PVP:Yes | Distribution:Retail | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:SubscriptionBUY IT
Desktop Client | System Req:
Star Trek Online Forum » General Discussion » PROOF: Crusier=Tank, Science=Support, Escort=DPS
| 477 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
I am beginning to think most people on this forum just look for any reason humanly possible to hate the game before it is even launched. I think the next argument will be complaints on the shade of green of Romulan blood, or the sharp corners of the retail box being a hazard and therefor Cryptic hates people... |
|
Originally posted by DanaDark Being worried the combat system isn't going to be fun is a legitimate concern. I'm tired of the Tank-Healer-DPS system, and I'm not going to play another game that forces you to use that for major group content. |
|
|
Then don't play. No real sense acting as a three year old and whinning to the world about it. As well, another example of a person complaining about the "Holy Trinity" without offering an alternative. The "Holy Trinity" problem is not a developer issue, it is the issue of a player unable to be creative enough to break free from it. |
|
Originally posted by DanaDark I HAVE offered an alternative. Someone quoted me about on THIS PAGE (though I had a more elaborate post elsewhere in this thread). Also, I'm perfectly entitled to my opinion and if that means I want to vent my disappointment about the game in an appropriate thread then I'm perfectly entitled to do that too. No one is making you read this thread after all. In short, your proposal for self-censorship is rejected! Btw, is most definitely IS a developer issue. They make the combat mechanics. In real life the "Holy Trinity" doesn't work, for example, because real life doesn't have people that can magically hold the aggro of others AND withstand constant attacks, nor do we have people that can magically heal people from near death to complete health in moments, nor would damage dealers that can be taken out in one blow be a successful real life tactic. These things are only possible when a combat system is designed around them; they are only possible when the specialties the game supports are the tank, healer, dps ones. A player problem? Don't be ridiculous. Mechanics matter. |
|
|
There's also no sound in space. You propose they disable audio while in space? They've detailed the ability to configure your ship with equiptment and player skills, therefor you can, and most likely will, greatly customize how your ship engages in combat. If you choose to actively persue the Holy Trinity, thats on you, not them, they simply described that those rolls will be available. The did not however, say you MUST have all three in a group or everlasting DOOM shall reign upon your hard drive. In fact, from their videos and interviews, they had detailed the ability of each different type to perform well enough on its own as well as in groups. So, you are overreacting. Again, this boils down to YOUR lack of creativity, not their failure. |
|
Originally posted by DanaDark This boils down to you practicing spin control to improve sales of the game. Trek doesn't have tanks OR ranged healing. It's not appropriate to the IP. Take the Trek names and graphics out of the game, and most of my objections go away. Watch the show once in a while, and see how battles are fought. Cover plays a huge role in Trek combat.
|
|
Originally posted by DanaDark One could say the exact same thing about WoW (except, perhaps, for Holy Paladins). That doesn't mean you can escape the Holy Trinity there either. The fact that Cryptic hasn't detailed any other way to handle group combat, and seems to kinda think something is going to magically appear out of their system which seems designed to support the Holy Trinity, gives me plenty of skepticism about their off-hand remark or two that you can play high-end group content any other way -- especially when all of their other remarks are supporting the use of the Holy Trinity. Now maybe they'll surprise me, but it sure isn't looking that way given their past games on the market and what they've said so far. Btw, your use of hyperbole to try to bolster your arguments isn't working so well. Saying things like they should disable audio in space makes it sound you like really don't understand the issue at hand here. The Holy Trinity is not reasonable artistic license. |
|
|
The OP likes classless game designs. Fine. It' s a preference. However,you DO sound silly when you start bashing designes you don't like ,because most of the players do like it and it make sense to them. Classes offer diversity and encourage grouping. Imagine how ultra boring EVE would be if it didn't have so many different classes of specialized ships. There is nothing wrong with the class system as a design. If it's going to be entertaining and interesting depends on the ways it's implemented and we can't comment on that until we try the game. |
|
|
Raltar, I think your previous posts, even in this thread alone, say all that need to to be said. Both quotes can be true, it's actually quite easy because the dev chat quote directly deals with the video quote. The problem is you are reading into the video quote what you want to hear. I've said this a number of times but you ignore it so you can keep making your argument. Resourceful captains will be able to make use of the fact that each ship type has a bonus to the traditional roles AND while people naturally gravitate to these roles, once they get familiar with the way they can load out their ship, they discover that there is much more in-depth team makeup to be had. It's right there in plain english. I apologize if english isn't your first language, but the quotes really aren't all that hard to understand. Since they were both said by the developers, logically it makes the most sense if they are both true. Twisting the meaning of one to contradict the other makes it look like you're trying to bash the game. Once again I'm not trying to say the game is a specific way, as you are. You say that the developer said X so the game MUST be like Y. I am saying the developers didn't say the game was like Y, they said A and B. I am not wrong because I am simply pointing out that you're twisting the words of the developers to mean what you want it to mean. You do it every time you make your argument. When I talk about EVE and other things, it's because I'm trying to continue the discussion in the thread. I am allowed to respond to other people in the thread, despite you wanting to have your own little flame war. "Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000 |
|
|
Lets take a look at the real issue here. Issue: New video says that Cruisers can be used as Tanks, Science as Support, and Escorts as DPS. Solution: Developer quote (below) says that yes while people can play this way, once they realize how to get full use out of their equipment/officers, they realize there is much more than just these simple roles. 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. Issue resolved. "Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000 |
|
|
Zeroxin
 Hard Core Member
Joined: 6/21/06
My words are not here to sway you,they are here to make you understand. |
http://www.massively.com/2009/11/20/star-trek-online-ship-tactics-part-2/ Round 2? This is not a game. |
Originally posted by Zeroxin
Haha, yeah. One of the things I take away from that article is that Power Management will definately play a signifigant role. It sounds to me like if you want to DPS you can just put all power to weaopns, or if you're getting hit and want to absorb damage, you just pump power to shields. Perhaps that makes the idea of cruiser-tank, escort-dps obsolete. Maybe taking a ship with bonuses to damage over bonuses to defense is just a personal preference. Perhaps whoever's taking the most damage at the time simply becomes "the tank" and puts power to shields until he can get away. For all we know, the enemies could just target whoever's doing the most damage to them at the time, and people take turns being tanks. Maybe then the only difference in choice of ship is you pick cruiser if you want a longer tank turn, haha. Maybe a cruiser with all power to weapons does enough damage to be signifigant. STO certainly wouldn't be the first game to do it that way. "Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000 |
|
Originally posted by Blurr Really? Like what? All we have from you (and the Devs) is, essentially, that "players are going to find out that there is more!" Neither you, nor the Devs, propose what this "more" is. Honestly, it sounds like it might just be wishful thinking on the part of the Devs, since unless the combat is designed with these other systems in mind, then it could easily be unbalanced. I think if the Devs actually had a clear idea of how non-traditional combat would work in their game, then they'd be talking about it, rather than have just one vague statement in one interview. If they even sketched out another way people might work together in combat besides the traditional method, I'd find it a lot more believable. Here's how I think things are going to go down. Everyone will use ships for their intended roles. You'll probably have one Tank, one or two science vessels, and the rest will be escorts. People will use their science officers to provide a bit of flexibility (so you can have a tank with a debuff power, for instance), but this won't change the basic role. You're still going to want the higher base stats for each role and the higher number of mods for each role that the specialized ships provide (higher officer seats will probably help to). In short, it won't be much different from a game like WoW, where you have tanks who can debuff and buff if you want, but a given tank spec is still a tank. The more I've thought about it, the more I think Cruisers won't have taunt mechanics, instead they'll be able to "extend" their shields around all ships in their group (or just all friendly ships) so that they take all damage that is fired out and they are the only ship that needs healer -- though I might be wrong here and maybe they will get taunts. Why do I think this? If you could get a Cruiser (which has extra power) to do nearly as much damage as an Escort, then no one would ever use an Escort (why bother, the Cruiser is tougher, generally cooler, and has more going for it!). Frankly, the fact the Escorts will have more special weapon attacks and special escort-only weapons that do extra damage as well as innate damage bonuses and more damage upgrade mod slots will probably ensure it is the best DPS ship by a good margin -- if not, then why bother even having that as a separate ship class? If you didn't need Science Vessels for Healing, then why bother with science vessels at all? Just make more Cruisers which have more shields, do more damage, and can protect other ships! Let's say you try going in without a tanking ship, then you'll probably need more healers. But 2 healers and 3 DPS are going to do less damage than just having a traditional group. If 2 tanks and 3 DPS can work -- giving one tank a rest to regen shields, then that's going to be better than the HT and HT setups are going to fall by the wayside. I haven't seen one other factor that determines what kind of job you could build a ship towards in ALL of their releases besides the traditional roles. I haven't seen you propose one. I haven't seen the Devs propose one. I haven't seen anyone said how they'd intend to balance this with regards to the HT which they definitely do have (and balance would be a major issue). Overall, I don't see where this other method of playing combat is going to come from in a game where the Devs have chosen to split up ship types into Holy Trinity Groupings, where classes are split up into Holy Trinity Groupings, etc. I don't think they've given any thought to designing another way to play the game, and if they have I'd love to hear what it is going to be and how they are balancing it. That said, I'll check out the game in Open Beta, but I sure don't have my hopes up. |
|
Originally posted by Blurr
Haha, yeah. One of the things I take away from that article is that Power Management will definately play a signifigant role. It sounds to me like if you want to DPS you can just put all power to weaopns, or if you're getting hit and want to absorb damage, you just pump power to shields. Perhaps that makes the idea of cruiser-tank, escort-dps obsolete. Maybe taking a ship with bonuses to damage over bonuses to defense is just a personal preference. Perhaps whoever's taking the most damage at the time simply becomes "the tank" and puts power to shields until he can get away. For all we know, the enemies could just target whoever's doing the most damage to them at the time, and people take turns being tanks. Maybe then the only difference in choice of ship is you pick cruiser if you want a longer tank turn, haha. Maybe a cruiser with all power to weapons does enough damage to be signifigant. STO certainly wouldn't be the first game to do it that way. They've said Cruisers shield other ships. Like I've said, I suspect healing/tanking is an issue of the deflector dish (right dish lets you shield friendlies, another dish lets you heal friendlies). Might be wrong there, but it doesn't matter so much. They've said that Science Vessels do less damage. They certainly have fewer weapon slots and less power than Cruisers. I'm not seeing how you could make one into a ship capable of dealing good damage. If a Cruiser with all power to the weapons is as good as a Escort...why bother with an escort, since the Cruiser is tougher? A fleet of Cruisers and one healer are then going to be able to last a LOT longer than 1 tank, 1 healer, and 3 escorts. (Unless the better power, better shields, more damage reducing mod slots, more engineering personal, and more crew somehow don't matter at all...at which point do any of these modifications make a different at ALL?) If the ship you choose doesn't really matter, then why split ships up into different Holy Trinity roles like that? Why bother having different officer allotments, if it doesn't really matter? Why bother having different mod slot allotments if it doesn't really matter? That said, I repeat that the Science Vessels doesn't seem capable of dealing good damage (or tank as well as cruisers for that matter). Anyhow, I actually addressed a lot of this in my post above. |
|
|
Well, this is sort of how I believe they'll implement it... Cruisers: Tank. Sure, but will be rather slow, a larger vessel that can extend it's shields around other ships or even erect shields around others. Will be able to pack a punch when needed, but will be meant more as a foundation for a fleet. Escort: DPS. I'd hardly rank the Defiant, as an example, as vessel capable of taking much damage, or as a vessel ready to explore strange new worlds. In fact, I'd classify it as pretty much a weapons platform with engines. And pretty darn good on making thing go boom. These ships should be faster and have an easier time flanking the cruisers. This can be a good thing as it'd require a fleet to have more than just 1 cruiser to take damage... avoiding the issue where in many MMO guilds, there is only 1 or 2 tanks among 30+ players. Science: Support. This is Sci-Fi... support can be a lot. Power transfer to boost a ships power to shields, weapons, engines, etc. Engineering teams, shield scramblers, engine disablers... sure they won't be able to take many hits or dish out damage... but being able to disable the enemy ship completely perhaps, will be a MAJOR advantage. Heck, I could imagine scenarios where a science ship could really take on more than the rest. Ship Make Up: Blush and eyeliner. This is what can reeally make things rather nice. Since the game is built on a skill system involving the player, equiptment, and crew, I'd imagine it possible to create a rather sturdy science vessel, or a cruiser with weak shields but a tyrannical punch. The discussion up to this point has focused almost exclusively on the "Holy Trinity", which is wrong, the real discussion should be on just how far this customization allows us to go. The more customization the better. And that is why I think they started with a basic Holy Trinity pattern. Have something basic down as a foundation, and then let players customize their gaming experience to kingdom come. |
|
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. |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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. |
|
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 |
|
|
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).
|
|
|
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. |
|
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. |
|
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. |
|
|
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). |
|
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. |
|
