as the fleet holding goes. do those weapons have anything special about them? like do they have unique procs or something else about them thats different from other phaser weapons?

    Absolutely, but there is the "thing" (see the word I used there?): for every 1 person that seriously cares about min/maxing and exact builds, 99 others don't. So 99/100 people are just playing with that they think looks the coolest and are just satisfied having a max level weapon/etc of their preferred visual type.

    So for that vast majority of people, they would have no reason to spend the time/resources getting the fleet version of TOS weapons when they could just get the TOS visuals from an el cheapo TOS phaser they got off the exchange and still have the effects of the max level weapon they already have equipped on their ship.

    Why does that matter? Well:

    A: it removes a dil sink for all of those people (which is the last thing the game needs), and

    B: it invalidates all of the dev resources that went into creating the fleet holding to sell those top tier TOS weps (except for that tiny tiny fraction that care enough about min/maxing and exact builds to still use it).

    Now having said all of that, let me say this:

    I would be happy to have everything I want in game for free and as easy to get as possible. That's cool with me.

    But due to the reasons explained above, I also understand why that's not going to happen.


    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • Options
    garaffegaraffe Member Posts: 1,353 Arc User
    > @thegrandnagus1 said:
    > Yeah, I'm not going to argue semantics with you. Just replace the word "problem" with "issue" or even "thing" and my point remains exactly the same.
    >
    >
    > Absolutely, but there is the "thing" (see the word I used there?): for every one person that seriously cares about min/maxing and exact builds, 99 others don't. 99/100 people are just playing with that they think looks the coolest and are just satisfied having a max level weapon/etc.
    >
    > So for that vast majority of people, they would have no reason to spend the time/resources getting the fleet version of TOS weapons when they could just get the TOS visuals from an el cheapo TOS phaser they got off the exchange.
    >
    > Why does that matter? Well:
    >
    > A: it removes a dil sink for all of those people (which is the last thing the game needs), and
    >
    > B: it invalidates all of the dev resources that went into creating the fleet holding to sell those top tier TOS weps (except for that tiny tiny fraction that care enough about min/maxing and exact builds to still use it).
    >
    > Now having said all of that, let me say this:
    >
    > I would be happy to have everything I want in game for free and as easy to get as possible. That's cool with me.
    >
    > But due to the reasons explained above, I also understand why that's not going to happen.

    You are basing your entire arguement on one visual type when there are many many other desirable weapon visuals. For me, I would just like all my beams to look the same, even if I am using multiple versions of the same energy type. For example, I want all of my plasma beams to look like the Romulan beams instead of the plasma rainbow I have now.
  • Options
    thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 5,165 Arc User
    > @garaffe said: You are basing your entire arguement on one visual type



    No, I am simply using the same example the OP mentioned.

    And just to repeat what I said earlier, I would be fine with everything being free and easy to get.

    I just understand why the devs won't do it.

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • Options
    rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 58,040 Community Moderator
    lianthelia wrote: »
    The Devs have said this was vetoed long ago, I think because of CBS? I don't remember exactly but they Devs have said no already

    Yes. It was veto'd by CBS. Apparently early in STO's life or development they even had a system to RGB your beams, but CBS said no. And what CBS says is law until CBS says otherwise as they are the IP holders giving Cryptic the license. For many years the standing orders regarding an endgame Connie was a very firm No. That changed with the Kelvin Connie, which was the first endgame Connie in the game.

    So being able to change the appearance of your weapons is still under veto by the Gods of Star Trek.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • Options
    imelchori42imelchori42 Member Posts: 80 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    > @garaffe said: You are basing your entire arguement on one visual type



    No, I am simply using the same example the OP mentioned.

    And just to repeat what I said earlier, I would be fine with everything being free and easy to get.

    I just understand why the devs won't do it.

    well my argument is, that if the phasers from the fleet holding have unique stats, then the stats is the reason people would chose them.

    you already mentioned how there are other sources for the 23rd century phasers, so everyone can have them on their ship anyway. the purpose of these fleet weapons isnt just the visual.

    like the other guy said, i would like my beam weapons to look the same.
  • Options
    imelchori42imelchori42 Member Posts: 80 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    rattler2 wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    The Devs have said this was vetoed long ago, I think because of CBS? I don't remember exactly but they Devs have said no already

    Yes. It was veto'd by CBS. Apparently early in STO's life or development they even had a system to RGB your beams, but CBS said no. And what CBS says is law until CBS says otherwise as they are the IP holders giving Cryptic the license. For many years the standing orders regarding an endgame Connie was a very firm No. That changed with the Kelvin Connie, which was the first endgame Connie in the game.

    So being able to change the appearance of your weapons is still under veto by the Gods of Star Trek.

    did they give any reasons why, or did they just want to be dicks about it?

    because i cant for the life of me see why CBS would care if people customized their star trek ships to a theme in STO.
  • Options
    jennycolvinjennycolvin Member Posts: 1,100 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    The Devs have said this was vetoed long ago, I think because of CBS? I don't remember exactly but they Devs have said no already

    Yes. It was veto'd by CBS. Apparently early in STO's life or development they even had a system to RGB your beams, but CBS said no. And what CBS says is law until CBS says otherwise as they are the IP holders giving Cryptic the license. For many years the standing orders regarding an endgame Connie was a very firm No. That changed with the Kelvin Connie, which was the first endgame Connie in the game.

    So being able to change the appearance of your weapons is still under veto by the Gods of Star Trek.

    did they give any reasons why, or did they just want to be dicks about it?

    because i cant for the life of me see why CBS would care if people customized their star trek ships to a theme in STO.

    Here's the thing: they *said* that CBS vetoed... *we* have no way of knowing if it's even remotely true, so we're left believing whatever they want to say on the matter.
    kv1Ohsx.png
    Not agreeing with someone doesn't give you the right to be an TRIBBLE.

    Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
    - quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
    - quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
    - quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;

    Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
    Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.
  • Options
    leemwatsonleemwatson Member Posts: 5,348 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    The Devs have said this was vetoed long ago, I think because of CBS? I don't remember exactly but they Devs have said no already

    Yes. It was veto'd by CBS. Apparently early in STO's life or development they even had a system to RGB your beams, but CBS said no. And what CBS says is law until CBS says otherwise as they are the IP holders giving Cryptic the license. For many years the standing orders regarding an endgame Connie was a very firm No. That changed with the Kelvin Connie, which was the first endgame Connie in the game.

    So being able to change the appearance of your weapons is still under veto by the Gods of Star Trek.

    while i understand the context, the actual argument is really no longer valid since many weapons of combined stats or proc or whatever, have altered colors/visuals now. honestly, id rather enjoy a visual to make all weapons look the same, all same color, or all same style as well.

    i mean, i have all one type of energy on several ships, but not all the same color or firing type. its quite annoying anymore.
    id also enjoy my away team looking like a "team" in certain apsects and have the same look, but other toons i dont need that on.

    It's absolutely still relevant, simply because the proc's on a weapon may actually be altering what we see. That's the scientific perspective.
    "You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
  • Options
    rattler2rattler2 Member Posts: 58,040 Community Moderator
    Here's the thing: they *said* that CBS vetoed... *we* have no way of knowing if it's even remotely true, so we're left believing whatever they want to say on the matter.

    If the IP Holder who issues the license says "Jump", Cryptic's answer is literally "how high?"
    When it comes to anything Star Trek, CBS is the ultimate authority. Cryptic cannot go against CBS is they decide something is not allowed in an officially licensed game.
    db80k0m-89201ed8-eadb-45d3-830f-bb2f0d4c0fe7.png?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2ExOGQ4ZWM2LTUyZjQtNDdiMS05YTI1LTVlYmZkYmJkOGM3N1wvZGI4MGswbS04OTIwMWVkOC1lYWRiLTQ1ZDMtODMwZi1iYjJmMGQ0YzBmZTcucG5nIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.8G-Pg35Qi8qxiKLjAofaKRH6fmNH3qAAEI628gW0eXc
    I can't take it anymore! Could everyone just chill out for two seconds before something CRAZY happens again?!
    The nut who actually ground out many packs. The resident forum voice of reason (I HAZ FORUM REP! YAY!)
  • Options
    jennycolvinjennycolvin Member Posts: 1,100 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Here's the thing: they *said* that CBS vetoed... *we* have no way of knowing if it's even remotely true, so we're left believing whatever they want to say on the matter.

    If the IP Holder who issues the license says "Jump", Cryptic's answer is literally "how high?"
    When it comes to anything Star Trek, CBS is the ultimate authority. Cryptic cannot go against CBS is they decide something is not allowed in an officially licensed game.

    Nowhere in my post I have inferred differently. Just as nowhere, in your post, you have negated what I said in mine in any way, shape or form.
    and therein lies the rub...

    we can have visual vomit all over the place, but cant have colors/details match for weapon firing or actual weapons. we can have vanity shields but cant have other stuff.

    rather odd position...lol

    Not only that, but now we also have cross-faction flying. Still, the *colors* of our weapons are somehow a hard "no"? Sure thing.
    kv1Ohsx.png
    Not agreeing with someone doesn't give you the right to be an TRIBBLE.

    Ci sono tre tipi di giocatori:
    - quelli a cui non va mai bene niente... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
    - quelli che sono talmente imbesuiti da credere a qualunque cosa i dev dicano, perfino che la luna è fatta di formaggio... e vanno sul forum a trollare;
    - quelli che credono a quello a cui è giusto credere, sono d'accordo con quello con cui è giusto essere d'accordo e sono critici con quello che non va;

    Ai giocatori dei primi due tipi, gratis in omaggio un bello specchio lucente su cui arrampicarsi. E una mazzata in testa per la loro poca intelligenza e compassione verso gli altri giocatori che non la pensano come loro.
    Agli appartenenti al terzo tipo, invece, dico grazie. Anche se non sempre si riesce a mantenere la calma, siete quelli per cui vale la pena incazzarsi.
  • Options
    lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,825 Arc User
    rattler2 wrote: »
    Here's the thing: they *said* that CBS vetoed... *we* have no way of knowing if it's even remotely true, so we're left believing whatever they want to say on the matter.

    If the IP Holder who issues the license says "Jump", Cryptic's answer is literally "how high?"
    When it comes to anything Star Trek, CBS is the ultimate authority. Cryptic cannot go against CBS is they decide something is not allowed in an officially licensed game.

    and therein lies the rub...

    we can have visual vomit all over the place, but cant have colors/details match for weapon firing or actual weapons. we can have vanity shields but cant have other stuff.

    rather odd position...lol

    Vanity shields don't affect combat at all, pvp may be virtually dead but still has some people. Back when this rule was made the KDF revolved around PvP
  • Options
    garaffegaraffe Member Posts: 1,353 Arc User
    There is no viable in-game reason to not have an energy weapon vanity slot. The only reason I can think of would be if CBS says no.
  • Options
    nixie50nixie50 Member Posts: 1,268 Arc User
    lianthelia wrote: »
    The Devs have said this was vetoed long ago, I think because of CBS? I don't remember exactly but they Devs have said no already

    way back in beta, you COULD change the colors for a short time (Like a day or 2) the whining from the PVP crowd caused the devs to remove the option. if you were KDF and you switched up to Tetryon and made the beams green, Fed players would go in equipped with disruptor resistances. the complaint was that it was a cheat/hack and unfair.
    u7acy6aymfw7.gif
    We Need BERETS in the tailor
  • Options
    thegrandnagus1thegrandnagus1 Member Posts: 5,165 Arc User
    nixie50 wrote: »
    lianthelia wrote: »
    The Devs have said this was vetoed long ago, I think because of CBS? I don't remember exactly but they Devs have said no already

    way back in beta, you COULD change the colors for a short time (Like a day or 2)

    Yeah, it was a carried-over mechanic from Champions. For those that don't play that game, you can change the hue of (almost) all of your powers and effects to match your preferred costume or theme :p

    The-Grand-Nagus
    Join Date: Sep 2008

    og9Zoh0.jpg
  • Options
    fleetcaptain5#1134 fleetcaptain5 Member Posts: 4,805 Arc User
    It is strange that CBS would care about these things though, given how many weapons we have now.

    I mean, if we only had blue (TOS and Andorian) and orange phasers, sure, I could understand them saying that they want the game to be like the shows in this respect and that other colours therefore cannot be had.

    But even the recent shows entirely changed the looks of weapons - they're mostly pulses now, and the 32nd century weapons have a very different colour than regular phasers.

    Besides, in the game there are many different types now. We have red ones, yellow-greenish ones, light blue, dark blue, darker red, green and many of these also come in multiple varities.
    It's the same with disruptors and plasma weapons.


    The game has moved far past the point where 'phasers are orange or blue'. This CBS restriction makes no sense anymore, if it ever did (again, the shows have constantly changed the way weapons look as well). I doubt it's still active. If it is, it is obviously not as rigid anymore as we're told.
    [4:46] [Combat {self}] Your Haymaker deals 23337 (9049) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother

    [3/25 10:41][Combat (Self)]Your Haymaker deals 26187 (10692) Physical Damage(Critical) to Orinoco.
  • Options
    fleetcaptain5#1134 fleetcaptain5 Member Posts: 4,805 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    Regarding the topic in general:

    I'm still of the opinion that a disable function for certain weapon visuals would be best.

    1. It would solve the inconsistency issue that comes with, for example, using 6 coalition disruptor beams and then having to use one greenish one from the Nausicaan set (the one with the torpedo and console from a Lukari episode).

    2. It could allow players to pick whichever weapon colour they want.
    You want to have purple phasers?
    Put six regular phaser beams on your ship
    Use phaser consoles and gear to boost them
    Place one polaron beam on your ship.
    Disable the visuals of the phasers et voilà: you have purple 'phasers'.
    You're firing mostly phasers now but you're only seeing the purple polaron beam.

    This may mean sacrificing a bit of effectiveness, but only limitedly so. It's only one weapon that's slightly less effective and even that is hardly an issue because we have many universal consoles now that boost multiple weapon types.


    And because we wouldn't really be changing the colours of the weapons themselves, it wouldn't be violating the CBS veto (as far as that's still a thing anyway, as mentioned in my post above).
    [4:46] [Combat {self}] Your Haymaker deals 23337 (9049) Physical Damage(Critical) to Spawnmother

    [3/25 10:41][Combat (Self)]Your Haymaker deals 26187 (10692) Physical Damage(Critical) to Orinoco.
  • Options
    poddlipoddli Member Posts: 173 Arc User
    Why not create a new category of items? Vanity Weapons [Space]. You want the TOS beam effects? Get it from a lockbox or the Dil store (DIL SINK, YAY!).

    CBS said no T6 Connie ever and held that position for a long time. So I don't think we can hold up something else they said no to and argue that it'll never happen.
  • Options
    davefenestratordavefenestrator Member Posts: 10,522 Arc User
    CBS said no back in 2010. Do they still say no? Who "nos"?

    The other reason not to allow vanity beams is Cryptic wanting to sell us lock box weapons, but there are ways around that.

    Using 1 vanity slot per weapon keeps the lock box sales while letting us get our visuals for Space Barbie.
  • Options
    imelchori42imelchori42 Member Posts: 80 Arc User
    edited February 2022
    CBS said no back in 2010. Do they still say no? Who "nos"?

    The other reason not to allow vanity beams is Cryptic wanting to sell us lock box weapons, but there are ways around that.

    Using 1 vanity slot per weapon keeps the lock box sales while letting us get our visuals for Space Barbie.

    well, they could still make it to have access to a weapon visual youd first have to have access to the weapon itself.

    like youd have to slot a beam array like the vanity shields to overwrite your equipped weapons visual.

    this means if you want to get the visuals of lockbox weapons, youd have to get those weapons first too and it wouldnt change anything for the sales.

    otherwise, most people get the lockbox stuff for their stats anyway and its not like thats going to change.
  • Options
    altston1909#2309 altston1909 Member Posts: 49 Arc User
    What about a different approach? What if you couldn't use actual weapons to get the visuals?

    What if they added two more vanity slots to all ships, one for energy weapons, one for torpedoes.

    BUT! You couldn't slot any weapon in them, just a special "Vanity Weapon Style - Energy" and "Vanity Weapon Style - Projectile" items.

    There could be several categories:
    1. Basic Styles - craftable trough RND, they would only apply the basic Phaser, Plasma, Disruptor, photon...etc styles
    2. Reputation Styles - available trough rep projects at T6, similar prices to shields, it gives the reputation's specific weapon style
    3. Fleet styles (like TOS from K-13) available at fleet stores
    4. Premium styles - very rare lockbox drops, giving the styles found in lockboxes, avalable alonside lockbox vanity shields during the same events
    5. Lobi styles - found in Lobi store, giving special Lobi space weapons, some weapons could come with them.

    All but basic and lobi styles would be great dil sinks and basics would allow all players to at least cheaply unify their weapon visuals while everything else would be charged accordingly based on it "premium" status.
This discussion has been closed.