| 487 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
11/22/09 11:25:19 AM#141
Originally posted by DanaDark Just as I have come to believe that you will enthusiastically defend any lame or stupid game mechanic that Cryptic applies to this project. "" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2 |
|
|
11/22/09 11:26:59 AM#142
Drachasor I think you might be making some assumptions which haven't really been provent out yet. Among what the "more" potentially has to offer, check the article that Zeroxin linked. "Power management is going to play a big role, which we known about for a while" Just because the devs aren't making press releases to answer your specific questions doesn't mean they're hiding anything. They are busy making the game and all. Perhaps you could ask your questions to them directly in the next "Ask Cryptic" feature? A lot of what you're assuming about this game being traditional combat doesn't have much in the way of hard evidence to support it, I think. Sure you have every right to think that's how things will be, but you can't know if you're right/wrong until you actually get your hands on the game. Perhaps you could go through the gameplay videos on youtube and the like and see if you can find any actual gameplay supporting the "traditional role" combat? Why would you use an escort if a cruiser can do nearly as much damage? Because as you've pointed out before, some people will always go for the best possible in one area. Nearly as much isn't as much. Some people will take every advantage they can get, even if it means the second they get targetted they're in deep doo-doo. Also the reverse could be true. Perhaps an escort that is getting targetted can simply put power to shields and tank nearly as well as a cruiser. It should also be mentioned that sometimes people just play a certain way because they want to. For example, if mages are the highest dps class in WoW, why would anyone play a rogue? Because they bring different skills to the table. If warriors make the best tanks, why would anyone play a warrior as a dps? Why would you play a warrior as a dps when you could have higher dps with a mage or a rogue? People will vary their play style as much as the game lets them. From what the devs have said, STO will let them vary their play styles beyond just the basic roles. Perhaps you need to stop thinking about the game in terms of the traditional style combat. What if you go in as a party of 2 cruisers, 2 science, and 2 escort, but you can all do decent damage? The cruisers might go in first because they can take the most damage while all the enemy ships are up, but everyone just opens fire. The escort might do more damage, but the science and cruisers might be able to take out ships too. Maybe when the escort starts taking damage, he just pumps power to shields and hangs back while still firing all weapons at the enemy. Maybe the science vessels can heal while still fighting the enemy just as well. Maybe it doesn't matter if you have 1 cruiser and a bunch of science, or all escort, or 1 escort and all cruisers. Why is it so hard to believe that a ship getting a bonus to something doesn't force you into a role with it? Do people simply not want to believe that could be true? I would love to see any hard evidence that says otherwise. Maybe I take a science vessel because I want to be a disabler more than a healer. Maybe I take a cruiser because I don't want to have to worry about my shields and I've got an officer with a good self-healing thing. Maybe I take an escort because I like the cannons and the maneuverability, but I keep it with power to shields so I can fight longer, and load it up with defensive stuff. "Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000 |
|
|
11/22/09 11:36:14 AM#143
Some people just NEED Doom and Gloom. The feed on it he he. Defending mechanics? Perhaps. I understand them, see the logic and reasoning, and make rational and reasonable judgements based on facts at hand, refraining from tainting an outcome with irrational obsessions, ideas, and opinions. If you expect the world from a game, you'll quickly be disappointed upon the realization that in the end, it is but a game. |
|
|
11/22/09 11:40:06 AM#144
Originally posted by DanaDark
I think DanaDark kinda hit the nail on the head here. As the devs have said, people start off in the traditional roles because that's what's familiar to them. When they finally get used to the game though, they really open up and start to see the posibilities. You can complain that they haven't outlined all these extra posibilities to us, but I think that's just nitpicking. The devs are busy making the game and don't have time to come and answer every person who suddenly hates the way they assume the game will be. I think between power management, bridge officers, and the way you pick your skills, and the equipment you load your ship with, will ultimately offer quite a lot of customization. "Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000 |
|
|
11/22/09 11:43:33 AM#145
Most Cruisers could do pretty much any job, in cannon, though shield extension was generally a bad idea (greatly weakened the shields). Looks like they are lowering cruiser damage though, based on what has been said.
The Defiant in the show was shown to have an excellent ability to avoid damage combined with being extremely tough for its size. It could certainly survive pretty tough engagements due to these factors. Hardly a weapons platform with little defense. The problem with flanking when moving faster than cruisers is that then cruisers will be damaging a different section than the escorts will, and that divides up damage. Generally you'd want everyone focusing on the same area....assuming people the cruiser is doing any damage of note (which it might not be).
Power transfer to boost shields, transferring engineering crews for super-fast repairs, and the like don't exist in Star Trek. This kind of "healing" is rather ridiculous. If they can't dish out much damage or defend themselves well then they are rather stuck in their role, which isn't a good thing. The only thing they have that's all that special is the ability to target systems on the other ships, and it has already been stated that any ship can potentially pick that up, so if it is really good then everyone will get it. Given that, I don't see where they are going to be taking on anything a Cruiser couldn't handle (which has more weapons and more shields).
One thing you want to consider here is that Engineering mods are used for tanking ability. Cruisers have the most engineering mods. Engineering Officers also can help here. Cruisers have the most engineering officer slots. The ships don't just have more basic ability in one area or another, they also have more modification slots for those areas.
Like I said in another thread, and no offense meant, but this is a statement that is rather ignorant of game design. You can allow a ton of emergent gameplay in a singleplayer game, because things that are grossly overpowered which people figure out aren't THAT big a deal. This sort of thing has to be avoided in multi-player games, especially MMOs. Without designing things carefully you might easily find yourself in a position where Science Vessels are crap or Engineering Captains are a very bad choice. This is why types of gameplay have to be looked at and balanced from the beginning, otherwise you risk having a huge mess of a game. Certainly, even allowing the HT is a significant design decision. You can't treat the game like it is in some sort of design vacuum once you know that. Other options then have to be carefully balanced with this decision, lest one becomes grossly inferior to another. Since the only group tactic they've talked about are Holy Trinity ones, it is safe to say that is their main and perhaps only focus. Ships might be a bit more flexible than just that, but you could say the same thing in WoW with Paladins, Druids, Death Knights, and Warriors (and some other classes). Sure, they ARE flexible, but in any group situation that isn't a joke, you are forced into the HT categories (your flexibility might mean you have other minor roles, such as counter-spelling, but it doesn't change your main role or the combat system as a whole).
|
|
|
11/22/09 11:53:37 AM#146
Power Transfers, Engineering Teams, and the like arent in Star Trek? Seems I am a bigger fan of Star trek then you are, as I know for a fact they are in Star Trek. And your tactics are highly highly questionable. Having everyone target one location on a ship is rather... foolish. Extremely. Outstandingly. It shows your sheer inability to think tactically. But that's alright, no requirement that you have any clue on the matter. And you keepp trying to argue with my reasoning behind game mechanics and programming, yet offer the most foolish reasons that are not even relevent. the idea of extending shields around other ships at the cost of lowering their effectiveness is a no brainer. In order to protect more ships, you can't protect as well. This makes complete logical sense. You'd require more energy to have a stronger shield around a greater area, so, you'd need some supporting vessels around to transfer energy to you. Keep in mind that this is ship based combat, not like fantasy rpgs where you usually have a group taking on 1 mob at a time. It's entirely plausible that yoou won't need a super tank as every ship will be actively engaged with enemies, and your ability to use your vessel will matter more than the basic Holy Trinity. I actively admit ignorance on many game mechanics for STO, beccause I know that it is impossible, as a non-STO developer, to fully know all there is. You can feign knowledge of what is and what is not, but in the end I know you are equally as ignorant, but somehow unwilling to accept that. |
|
|
11/22/09 12:15:07 PM#147
Originally posted by someforumguy
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.
LOL...finally, someone says what needs to be said. |
|
|
11/22/09 12:20:38 PM#148
Originally posted by ktanner3
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 .
I'm sorry, but a Science vessel being used exclusively for nothing but combat, and having the ability to 'heal' other ships is stretching it, and borderline ludicrous. Oh, but I forgot. 'Nothing But War Going On Right Now' is Cryptic's convenient excuse to avoid having to worry about things like that. They might as well change this to Star Trek Bridge Commander Online. |
|
|
11/22/09 12:20:51 PM#149
So are you. My assumptions are based on the premise the Devs show the best aspects of their game and focus on advertising those aspects. Your assumptions are based on the idea the Devs make little videos going over combat and are secretly holding back the best aspects of the system and hence only talking about the Holy Trinity aspects.
And what are the power management options? Shields, speed, and damage. That means anyone wanting to do the most damage is going to minimize shields at least, and only have enough speed to keep up with the rotating enemy ship. Cruisers have the most power by default, but this system gives Escorts something to offset that different as far as damage dealing comes into play. Since they have higher base speed, they can afford to put less power into their speed relative to other ships and more into weapons. Tanks, of course, don't need to move, so if you go with a Holy Trinity setup, that gives Cruisers a big advantage. All power to Shields. If they need to move a little, they can do that, but they definitely have the advantage here. If anything, this might limit the usefulness of abilities you can pick up, such as targetting the enemy systems if you can't afford to put enough power to your weapons. Or even other special attacks. Despite the advertisement as providing more options and flexibility, this really seems to just work like the Champions Online system which, like you said, for a 90% of the content you could do whatever you wanted (go with balanced, etc), but for the stuff that matters in a group setting you had to specialize.
Doesn't have hard evidence to support it? I beg to differ. You are the one without hard evidence. Here's what I've offered up: What do you have? A vague answer to a question in one interview? That's about it.
People go for the best possible in areas that matter. (That said, certain levels of damage differences don't matter). They can afford to go with Escorts for damage if cruisers can stop all damage from getting them, which seems to be the case (Cruisers can cover other ships with shields at no penalty). If an Escort can tank nearly as well as a cruiser, then these modications and even officers mean very, very little. Cruiser has more slots for engineering stuff? Who cares! It doesn't make any big difference! That said, changing power settings TAKES TIME, so you can't immediate switch your settings when you are targetted. This is one way how Power Settings force you into a particular role. Unless you can break the laws of physics and see the future, you aren't going to know when you need to up shields until after you are being fired upon (so then you might say just have everyone keep some power going to shields, but this hurts damage a lot compared to just one ship doing it).
First, mages are getting nerfed, last I checked (or have been nerfed...I don't play anymore). Imbalances like that get fixed. Why do they get fixed? Because guilds start not wanting to bring particular classes when another makes the job much, much easier. Btw, Warrior DPS was quite good, last I checked, certainly about the same as a Rogue. In any case, yes, people like different playstyles, which is a BIG reason why Devs need to balance those play styles so that they aren't hitting anyone in the face for picking a choice they find to be fun. As far as I can tell, STO will let you have "different play styles" the same way WoW does. You want to DPS and debuff (like some Mages), then get the right science officers and the right science mods. This doesn't change the fact that you ARE a dpser. This doesn't get you out of the Holy Trinity system.
I've considered other possible styles. Problem is, there no evidence things like traditional naval combat (which is more Star Trek-like) are supported. Everything, every sort of mod, is already divided into Holy Trinity groupings. Adding another combat system as an alternative requires careful balancing lest one become far superior to the other. There's no evidence they are doing this, and more and more evidence comes in that they are not (like Power Management).
Well, first I heard party size was 5, so that's a major problem right there. : ) There's no reason to think Science Vessels can do decent damage. They have less weapons and power than cruisers. They will certainly be doing significantly less damage than them. Again, you are assuming you can instantly divert power, which you can't. Even assuming you can instantly divert power, you are going to have to maintain some power to shields all the time, otherwise if everyone turns on you, then you are screwed. So that means ALL dps are doing less damage than they otherwise would, since they have power diverted to their shields from weapons. Also, the Science Vessels are going to have to be providing more healing than normal, since it is the Cruiser that has the most damage reducing modifications and officers (or everyone is slacking here, in which case it still has to heal more). In short, they'd be better off going with a HT system since the Cruiser can shield friendlies. Or if they make it so that ship class, officers, and modifications don't matter, much, it is just better if the tank shields other ships.
It's far from just one minor bonus. Sure, a minor bonus doesn't make a big difference. We are talking about EVERYTHING in the game here, however. You have to have all modifications, officers, etc provide basically no bonus for you not to be specialized by your ship selection. At that point they essentially don't have a modification system. I sincerely doubt this is the case.
1. I don't think there will be a disabler specialized role per se. Also, ALL Science Vessels can heal, so if you are science, then you can heal. Disabling, from what I see, is done, essentially, by Science Officers. So you can make that what all your science guys do on a Science Vessel, but you'll also have healing to do too. 2. And as a Cruiser you can tank, so people will expect that of you. Again, that's the best role for your ship, unless all the modification tools in the game don't help you much. You can choose not to do that, but then what are you really bringing to the party? 3. Again, with the Escort, if you do that then you'll damage will suffer a lot. Since you can deal the most damage and a Cruiser can make it so that you don't need ANY power to shields (or almost none), then keeping power to the shields just hurts the group. You say I am stuck on this HT dynamic, but they really have provided no other way to play or even hinted at another way to play. Even your proposals are really just tactics that are less effective than a Holy Trinity tactic in all scenerios. (Heck, they've even managed to make Tanks effective in PvP, since you shield other ships, so HT is alive and well in all aspects of the game). |
|
|
11/22/09 12:32:01 PM#150
Power Transfers: Name one episode where they transfer power at the cost of weapon effectiveness. Engineering Teams: Sure they exist, but they don't send them over to other ships IN COMBAT. All this has a vague veneer of Star Trek, but the actual implementation is far from right. Btw, how is my tactic questionable? Why is it a better idea to spread out damage among multiple independent shield systems? You'd have to deal more damage overall, whereas when you concentrate it you can break down the shields and get to the hull easier. As long as you can move fast enough to keep up with the ship's rotation, this would work better than any other method for main damage (naturally you'll want a ship or two targetting specific systems, but for general damage you certainly want to focus it). Are you just arguing with me to argue?
Yet, you don't seem to be reading what I say, or countering my arguments. Claiming they are foolish and not relevant doesn't make them so.
Well, energy transfer like that isn't present in Star Trek combat, but otherwise, yeah. it does make a lot of sense. A TON of sense. I'm glad you agree. Now if you had actually read what I wrote with any care, you'd realize that's NOT how STO does it.
Evidence indicates your tank will probably tank the whole group at a time, by shielding friendly ships. The Science vessel will heal the tank, etc. There's no talk of another system beyond one vague line, and no clear mechanics to support another way to play either. You're being a bit vague on what "ability to use your vessel" means. In an HT system, you still have to use your avatar correctly otherwise the group gets hurt (and probably fails). The inability for anyone to propose another combat tactic that isn't grossly inferior is rather telling though.
I'm clearly not equally ignorant, since you don't know how shielding other ships work in STO. |
|
|
11/22/09 12:47:16 PM#151
Originally posted by Blurr
I think DanaDark kinda hit the nail on the head here. As the devs have said, people start off in the traditional roles because that's what's familiar to them. When they finally get used to the game though, they really open up and start to see the posibilities. You can complain that they haven't outlined all these extra posibilities to us, but I think that's just nitpicking. The devs are busy making the game and don't have time to come and answer every person who suddenly hates the way they assume the game will be. I think between power management, bridge officers, and the way you pick your skills, and the equipment you load your ship with, will ultimately offer quite a lot of customization. No, I'm not complaining they haven't outlined all those extra possibilities. I'm complaining they haven't outlined ANY. There's no one alternative that they've talked about, and heck, all we got is one comment that there might be alternatives and tons of comments that this is WoW in space. CO has power management. It is still Holy Trinity for group content that is tough. Saying "oh, but it is so customizable!" is rather silly. So is WoW -- tons of gear slots, talents, and glyphs. WoW is still HT. Being "customizable" doesn't magically mean you can get another combat system. |
|
|
Raltar
 Apprentice Member
Joined: 1/28/06
Asking for help on the internet is like asking a swarm of bees why they are stinging you! |
Originally posted by Blurr
Twisting the quote around and repeating it in an incorrect fashion doesn't allow you to pretend the issue has been resolved. That kind of behavior really hurts your credibility. This is the REAL quote: "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." Lets break this quote down the CORRECT way, shall we? First it says: "Resourceful Captains will also be able to recognize and utilize the different classes of starships." It doesn't say any of the things Blurr claims it says. It doesn't say that resourceful captains have the option to do it this way or that resourceful captains might choose to do it this way. Nor does any part of the quote suggest that there are alternate options. It directly says "Resourceful Captains will" attach specific roles to specific ships. Nothing about the statements suggests that there is a choice involved here. No where does this phrase use the word "can" as Blurr claims. It directly says resourceful captains WILL do it this way. Secondly it says: "Cruisers as tanks, science vessles as support and escorts for lighting strikes." Nothing about this part of the quote suggests that there are alternate options available. It directly and without question assigns each ship type to a specific role. There are no hints given about how great or how large the possible advantages and disadvantages are that these ships will have in these roles. But it makes it clear in an undeniable way exactly which ships have been designed with which roles in mind. There is NO way to ignore this. So its a FACT that specific ships have been designed by the developers with specific roles in mind. Its also a FACT that they believe resourceful captains WILL use these ships for these roles. (And Blurr, I notice you didn't even TRY to reply to my point about your hypocrisy in claiming I might be wrong because I didn't play the game when you weren't willing to admit you might be wrong for the same reason. Nor have I seen you attempt to mount any kind of defense aginst Drachasor's point that Tanking doesn't make sense in the Star Trek universe.) (I also notice that our new "friend" DanaDark pretty much agreed with me in post #140 where he goes into great detail explaining how Cruisers will tank, Escorts will DPS and Science ships will support.) Each man must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, which course is patriotic and which isn't. You cannot shirk this and be a man. To decide against your conviction is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country, let men label you as they may. ~Mark Twain |
|
11/22/09 1:03:54 PM#153
Frankly, the whole concept of science vessels 'healing' other ships makes me sick. The idea of tanks (presumably with some 'taunt' abilities) is only slightly less silly. Perhaps each tank ship has a version of General Chang spouting quotes from Shakespeare (in the 'original' Klingon)? Ranged 'healing' whether personal or ship-related is not part of Trek. Tanking is a fantasy RPG concept developed to substitute for collision detection (blocking) and use of terrain features (like NWN had). These are ridiculous ideas and the Cryptic devs should be shunned for putting them into this game. Thanks for adding magic to Trek. "" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2 |
|
|
11/22/09 1:10:07 PM#154
Originally posted by MMO_Doubter We are on the same page. I had a similar idea for a name, but you took it, so I won't steal your thunder. :) The Cryptic devs don't care, they designed a game to amuse themselves, not the fans. |
|
|
11/22/09 1:21:37 PM#155
Sigh, there is no reasoning with some people, even with detailing examples. Ranged healing isn't magic. Shields require power, they go down usually because of drained power as they absord hits. A power transfer, which is a ranged tactic, can replenish the shields. Power transfers are seen in Star trek episodes between ships. Engineering and Medical teams are also ranged as they depart the ship and head to other ships by shuttle or transport. Star Trek Nemesis had such teams mentioned after the final engagement. EVERYTHING in space combat is ranged. I would be bothered to see a ship bust out with a bandaid and place it on another ship using its "hands". Tanking is seen in Star Trek as the Enterprise, in several episodes, has extended its sheilds around other vessels al also has drawn fire using substantially less effective weaponry (Saucer section using an antimatter spread on a cube while the Star Drive section fires phasers and torpedoes... yet the cube puts its attention on the nearly defenseless saucer). You inability to see these issues highlights not only your lack of fandom in Star Trek, but also your complete lack of creativity. |
|
|
11/22/09 1:27:11 PM#156
I'm late in this thread but just wanted to voice my opinions also heh. I'm alittle miffed about that video myself.... What I wanted to say was about the people comparing tanking, dpsing and such to real naval combat. I am no profession, but it seems to me that vessels (or units) have certain tasks, that much is clear (in real combat). However, I wouldnt exactly compare it to the trinity. My biggest example would be a submarine. Now, I don't know much about naval combat, but I'm pretty sure Destroyer class ships were submarine bane? Atleast I think that was the ship class title heh. Cruisers ( I think ) are more head to head ship vs ship thing. Put one against a submarine and they get eaten. Yet put that Cruiser against the Destroyer and the Cruiser wins. Atleast I think that is how it works. The ship titles might be off but the basic premise is, each class of ship has its strengths and weaknesses. No one ship would be a tank. And if anything I would hope that the crew of the starship would be the healers heh, not some other damn ship. Land warfare would be somewhat similar. Real tanks, while tough and damaging to alot of things and fairly vulnerable to air strikes. AA guns are needed here, while being weak to umm tanks and infantry? My point is, a military as a whole is what makes it work. Certain things counter certain things while being weak to other things... Sorry too many things there lol. Anyway, I kinda feel thats how Cryptic should have went about it. And maybe they did, but that video sure didn't give me a good feeling about where its heading heh. |
|
|
11/22/09 1:32:17 PM#157
Originally posted by DanaDark
Inability has no bearing here. You are blindly supporting a product because it has a brand name label on it. 'Star Trek' blinds you. The point is, Cryptic is releasing a very limited and monotonous and ubiquitous concept to the masses, and the reason people like MMO_Doubter and I are railing against the combat system is because that is all Cryptic is focused on...war, combat, leveling, gearing up, etc. All Cryptic shows us is combat, war, more combat, more war...if that's all they show us, what are we supposed to 'see'? I wanted a game (and was being offered a game in the beginning) where I could be an Engineer and monitor the warp core, or be a bridge officer where I could reroute power from the engines to shields in a fight...where I could work alongside other players on one single ship to accomplish a common goal...whether it be combat, exploration, first contact with another race, or a diplomatic mission to another planet. You tell me what I've named above that ISN'T synonymous with Star Trek. But, oh, I forgot, Cryptic is shoveling this other dung down my throat where everybody gets a ship and a 'pet' crew. And all we do is fight. On the ground, in space, etc. Oh, that sounds like monotonous fun. Maybe if you put any other name on it besides Star Trek, I might buy into this, but this game is not what Star Trek is about. Star CRAFT, perhaps. It's a giant sandbox space battleground piece of junk. No, I know nothing about the game. And I'm telling you that flat out. WITH confidence. You'll be paying for an ongoing beta with a very limited gaming experience. War.
|
|
|
11/22/09 1:33:12 PM#158
Might add that the interviews are with game developers... whom are not always the best at conveying ideas and such. I doubt that what they say is in it is the ONLY thing that is in it. |
|
|
11/22/09 1:33:15 PM#159
Originally posted by smokeybha Your assessment is pretty much on the mark. Nothing in the real world matches tanks and healers in RPGs. "" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2 |
|
|
11/22/09 1:34:10 PM#160
Originally posted by DanaDark Oh, get real. Now the devs don't even know what they are saying. Just stop now. "" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2 |
|
