Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by madeux

 It's rather simplified, but it is sort of how naval combat works. 

 

Yeah... I guess I just totally forgot about all those Science ships they had back in WWII that ran around using their deflector dish to repair the other ships...

Oh wait...

Navies have support ships, also in WWII submarine hunters were incredibly important because they helped prevent German U-boats from sinking convoys. These ships needed to have sonar and scanning systems, they needed to be able to lay mines and drop depth charges. A typical battleship of the era was ill equipped for these tasks, so they fell to specialized destroyers.

I do agree that having ships act as tanks, mages and priests is a dumb design choice for s spaceship game. I was dreading the Perpetual version for this very dynamic and I'm incredibly disappointed that Cryptic kept it. Of all the dumb mistakes Perpetual had made with the game, I was really hoping Cryptic fixed this one. It seems like lazy design choices to me, and isn't very "Star Trekish" either.

Originally posted by Blurr

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by kahulbane

In normal naval combat, there is electromic warfare, or science ships, and fast attack ships, like subs, that cannot take a hit, etc, this can go on for ever...

And so in ST there are the same, Logistics in large fights. 

 

So by that logic, I guess Voyager was only capable of "electronic warfare" since its a science ship? I guess someone should tell CBS to go back and erase all those episodes of Voyager where they were fighting toe-to-toe with larger ships.

Not to mention all those episodes where the Defiant got damaged, since they are just like a sub and "cannot take a hit" according to the rules of naval combat.

Star Trek isn't like naval combat!

 

Actually I think you just proved yourself wrong. As a cursory examination of naval vessels will tell you, while they are usually designed with one purpose in mind, they actually are quite decent at a number of roles. A sub may be a good stealthy attack vessel, but it may also be good in exploration, or mine hunting, etc. An aircraft carrier might have the best ability to dominate an area of the ocean, but it also serves quite well as a platform for carrying troops or resupply or what have you.

The Enterprise (TNG) was a diplomatic/exploration flag ship, but it was a cruiser. They did science stuff well, they explored well, they did well in combat. It's not one-dimensional just like naval vessels aren't one dimensional. As you quite rightly pointed out.

The Galaxy class was Starfleet's experiment with large multi-role vessels. A Galaxy could do all the things you said while evacuating a planet and studying a nebula at the same time. The unfortunate side effect was that when a Galaxy was destroyed (and keep in mind that six were originally built and we saw three destroyed on screen) a lot of time, materials, and resources were lost. Starfleet then switched to smaller, single-role vessels like the Defiant, Intrepid, Nova, Prometheus, Akira, Norway, and Steamrunner. Even the Sovereign class is smaller (by internal volume) than the Galaxy class and is much more specialized (it should be noted that a Galaxy equipped for a single role, i.e. combat, instead of multiple roles, is an amazing thing to behold. Galaxies equipped for combat during the Dominion War were near invincible.)

If Cryptic were to follow this quirk in Star trek canon, there would be many, many more smaller ships than larger ships.

Originally posted by Blurr

Originally posted by Raltar

Blurr,

We are all well aware that the devs have said you can configure your ship in different ways and that they have denied that specific ships apply to specific roles.

But if thats true, then why does the video totally contradict that statement by telling us that the most effecitve players will be the ones who use ships for the roles they were designed for? It goes on to directly say that Cruisers are tanks, Science ships are support and Escorts are DPS.

The video contradicts what the developers have said elsewhere. Who should I believe?

 

Oh, and here is another one. In a different thread a guy just posted a link to an interview where one of the developers said this:

"One night you could use a Defiant class ship for a quick space battle, and the next night, you could change to a Science class ship – the healer – to support your guild. You can really change what role you play on the fly."

He directly tells us the Science ship is the healer and you would use it to support your guild. Clearly a defined role for the Science ships.

Apparently the video isn't the only contradiction.

 

Because once again you are conveniently missing the point and assuming black-and-white values in order to continue hating on the game.

Let me make this simple for you. Chances are you've probably played enough of WoW to know what a paladin is. In that game the paladin can be a tank or a healer or a dps, depending on how it's set up. If I were to talk about a guild run, perhaps I would use the paladin as a healer, then I would talk about him as the healer. We already know the science ship isn't just a healer, because it can be a disabler, buffer, or what have you. We also know that other ships can heal as well. He was just using a specific example of a loadout to make the point that you can change what role you play on the fly. You are taking a specific anecdote of the way a ship CAN be used, and assuming that that's the way it MUST be used.

Surely you see where you're wrong in doing that, right? We already know that science captains will be able to heal too. We know that any ship with a science bridge officer could have the ability to heal. We know that a science ship could have no healing ability whatsoever but still be very strong as a science ship. While it is defined as a POSSIBLE role, it is not the ONLY role.

This really shouldn't be that hard to grasp. Please also go re-read the points I mentioned about how we actually have no hard facts on just how much of a bonus/detriment your ship type will be compared to your career choices, bridge officer choices, gear choices, power settings choices, and so on.

That Paladin in WoW who is healing needs to be HIGHLY specialized.  All gear spent on healing gear.  All talents spent on healing talents.  They do crap damage and can't do anything other than healing and support.  The Tanking Paladin and DPS paladin are similarly highly specialized.  Holy Paladins can't tank or dps.  Protection Paladins can't heal worth crap or dps worth crap (and I've personally tried the latter a LOT after some of the Wrath changes...doesn't work).  Retribution Paladins can't heal worth crap (well they could for a bit, then that got nerfed to the ground) or tank worth crap.  This is one of THE hybrid classes in WoW, yet you must specialize everything to one role or you just can't do a good job in the end-game.  This is a natural consequence of having all the AI and other mechanics focused around the Healer-DPS-Tank system.  If a crappy tank can do high-end stuff, then a great tank will make high-end stuff a complete joke.
 

Btw, as far as healing goes, I don't think they precisely said what you need on a ship to make it able to heal.  What we can certainly tell is that a Science Ship is going to be THE best healer once you gear it out properly.  Maybe you can make a "viable" healer some other way, but the mere fact we are stuck in a Tank-Healer-DPS system inevitably means that "viable" really means "makes things difficult on other players and why the heck didn't you go with optimal."  That's how WoW and nearly all other MMOs with this sort of combat system work.

We've never said you can't use a ship in an unorthodox way.  We've said that doing that won't be optimal, and games with this combat system typically make it so that unoptimized choices make things difficult on everyone else (or optimal choices make all content a joke until it is retuned).  Yeah, we have no hard numbers on what the bonuses are, but we have the Devs say Cruisers are REALLY good at tanking and stuff like that, which implies the bonuses aren't negligible.  That means the best tanks ARE Cruisers (it also helps they have more engineering slots, which the Devs have stated are tanking slots, and more Engineering Bridge seats which are how you get a variety of tanking abilities).  So the Cruiser, for instance, has better base stats, and will be able to get more bonuses on top of that.  It screams to be used as a tank.  It shouldn't be hard to grasp that the more bonuses you have for a given role the better you are, and in a group setting the better people are at their specialty the better the group does, especially in a Tank-Healer-DPS system.

Incidentally, we have also said even having tanking in a space game is extremely stupid and unrealistic.  I assume you are conceding that point.

Originally posted by Blurr

A: Chances are you've probably played enough of WoW to know what a paladin is.

B: We already know the science ship isn't just a healer, because it can be a disabler, buffer, or what have you.

C: He was just using a specific example of a loadout to make the point that you can change what role you play on the fly. You are taking a specific anecdote of the way a ship CAN be used, and assuming that that's the way it MUST be used.

D: We already know that science captains will be able to heal too. We know that any ship with a science bridge officer could have the ability to heal. We know that a science ship could have no healing ability whatsoever but still be very strong as a science ship.

E: we actually have no hard facts on just how much of a bonus/detriment your ship type will be

A: I have never played WoW. Well... "never" is a strong word. One night I was drinking with a friend of mine and he had WoW running on his computer for some reason. I played long enough to get him killed by a wolf or something. Then I went back to drinking. Thats sums up my WoW experience. I see the poster above me already dealt with your Paladin rant though.

B: All of those things fall under the category of a support ship. A weak ship with minimal defense which will have to hide behind a tank in order to surivie. So pretty much its the same as either a controller or defender from City of Heroes. Sure one controller might be a buffer and one might be a debuffer but both of them are still hiding behind a tank at the end of the day.

C: Funny, he didn't say anything which made me think it was an example. He went out of his way to say that a science ship is the healer of the game and that you would use it to support your guild. Combine that with what the movie said, plus what is said about the different ships types on the website and I'm sure you can see where its all starting to paint a picture that ship types in this game will play a very large part in determining your role in the game.

D: Actually, we don't know any of that. You are telling me that healing will be a skill used by science bridge officers? Care to show me where that is refrenced on the website? The only way you could possibly know this for sure is if you are in the beta. And even then if you told me that would be a violation of the NDA. So yeah... WE don't know any of this, do we?

E: Yeah, we really don't have any hard facts about how minor or how extreme the stats of your ship type are or how they will effect your play style. So why do you keep assuimg that we DO have those hard facts by constantly telling us how the ships will and will not work? All we have to go on at this point are what the developers say about the game. You have pointed out a few quotes and so have I. But at the end of the day I still think this quote from the video says it all:

"Resourceful Captains will also be able to recognize and utilize the different classes of starships. Cruisers as tanks, science vessles as support and escorts for lighting strikes."

Now by saying that, they are telling us which ships will be MOST EFFECITVE at what. Does that mean you can't turn a science ship into a tank or an escort into a healer? NO. But according to Cryptic themselves you wouldn't be a resourceful captain if you did that. Its their way of telling us the power gamers who eventually take over every game will do it this way and anyone who tries to do anything different or unique will end up with a weaker character/ship as a result. That is always the way these simplistic MMOs go.

Lets examine some of the absurdity of some of these concepts......

Since this is supposed to be SCIENCE fiction.... How, specificaly, is a ship "healing" another ship in combat supposed to work?

In the 21st century, if my car breaks down...... I don't believe that asking my mechanic to have his tow truck shoot it with it's "healing ray" is going to work.

In the Trek universe everything I've read or seen indicates that stuff (including ships) is built in a similar way to the manner it is today. That is it involves human beings (or machines) using TOOLS to assemble/disassemble, replace or modify parts of the ship from physical material. In fact, I've seen alot of Star Trek episodes that depict just that happening. I've yet to see/read any one of those with a ship using a "beam" to effect repairs on another ship...in or out of combat.

Furthermore, the people in Trek responsible for building and fixing stuff (including ships) seem to be called - gasp - ENGINEERS. In fact, if I remember correctly, that's basicaly the job function of an Engineer aboard a ship... maintaining and repairing the ship.

So how is it that Cryptic has the SCIENCE officer aboard a SCIENCE VESSEL responsible for "healing" other ships?

Oh I forgot, in Cryptic-speak "SCIENCE" officer = Spell Caster/Priest  and since in fantasy MMO's spell-casters using "HEALING SPELLS" to heal other characters in combat.... Science Officers/Ships need to be able to do the same thing in thier game.

realistically a tank is just a fluffing big ship (battleship, flagship, carrier) and a science/support vessal is a repair ship/resupply ship (which are used quite often) and the dps is just a frigate or Destroyer with a crapload of guns on it....

anyway i don't mind so much but tbh...ditch the tank ship and make everyone either a dps or a support with varying degrees of tankability.

Originally posted by Death1942

realistically a tank is just a fluffing big ship (battleship, flagship, carrier) and a science/support vessal is a repair ship/resupply ship (which are used quite often) and the dps is just a frigate or Destroyer with a crapload of guns on it....
 

You're totally wrong here.  Just check the last page or two of this thread and you'll see why.
 

Well at this point I'm finally convinced Raltar is just trolling. He takes comments out of context and assigns meaning to them beyond what anyone can clearly see they were originally intended, and then uses them to try and bash the game/developer without listening to reason or proof otherwise. I did like the part where he acted like he was too cool for WoW, yet here we are having an argument about Star Trek Online. Oh sweet irony, I lol'd. 

On the paladin analogy, there's been plenty of times I've seen a paladin tank toss some extra heals even though he was all in tank gear/talents. Sure the tank paladin is better as a tank, but sometimes he has to dps/heal, and while he's not as great as a dedicated healer/dps, he can do an adequate enough job to still contribute to the group. I played a tank DK and I still managed to do quite well in the DPS department, as well as doing a good amount of self-healing.

On the healing note, Grumpymel2 I understand where you're coming from, but there's actually precedents for how one ship can heal another in star trek. Extending shields to another ship, beaming over repair crews, transfering power to another ship. If a guy has some way to transfer some of his extra power to your shields, that'd count as a heal in my book. You've got shields and then your hull health. If someone can boost your shields, that gives your crew more time to repair your ship, right?

Raltar, I know you're just trolling, but how is it that you can ask where I get my information (from the websites and dev chats, btw) and yet you make statements like "A weak ship with minimal defense which will have to hide behind a tank in order to surivie." Where did you get that? I'd love to see where the devs said that. Also you keep assuming that this game is following the path of City of Heroes, except that in City of Villains they changed up the role dynamic a bit. Not to mention that, but their latest game, Champions Online, changed it even more (more on that later).  "ship types in this game will play a very large part in determining your role in the game" This is another assumption you've made, no dev actually ever said that. Of course, it suits your argument better to twist the words that have been said in order to make your hate for the game justified.

Ask Cryptic Dev Chat 30th of June 2009:
<CrypticZinc> <Tamgros> Bridge Officers are the ones who perform the ship's special abilities, do they have special abilities on the ground, or they just act like drone pets with buffs/debuffs? It sounds like the captain has abilities on the ground and general buffs for ships, so this question is basically is it flipped for bridge crew?
<CrypticZinc> The BOfficers have special skills on the ground - but that's a nice observation. In space - your Captain provides most of the buffs, and your BOfficers provide most of the "powers". On the ground - that's reversed.

Considering that BOfficers provide most of the "powers", it would stand that the bridge officers are going to be responsible for your healing powers. It would also stand that the most likely to have a healing power would be a Science officer.

Perhaps some of you who are having trouble with this might actually consider that Bridge Officers could have as much, if not more, effect on what your role is compared to your ship. Certainly a buff to my deflector dish powers doesn't affect my role as much as what deflector dish powers I actually have, or how strong they are, right? A buff to warp core strength for more energy won't affect me as much as having an engineering officer with good defensive powers. Being able to equip cannons might not be as signifigant as a tactical officer who could give you devastating attack powers.

Raltar also you take that quote out of context every time. It is a tip, not a rule. They have not said "Cruisers must tank, science must heal, escorts must dps". They have only said that these ship types get slight bonuses to these roles. The same way a piece of loot might give +damage or +healing.

Let's take a look at the core problem some people are having with the whole tank/dps/support issue. Some people say they don't feel tanks make sense in space combat.

Consider this though, when you're firing your photon torpedo, do you want to fire it at the escort ship which is highly maneuverable and might not get hit? Or do you fire it at the slow moving cruiser that will almost definately get hit, but won't suffer as badly from the hit? Perhaps sustained dps is more effective than spiking dps, in a fleet battle. Perhaps it's best to take out the cruiser first because of the buffs or whatever he provides. What happens if the fast little escort comes in and attacks, but then flies out of range before you can really get to bear on him? Do you waste time chasing after the escort or do you make the most of your time and take out the cruiser?

Also consider this, what if you're right? What if tanks don't make sense? What if this whole argument that Raltar is getting so upset over is a moot point? *gasp!* Have you tried Champions Online, the latest game from Cryptic? In that game, they have "roles" as a sort of "stance" that you go into. 90% of the time though, people can just stay in the "balanced" role rather than the dps or tank or healer roles. Sure the other ones give you bonuses, but what if in STO, like in Champions, the bonuses don't really matter all that much? So you're in a cruiser and you can take more damage, but how much does that matter? If the escort is taking too much damage, he has to run and stop his dps, but you get to stay, allowing you to do more damage. Some people will naturally go for more defenses while some people naturally go more for damage or whatever. It could just be a personal preference type thing.

As a final note, if anyone would like to conitnue the argument that we are "stuck" into the traditional "tank/healer/dps" model, then I charge you to find me a quote where the developers have said "You will NEED a tank/healer/dps in order to complete this content". I mean an actual quote, not "oh he said you could be a healer and support your guild so I assume you HAVE to have one". I leave you with another quote ignored by people who would rather bash the game, because I've already posted it, where they address this exact issue.

DevChat 14/07/09
Bizzaro_Daeke: <]AoA[Vmann|work> In play testing, have players gravitated to the trinity of MMO roles (healer/tank/DPS), and if so, any plans on how to break up the old and tired group formula for STO ship combat?

CripticZinc: Yes and no. Some people gravitate to those roles beacuse they're MMO players. It's a vocabulary that they know and is familiar. That being said - once people realize in what directions and limits they can customize their load-outs, what Bridge Officers they activate - they end up seeing that there's far more depth and team makeup to be had.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
Well at this point I'm finally convinced Raltar is just trolling. He takes comments out of context and assigns meaning to them beyond what anyone can clearly see they were originally intended, and then uses them to try and bash the game/developer without listening to reason or proof otherwise. I did like the part where he acted like he was too cool for WoW, yet here we are having an argument about Star Trek Online. Oh sweet irony, I lol'd. 

---

He's not trolling. One should try not to be so insulting to others on forums, though I know it can be difficult at times.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
On the paladin analogy, there's been plenty of times I've seen a paladin tank toss some extra heals even though he was all in tank gear/talents. Sure the tank paladin is better as a tank, but sometimes he has to dps/heal, and while he's not as great as a dedicated healer/dps, he can do an adequate enough job to still contribute to the group. I played a tank DK and I still managed to do quite well in the DPS department, as well as doing a good amount of self-healing.

---

A Paladin tank cannot heal while tanking, so I assume you meant a Paladin Tank who wasn't tanking (perhaps he was the off-tank and there was nothing else to tank). At that point the Pally tank has a choice between totally crappy heals or totally crappy dps. Doesn't much matter what they do, as they are still aren't doing much. Since the system is a Tank-Healer-DPS system, someone in one role cannot perform another role decently, and you only do an off-role when your main role is completely unneeded (at that point doing something pathetically is a little bit better than going afk).

As for DKs, last I checked their DPS capability as tanks got nerfed because it was overpowered. I take it you were a blood DK, in which case the self-healing is to compensate for the fact that Blood DKs have inferior mitigation (e.g. they self-heal instead of some mitigation). You really aren't doing the job of a healer there either.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
On the healing note, Grumpymel2 I understand where you're coming from, but there's actually precedents for how one ship can heal another in star trek. Extending shields to another ship, beaming over repair crews, transfering power to another ship. If a guy has some way to transfer some of his extra power to your shields, that'd count as a heal in my book. You've got shields and then your hull health. If someone can boost your shields, that gives your crew more time to repair your ship, right?

---

1. Extending shields around another in Star Trek has always dramatically reduced shield strength. Also, this isn't how Science Vessels heal in STO. Extending Shields is a tanking ability. Science Vessels magically restore shields, which is totally different.

2. You can't beam through shields in Star Trek.

3. There is no precedent in Star Trek for magically powering someone else's shields from a distance, nor does it really make any sense. Doing this was a deliberate decision on Cryptic's part to make STO's combat system into a Tank-Healer-DPS system. It wasn't something they had to do, and sure you can try to justify it, but it was something they CHOSE to do to give STO WoW/EQ-like combat.

4. AGAIN, TANKING MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
Raltar, I know you're just trolling, but how is it that you can ask where I get my information (from the websites and dev chats, btw) and yet you make statements like "A weak ship with minimal defense which will have to hide behind a tank in order to surivie." Where did you get that? I'd love to see where the devs said that.

---

Either Escorts need the protection of Cruisers, or you don't need cruisers at all. There's no particular reason to have a Cruiser from what the Devs have said if what you say is true. Escorts from everything the Devs have said have more mod room for weapon damage, can equip better weapons, and have more tactical officers to give special attacks. If you don't need to protect them with tanks, then you can just have a group of pure DPS and quickly destroy the enemy. There'd be no point to have a large, cumbersome ship with excess defense and poor offense base (and less ability to improve damage than an Escort to boot).

Raltar and I assume the game isn't made in such a way that Cruisers are a bad choice. If the game mechanics don't enforce the use of tanks, then no one will want to play a ship designed for tanking. It's pretty much that simple.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
Also you keep assuming that this game is following the path of City of Heroes, except that in City of Villains they changed up the role dynamic a bit. Not to mention that, but their latest game, Champions Online, changed it even more (more on that later).  "ship types in this game will play a very large part in determining your role in the game" This is another assumption you've made, no dev actually ever said that. Of course, it suits your argument better to twist the words that have been said in order to make your hate for the game justified.

---

Devs have said "this ship type is for doing that" and similar statements a LOT. They've also said that using a ship type for something else is not optimal, but they are aiming for "viability" (and viability usually means something people don't want to see in a group setting in a Tank-Healer-DPS system -- people want optimal). You can also EASILY tell this is the case. Science ships have room for more science mods, which are passive bonuses. Their healing starts better, and even if other ships can heal, the Science ship will ALSO be able to pile more healing mods on top of it, so it does a better job than other ships.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
Considering that BOfficers provide most of the "powers", it would stand that the bridge officers are going to be responsible for your healing powers. It would also stand that the most likely to have a healing power would be a Science officer.

---

So what's your argument here? Best case scenerio you can make a cruiser into a healer? Or you can make a Escort into a tank? You'd still need those specialized roles since they seem to be designing combat around this mechanic.

Btw, it seems there is some evidence that the Deflector Dish will determine how you can heal or not. "Their deflectors can also be used to aid and repair ally ships, as well as control the pace of battle." Especially since they've talked about how Deflectors play a role in what your ship does.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
Raltar also you take that quote out of context every time. It is a tip, not a rule. They have not said "Cruisers must tank, science must heal, escorts must dps". They have only said that these ship types get slight bonuses to these roles. The same way a piece of loot might give +damage or +healing.

---

1. Even if this is the case, we are still stuck with WoW in Space. Which is idiotic on many levels.

2. MMO players go for what is optimal. If a Cruiser is the best tank because it has INNATE bonuses and more room for installed bonuses, then people will want a cruiser for a tank.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
Let's take a look at the core problem some people are having with the whole tank/dps/support issue. Some people say they don't feel tanks make sense in space combat.
Consider this though, when you're firing your photon torpedo, do you want to fire it at the escort ship which is highly maneuverable and might not get hit? Or do you fire it at the slow moving cruiser that will almost definately get hit, but won't suffer as badly from the hit? Perhaps sustained dps is more effective than spiking dps, in a fleet battle. Perhaps it's best to take out the cruiser first because of the buffs or whatever he provides.

---

Science Ships provide buffs, and aren't particular maneuverable. You might want to kill them first (kill the healer first is generally smart). After that you go after the DPS. As years and years of PvP has shown, tanks aren't worth bothering with at all, even if you are more likely to hit them. As real life shows, you must neutralize THREATS that are attacking you first. Escorts are the big threats, you kill them, probably right after the healers. After that you'd mop up the Cruisers.

Since Shields regenerate, I can say with confidence that SPIKE dps, as it is in ALL MMOS, will be king. The faster you kill a ship, the better.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
What happens if the fast little escort comes in and attacks, but then flies out of range before you can really get to bear on him? Do you waste time chasing after the escort or do you make the most of your time and take out the cruiser?

---

Sounds like I wouldn't want a cruiser with my fleet at all. I'd just want a bunch of those super-escorts that can't get hit. Why build cruisers? Sure, if the enemy has a bunch of unhittable objects and one object I can hit, I'd guess I'd go for the hittable object. Well, no, actually I'd probably run for it.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
Also consider this, what if you're right? What if tanks don't make sense? What if this whole argument that Raltar is getting so upset over is a moot point? *gasp!* Have you tried Champions Online, the latest game from Cryptic? In that game, they have "roles" as a sort of "stance" that you go into. 90% of the time though, people can just stay in the "balanced" role rather than the dps or tank or healer roles. Sure the other ones give you bonuses, but what if in STO, like in Champions, the bonuses don't really matter all that much? So you're in a cruiser and you can take more damage, but how much does that matter? If the escort is taking too much damage, he has to run and stop his dps, but you get to stay, allowing you to do more damage. Some people will naturally go for more defenses while some people naturally go more for damage or whatever. It could just be a personal preference type thing.

---

The point is they still have tanks, and even if you only need them 10% of the time, that 10% is a big deal. Take WoW, for instance. You might only need tanks in 10% of the content, but that comprises pretty much all of the end-game content that's not PvP (where tanks are not wanted at all because they are amazingly unrealistic).

Part of the point a number of us have tried to make here, is that the Tank-Healer-DPS system is pretty stupid in general, and particularly inappropriate for Star Trek (or any ship-based fighting). Your attempts to defend it really only emphasize how grossly inappropriate it is -- and honestly this is something anyone remotely familiar with PvP in any MMO should know. Trying to force this dynamic into Star Trek is beyond stupid, especially when they could have done something more true to the show and even been inspired by Naval combat.

---

Originally posted by Blurr
DevChat 14/07/09
Bizzaro_Daeke: <]AoA[Vmann|work In play testing, have players gravitated to the trinity of MMO roles (healer/tank/DPS), and if so, any plans on how to break up the old and tired group formula for STO ship combat?
CripticZinc: Yes and no. Some people gravitate to those roles beacuse they're MMO players. It's a vocabulary that they know and is familiar. That being said - once people realize in what directions and limits they can customize their load-outs, what Bridge Officers they activate - they end up seeing that there's far more depth and team makeup to be had.

---

The Devs use the Tank-Healer-DPS talk ALL THE TIME. The mere fact they HAVE tanks indicates this system is part of their thinking (because Tanks don't make sense unless you arbitrarily design things to support their existence). Cryptic isn't exactly known for having a history of breaking the mold here, and they certainly aren't known for keeping true to statements a Dev might make during development. From the actual mechanics they've shown us, it looks like the game heavily endorses the Holy Trinity (e.g. it is WoW in Space). It certainly doesn't emphasize aspects of naval combat one might expect (especially given that the combat is done on a 2 dimensional map).

Sorry, but one vague statement by one Dev hardly goes against the massive amount of Holy Trinity talk the Devs are using on the website and in their combat mechanics talks. Granted, I'll try this game out in Open Beta to confirm my suspicions, but there's no reason to think they are going to do anything to significantly deviate from WoW in Space. Pretty sad -- I'm quite tired of such an artificial combat mechanic.
 

I want to go back and key on something posted (somewhere in all of this) from one of the Dev interviews:

'WE WANT TO MAKE ALL CLASSES VIABLE IN A FLEET BATTLE'

Now I'm going to make a bunch of leaps here but bear with me and it just may make sense.  Well not science vessals as healers mind you but the others atleast :)

First off everyone keeps using WWII as the Naval reference for ship types.  I think we need to look farther back to the Age of Sail for our loose reference.  Just think; Cruisers (Tanks) are your rated ships of the line - good dps and good defense, Escorts (DPS) are your frigates - fast, hard to hit, can't take much damage and stepping out of our reference  big DPS.

Fleet Battle scenario -

Cruisers (tanks) in a tight formation covering each other.  Maybe this is where the extended shields come into play.  Instead of 6 to 12 individual shields / targets, they overlap them to present a solid wall.  We'll put the enemy fleet in the same formation.

Escorts (DPS) attack from the flanks and try to break up the formation so that their allies can now concentrate and destroy individual targets by overwhelming them instead of trying to punch through overlapping and maybe strength multiplied shields.

If one of your Cruisers or Escorts take damage, they fall behind the line of protecting cruisers and 'heal'.

For the Science vessals I guess we'd see them in the back lines conducting ECM / ECCM (debuffs / buffs) and providing repair crews as needed (heals).

If anyone wants to see something like this in action, just check out some of the better Port Battles from PotBS.  Frigates are snapping at the edges of the enemies fleet trying to bust up the formation, The Rated Ships are in Battle line pounding one ship at a time and anyone hurt falls behind the line to repair, protected by the LOS rules.

Now all of this doesn't help in a 5 man raid or while soloing and since Open Pvp will be voluntary in a special zone I'm not sure how much this would help there as you need numbers to pull this off, but in this concept it does make a strange sort of sense.

Originally posted by Raltar

http://pc.ign.com/dor/objects/14270158/star-trek-online/videos/startrekonline_trl_starshiptacticspt2_111909.html

30 second into that video it says this:

"Respurceful Captains will also be able to recognize and utilize the different classes of starships. Cruisers as tanks, science vessles as support and escorts for lighting strikes."

And now we know. In the mind of a Cryptic developer all MMOs must follow the trinity of TANK, SPELLCASTER, DPS. An original or flexable combat system is obviously beyond their skills.

Sad... just sad.

O great, another spank 'n'tank combat system. Does it also have a classic hate system with one of those silly taunt skills? I wonder how that would be presented in the game. I would only accept it if taunting was done with incredibly bad jokes.

I don't know.... I think they're trying to simplify it for all the eventual players. I believe that it will be a little more complicated, but it's easier to understand from a gamer point of view if you say this class of ship will be near equivalent to this type of character you see in other games. They have also said that you can upgrade your ship, cruiser, science, or escort, so that it has stronger shields, more powerful weapons, faster engines, etc.

Originally posted by Blurr

A: Well at this point I'm finally convinced Raltar is just trolling. 

B: I did like the part where he acted like he was too cool for WoW, yet here we are having an argument about Star Trek Online. Oh sweet irony, I lol'd. 

C: but there's actually precedents for how one ship can heal another in star trek. Extending shields to another ship, beaming over repair crews, transfering power to another ship.

D: Also you keep assuming that this game is following the path of City of Heroes, except that in City of Villains they changed up the role dynamic a bit.

E: "ship types in this game will play a very large part in determining your role in the game" This is another assumption you've made, no dev actually ever said that.

F: Ask Cryptic Dev Chat 30th of June 2009: In space - your Captain provides most of the buffs, and your BOfficers provide most of the "powers". Considering that BOfficers provide most of the "powers", it would stand that the bridge officers are going to be responsible for your healing powers. It would also stand that the most likely to have a healing power would be a Science officer.

G: Perhaps some of you who are having trouble with this might actually consider that Bridge Officers could have as much, if not more, effect on what your role is compared to your ship.

H: Raltar also you take that quote out of context every time. It is a tip, not a rule. They have not said "Cruisers must tank, science must heal, escorts must dps".

I: Consider this though, when you're firing your photon torpedo, do you want to fire it at the escort ship which is highly maneuverable and might not get hit?

J: Have you tried Champions Online, the latest game from Cryptic? In that game, they have "roles" as a sort of "stance" that you go into. 90% of the time though, people can just stay in the "balanced" role rather than the dps or tank or healer roles.

K: DevChat 14/07/09

A: Funny, I'm not the one insulting people.

B: I had to make it clear I was too cool for WoW since you were attempting to insult me by suggesting that I would play WoW. You pretty much forced the whole WoW conversation on us and now you think you can continue to insult me because I don't want to play your silly grind fest with cartoon graphics? Are you SURE I'm the troll here?

C: Extending your shields can protect another ship from damage but it can't "heal" it. Transferring power was very rarely done and also did exactly what it said it did: gave extra power. It didn't "heal" either. Sending repair crews over is the only way one ship could ever "heal" another ship in Star Trek and that was NEVER done during a battle. Repair crews would repair another ship outside of a battle, sure. But never during a battle.

D: They changed the roles in City of villians? PLEASE. Controller = Dominator. Defender = Corrupter. ect. The only class from the Hero side which didn't receive a clone on the Villian site was the Blaster and they decided to leave that one out because they needed the space to add in the Mastermind. That was it. Mastermind was the only class that was truly different.  

E: You keep saying things the devs never said either. Suggesting that Science officers will have a healing power when you would have no way of knowing that. Lets examine that next...

F: See, here you took something the devs said, that bridge officers would have powers, and then used it to make a logical assumption which you actually don't have the evidence to prove: that Science Officers would have a healing power. Your dev chat can't prove that, but you explained how your assumption made sense to you by walking us through your thought process. There is nothing wrong with that. And yet every time myself or Drachasor try to walk you through our thought process you rear up and scream at us that "OMG THE DEVS NEVER SAID THAT YOU ARE SO WRONG WHY DO YOU TAKE  EVERYTHING OUT OF CONTEXT!?!" Its a pot calling the kettle black, man. If you aren't going to let us make some logical assumptions then why the hell should we let you do it? Guess what, the devs never said science officers would have a healing power. YOU MUST BE WRONG I GUESS!

G: Uh oh! The devs never said that! You must be taking everything out of context again! Seriously though, you have no evidence for that. They have said bridge officers will provide "powers" for you to use. But to me that sounds like Guild Wars. A Warrior in Guild Wars can take Assassin as his secondary class and then use nothing but assassin skills in his build, but that doesn't change the fact he is still a Warrior primary which gives him some advantages and disadvantages which will dictate his strategy, such as his AL 80 armor. Right now we have no way of knowing if ship type or bridge officer skills will be more important. But considering the devs have told us that "resourceful" captains will use Cruisers as tanks, science ships as support and Escorts as DPS, I think its a fairly safe assumption that those ship types will have a major impact on which tactics will be most effective for each player.

H: I never said it was a rule. This is you flipping out again and refusing to let us walk you though the logical thought process in play here. I've said multiple times now I believe it will be POSSIBLE for a player to TRY to turn a Science ship into a tank or an Escort in to a healer. But the comments from the developers lead me to believe that it will be less effective than using those ships for the role they were intended for. The devs directly told us that in order to be a "resourceful" captain you will have to use Cruisers as tanks, Science as support and Escorts for DPS. This doesn't mean you can't choose to try something else, but apparently you wouldn't qualify as a "resourceful" captain if you did that. I believe its their way of telling us that those ship types will heavily effect which strategy will be most effecitve with each type, to the point where choosing to break away from the type you were designed for would leave you with a seriously gimped ship.

I: Maybe I don't WANT to fire my photon torpedo! Maybe I'll use my phasers first to disable his engines so he doesn't move around so quickly. Then I'll hit him with a torpedo. Give me an example of a time in Star Trek where they were fighting mutliple ships and said, "you know what, I can't hit that guy over there so I guess I'll ignore him while I attack this other ship over here that I can hit but can't do any damage to because hes a tank!" This is probably a siatuation where if they can't hit one ship and can't hurt another, they most likely would have had the good sense to get the hell out of there. Plus, tanking in MMOs only works aginst NPC enemies for exactly this reason. In PvP nobody is going to waste their time attacking the big, slow moving, heavily armored guy that can't be killed. They are going to attack the poorly armored wizard in the back who keeps chucking those annoying fireballs at them. "Tanking" is a cheap trick used to deal with NPCs who are dumb but too powerful to deal with any other way.

J: So you are saying that Cryptic designed a feature in their game which didn't work the way they planned and the players ened up ignoring it because it was useless? I don't think this is helping your case, Jack.

K: Yes, we have all seen your dev chat where they claim some players won't just use the big three roles. But we have also all seen my movie where they directly tell us that "resourceful" players will use the big three roles. Explain this for me: Why does the dev chat contradict what the movie said?

Please keep this thread on topic and abide by the RoC. 

Originally posted by Nebless

I want to go back and key on something posted (somewhere in all of this) from one of the Dev interviews:

'WE WANT TO MAKE ALL CLASSES VIABLE IN A FLEET BATTLE'

Now I'm going to make a bunch of leaps here but bear with me and it just may make sense.  Well not science vessals as healers mind you but the others atleast :)

First off everyone keeps using WWII as the Naval reference for ship types.  I think we need to look farther back to the Age of Sail for our loose reference.  Just think; Cruisers (Tanks) are your rated ships of the line - good dps and good defense, Escorts (DPS) are your frigates - fast, hard to hit, can't take much damage and stepping out of our reference  big DPS.

Fleet Battle scenario -

Cruisers (tanks) in a tight formation covering each other.  Maybe this is where the extended shields come into play.  Instead of 6 to 12 individual shields / targets, they overlap them to present a solid wall.  We'll put the enemy fleet in the same formation.

Escorts (DPS) attack from the flanks and try to break up the formation so that their allies can now concentrate and destroy individual targets by overwhelming them instead of trying to punch through overlapping and maybe strength multiplied shields.

If one of your Cruisers or Escorts take damage, they fall behind the line of protecting cruisers and 'heal'.

For the Science vessals I guess we'd see them in the back lines conducting ECM / ECCM (debuffs / buffs) and providing repair crews as needed (heals).

If anyone wants to see something like this in action, just check out some of the better Port Battles from PotBS.  Frigates are snapping at the edges of the enemies fleet trying to bust up the formation, The Rated Ships are in Battle line pounding one ship at a time and anyone hurt falls behind the line to repair, protected by the LOS rules.

Now all of this doesn't help in a 5 man raid or while soloing and since Open Pvp will be voluntary in a special zone I'm not sure how much this would help there as you need numbers to pull this off, but in this concept it does make a strange sort of sense.

Man, I just made a post in this thread about how this is not what Naval combat was EVER like.  Other people have made posts too.  Just look at the last couple pages.  (But as a brief counter-example, the toughest ships in Naval History were also the ones that dealt the most damage).
 

It's funny how angry some people can get when they're trying to cause a flame war. I think it's pretty evident who's actually interested in discussing the game, and who's interested in bashing the game at every opportunity.

To go right to the heart of the matter, the statements the devs made in both the video and the dev chats do not, in fact, contradict eachother.

Resourceful captains will be able to recognize and utilize the different classes of starships. Ok.

That being said - once people realize in what directions and limits they can customize their load-outs, what Bridge Officers they activate - they end up seeing that there's far more depth and team makeup to be had. Ok.
 

Lets put it all together now:

Resourceful captains will be able to recognize and utilize the different classes of starships. That being said - once people realize in what directions and limits they can customize their load-outs, what Bridge Officers they activate - they end up seeing that there's far more depth and team makeup to be had.

Simple enough? The 2nd quote deals directly with the issue in question. It's available in writing on the STO main site. The rest of the assumptions made in this thread seem an awful lot like simple Cryptic bashing. There's really nothing to argue about.

As far as the "naval" issue, have you ever played a naval sim game? Using the naval vessels in battlefield, Battlestations Midway, or Battlestations Pacific are good examples. I've played those games (if briefly) and from what I can see of the videos on youtube, STO space combat is close enough that it's an apt comparison.

Blurr, all you did there was splice two quotes together with the parts of each quote that you agreed with while cutting out the parts which didn't suit your point of view. I'll bet I could find a quote from Bush and a quote from Obama and then splice them together the same way to create a semi-valid reason why we should send the Navy Seals to invade the Chinese Moon Base. It would have about the same amount of evidence to back it up as your arguement did.

The fact of the matter is, the movie quote directly makes connections between specific ship types and specific roles in the game. There is no way to skit around this. It is a fact that they connected specific ships to specific roles. WHY would they do that unless they meant for those ships to occupy those roles?

Is it POSSIBLE that you could use a ship for a role it wasn't designed for? Yes.

Would that ship be as effective in that alternate role as it would be in the role it was originally designed for? The comments from the developers lead me to believe it would not.

Will players willingly play ships in roles they weren't designed for when they could be much more powerful and effective by sticking to the roles which have been established by the developers? All of my MMO experiences tells me that, NO, they will never do that. Players will always go for the most powerful option.

In the end, players will do whatever makes their ship/character most powerful. Cryptic has already told us that to qualify as a "resourceful" captain you will need to use Cruisers as tanks, Science Ships for support and Escorts for DPS. The players will take that information and then do everything in their power to max out their effectiveness in those three roles. Anyone who denies that this is the way MMO players operate is either lying or has never played an MMO before.

Actually no, what I did there is outline why both quotes can be true. Both quotes were supposedly said by developers, I know mine definately was. There's no reason to think they're not both true. I have provided evidence of where my quote came from and it's there for anyone who wants to check it's validity.

Once again, you use phrases like "lead me to believe" and "all of my mmo experience tells me", which proves you are making assumptions. You must admit you could be totally wrong, seeing as you haven't played the game, and all you're going by is what you assume.

EVE is a perfect example that while a specific ship has bonuses to make it the best in one role, it is quite often that players will mod it and use it as they see fit for their needs. Perhaps "all of [your] mmo experiences" don't cover those areas. Why would the developers do that? Because giving a bonus is not the same as forcing the player to use the ship in a specific way. Perhaps your mmo experiences are only with playing cookie-cutter flavour-of-the-month builds, I don't know the extent of your play experiences. If this is the case though, I do assure you that it is quite possible to make an MMO which doesn't require you to become a sheep and copy everyone else.

You say players will go for the more powerful option, but what if the more powerful option is to be a hybrid? "... once people realize in what directions and limits they can customize their load-outs, what Bridge Officers they activate - they end up seeing that there's far more depth and team makeup to be had."  You tell me what that sounds like.

Besides, we all know the Chinese Moon Base is just a secret front for the Chimps we sent to space and came back super-intelligent.

In regards to archetypal combat I would make reference to the classes of ships and planes employed by military's around the globe.

There are specialized ships that serve roles for example the Carrier is designed not as massively armed cruiser but to launch smaller fighter escorts and attack/bomber aircraft. They surround themselves usually with Destroyers and smaller support vessels that might carry troops/cargo/tanks etc.

If you expected them to not have a role for certain classes of ships than I guess you've never learned anything about Star Trek itself. In the Star Trek Universe there exists the three classes of ships they have specified. The flagship of the Federation is a Cruiser and combines science/combat/defense all in one. This vessel is not more powerful by sheer weapon loaded craft such as the one in Nemesis.

In episodes where the Enterprise engages in combat it did not win by sheer firepower alone but by being a sturdy ship with a crew that could employ defense tactics such as energy reroutes and shield modulations.

Switching over to an Escort type ship we're talking about the Defiant! My favorite vessel by far. It does not have the staying power that the Enterprise has in battle. It employs it's cloaking device and speed for defense and heavy hitting phasers and torpedos.

As for Science vessel they've been in many episodes and movies as well, they have basic defensive capabilities and defense but employ the maximum amount of scientific ability.

I'm really seeing this as a non-issue as this point because of what I'm about to say.

EVE  ONLINE ALSO HAS CLASSES. While you can take a Battleship and mine with it, an Exhumer does the job infinitely better.

Originally posted by Ranyr

In regards to archetypal combat I would make reference to the classes of ships and planes employed by military's around the globe.

There are specialized ships that serve roles for example the Carrier is designed not as massively armed cruiser but to launch smaller fighter escorts and attack/bomber aircraft. They surround themselves usually with Destroyers and smaller support vessels that might carry troops/cargo/tanks etc.

If you expected them to not have a role for certain classes of ships than I guess you've never learned anything about Star Trek itself. In the Star Trek Universe there exists the three classes of ships they have specified. The flagship of the Federation is a Cruiser and combines science/combat/defense all in one. This vessel is not more powerful by sheer weapon loaded craft such as the one in Nemesis.

In episodes where the Enterprise engages in combat it did not win by sheer firepower alone but by being a sturdy ship with a crew that could employ defense tactics such as energy reroutes and shield modulations.

Switching over to an Escort type ship we're talking about the Defiant! My favorite vessel by far. It does not have the staying power that the Enterprise has in battle. It employs it's cloaking device and speed for defense and heavy hitting phasers and torpedos.

As for Science vessel they've been in many episodes and movies as well, they have basic defensive capabilities and defense but employ the maximum amount of scientific ability.

I'm really seeing this as a non-issue as this point because of what I'm about to say.

EVE  ONLINE ALSO HAS CLASSES. While you can take a Battleship and mine with it, an Exhumer does the job infinitely better.

I see this as much an issue as having jedi in TOR (believe it or not, there are some complaining about that on the forums). It's staying true to the IP which is what every game based off a popular IP should do. I can't see how anyone can have an issue with this unless they never watched an episode or movie of Star Trek or just like complaining for the sake of complaining. Ships are built to perform certain tasks. That has always been how and why ships are built and I'm glad that part isn't being changed just because some folks have burnt themselves out on MMORPGS .