test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Howdy, Stranger!
talaj Arc User
Reactions
Comments
-
I would probably do it like THIS. APB2 + APO3 (you could use APB3 if you like, I just prefer APO3) gives you excellent attack pattern chaining, and dropping down to FAW2 isn't really a big deal given that fact. You can switch out DEM2 (and Marion) for RSP2 (and whatever other doff you like) if you feel you want more…
-
Interesting build, but a single copy of A2B is going to give you consistent cooldown reduction, still leave you with aux up close to 2/3 of the time, doesn't take up your cmd sci slot, and doesn't more or less bind you to using the MACO 2-piece + elite fleet deflector. I've been running a single copy on a front-loaded Orb…
-
I'm happy to back my **** up - I'll look you up this weekend. :cool:
-
The DEM/Marion combo.... honestly, it's most impressive how a few people with a vested interest have turned a very niche doff & ability that offers a minor sustained DPS boost at best, into a massive EC generator. Marion would be worth diddly-squat if not for an effectively orchestrated wool-pulling campaign that…
-
Saying that people who use it are relying on it as some sort of crutch to prop up their inadequacy as players is something of a misnomer. Frankly, I'll spank your TRIBBLE with a non-A2B build no problem - I'll just do it harder and faster with an A2B one. FACT. This is not a viable justification for it to continue existing…
-
I'd prefer to see some decent shuttle-based content first, before we get into the issue of high quality shuttle-specific weapons.
-
A2B variations are perhaps the most powerful builds in the game thanks to Techs. The aux trade-off simple is not nearly enough of a malus - especially as has already been said, if you run a single copy and still maintain nearly 2/3 aux uptime, allowing you to fire off strong sci abilities with high aux more or less at gcd.…
-
There's no holy trinity requirement for any of the PvE content in this MMO. Even if there were, a Tac or Eng could fly a ship with a science-heavy boff loadout and perform a support role virtually as well as a Sci. If Cryptic has no plans to re-establish the holy trinity, then frankly the Sci captain's abilities do need a…
-
That really isn't the case. You choose a ship based on the role you want to play, the amount of leeway you want with potential builds, and so on - not because it's "meant for" your captain's chosen career. You career path merely determines what captain abilities you bring to the table, but the majority of your active…
-
If you want to run a Sci-heavy boff loadout it's a very poor fit, but beyond that it's one of the best DPS boats to put any Fed/Fed-aligned captain in. I run a fleet Avenger on my Sci using a DBB build, and it mows through enemies just fine. When I want a Sci-heavy boff loadout on my Sci, I always default back to a Vesta…
-
The ability to highlight or tick what you want to purchase on the exchange, and then use a "purchase all" button, would be a welcome addition.
-
The destroyer, whilst a nice ship, isn't nearly as versatile as the Tal Shiar Adapted Battle Cruiser. If you're looking to play a support role in a borgified ship, then I would strongly suggest this as the better option for the following reasons: 1) Being a cruiser you get access to cruiser commands, which further enhances…
-
Below are perhaps the most important parts of your post: You might as well have said "This is what I think, therefore it must be true, and anyone who disagrees is a blinkered fool with a vested interest in the status quo." The problem is, you wouldn't be bringing this up if you didn't have a vested interest in changing the…
-
I would swap FAW3 for either APB2 or APO1, since BO will lend little if anything to your build. Personally I've stuck with TT1/FAW2/APB2/APO3 on my beamboat Scimitar for a long time now with solid results.
-
I prefer to augment with more attack pattern uptime than switching from FAW1 to FAW2 - especially when you're effectively slotting a second TT just to use up the slot, given one copy runs at global with an A2B build. I suppose it comes down to personal preference though, as I doubt there'd be a great deal in it either way.
-
I didn't alter the OP's skill setup, just the ship setup.
-
Take a look at THIS - it's a pretty standard Romulan plasma beamboat with the romulan rep 2-piece, both borg 2-pieces, and plasma infused embassy flow cap consoles to both get the most out of leech and increase plasma damage. Run it with 3 purple techs, Marion and frankly whatever else you like because only those four…
-
Block the Scimitar from being able to equip the valdore console, and nerf the Romulan drone ships. I think that would be a good start, and it could be further tweaked from there.
-
There's such a thing as an irrelevant gaming market when we're talking about - amazingly enough - PVP specifically in the MMORPG gaming market. You even say it yourself right above: "PvP doesn't dominate in MMOs" - quite right, it doesn't. The community constitutes a niche demographic within the overall MMO gaming…
-
I'm not going to quote the whole thing, but really if you think "It's in the works" equates to change coming anytime at all, let alone soon(TM), then I'm sorry to say there's plenty of precedent for this being a hook-statement. It's something I've seen before plenty of times: "It's in the works, just not a priority right…
-
Sounds like the saying most politicians live by. :rolleyes:
-
Bringing up the burgeoning FPS & MOBA gaming industries isn't relevant when the discussion is MMORPGs..... Following this logic, most serious PvPers must therefore be bad at the game. :rolleyes:
-
I've got to ask why a quasi-philosophical thread concerning the notion of majority vs. minority was deemed necessary? Yes, if you start paring everything down there are categories within categories within categories, and we're all part of minority categories at some point in the framework - but it's the overlap that…
-
Except it's never that simple with PvP - you should know that. There's a correlation that tends to hold true: the amount of resources you put into PvP, the more resources the PvP community starts requiring you to put into it on a continuous basis - yet the growth of the community often remains small or even stays flat. Or…
-
I was talking about developers creating a game revolving around PvP gameplay, not their style of gameplay - which by virtue of the fact that the PvP demographic is a niche market, does make them niche, but isn't the point. I wouldn't say that at all. As I've said before developers do pay lip service to PvP in order to hook…
-
If you check into them, you'll find these PvP-centric MMOs are being bolstered by a relatively sizeable number of PvE players - not a majority for sure, but they're there nonetheless. Even EVE benefits in this respect - there's plenty of info regarding the stability of activity in non-safe areas, versus increasing activity…
-
That sort of takes the biscuit, doesn't it....
-
No, what is representative - and was my point - is the fact that PvP queues DO take ages (the moaning on the forums and in this thread is a byproduct of that fact), AND that carrot-on-a-stick PvPvE maps DO see more activity (and the requests for more PvPvE maps is a byproduct of that fact) - but not because people want to…
-
It really wasn't hard to infer. It's only relevant in that it doesn't support really your stance. I have characters on EU-Quel'Thalas, and EU-Frostmane. BG queue times for both are similar, regardless of time of day - though Frostmane's queues are a little better during the weekend. STO is F2P, so there's no guaranteed…
-
In terms of proportion perhaps, but that's not really relevant. What's relevant is whether the amount they might potentially spend justifies the expenditure. Given the raft of PvP fails over the past decade, how much more evidence is necessary to show that, in general the expenditure is not justified? Like Rift tried to?…