Topic: Legacy: NO Upgrade System, only Energy Allocation system!

[Acidrain2]

Legacy: NO Upgrade System, only Energy Allocation system!

Well, with the resent video released it seems there is no upgrade system. The Strat guide has also indicated that you will use command points to purchase new ships to add to ones fleet. Also in the resent interview with STGU, it says as follows:


MADDOC: We had experimented with a more traditional upgrade system, but we found it to be redundant with the energy allocation system. Each ship can reroute power to one of three main systems. More power to your shield system increases shield strength. Allocating power to your engines means faster speeds and better turning. Power to your weapons will boost your recharge rates and ranges. Keep in mind that allocating power to one system will take it away from another. This energy allocation system means no two players will command the Defiant quite the same.

The official forums are just jumping all over this with disappointment.

Acidrain

[Magnum357]

Why would they be disappointed?  I don't understand.   

[IAF Lyrkiller]

That is one reason I will not bother to buy it. The game just plain sucks the big one.

Also, what is the point of dropping upgrading. You would want to upgrade certain system like phasers, photons, sensors etc.

I dont get their reasoning behind it at all. That is just my opinion.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

apparently photons won't damage shields either, just bare hull. someone correct me if I messed up with that from the legacy forum. Also, 2 phaser hardpoints on a constitution refit, what's with that BS?  SFC3 is better than this. There goes the franchise. 

[Acidrain2]

FPF-Tobin Dax,

You know iam not sure, there is information but it seem to change rather quick when it comes to what was going to be in the game to what is in the game know. Like the Strat Guide says one thing and then we find out from the Dev's something different.

Also, there has been some indications that there is a possibility of only 4 players in the game so it is basically 2v2. This isn't confirmed but all indications are pointing that way.

Also as for the Upgrade vs. Allocation, it wouldn't be so bad but the specs they have governor to just don't make sense on some of the ships. Though perhaps the modders out there could change that as well.

Acidrain

[Magnum357]

He still didn't answer my quesiton above about why everyone is disappointed about having an energy Allocation system.    

Actually, the game doesn't sound to bad, but I must admit, PHOTONS NOT CAUSING DAMAGE TO SHEILDS?!?!  I think they are trying to make the game have some tatical flavor, but that seems a bit too much.  Perhaps have Photons do 1/2 damage to sheilded targets, but it still seems very weird they would mess with Photons like that. 

[SkyFlyer]

He still didn't answer my quesiton above about why everyone is disappointed about having an energy Allocation system.    

Its not so much having an energy allocation system as it is not having an upgrade system.

Don't see why you cant have both like in SFC3.

[Acidrain2]

You know both of you bring up some good questions with regards to the energy allocation system, i don't know everyone has there own opinion on the EAS though iam not sure though if it is newbies of the old timers. Iam sorry i didnt respond to that question. Though for myself iam mixed on it and after talking to a few people iam ok with the EAS but my worry on it is the balancing of the other races and also the specs that i have seen on the Strat guide which don't make much sense and one if governored by those specs and that is what i dont like. On the Upgrade system ive always liked that system as it gave allot of strategy to one player against another and it would really craft ones game play and i think this kinda of takes away from that kinda of your custom setup even though at times many people new the setups but that ok.

So, iam still not really sure though perhaps the modders can change some of it? I know the modders are awesome and know a few of you are in here and i hoping to see some great things. I hope that the Dynaverse people do migrate to this new game if it is worth it, there is allot of good people that can bring allot of talent and this game was made for modding from what we have been told. We have been told by the developers and producers that which will make this game is the talent of the community and the modders.

Cheers,

Acidrain

[KBF-Crim]

I hope that the Dynaverse people do migrate to this new game if it is worth it,

Actually...we're kinda hoping it is the other way around..

Once you've enjoyed chess....checkers doesnt hold appeal

I find it extremely hillarious that now certain people have gotten exactly what they wanted.....IE:...no trace of ANY SFC features in legacy....those same people will now start complaining that the game lacks "depth".....

*snicker*

[Acidrain2]

Crim,

I can see that with lack of depth! Ive been in on alot of this game from the begining and there is alot of people really really not liking it. Iam almost to the conclusion that this game is going to flop and i mean really bad iam afraid.

Acidrain

[FRA.E.Kehakoul_XC]

Sounds like a dumbed down version of bridgecommander just without the bridge...,and even more dumbed down then sfc3, uh heck.
Its the modders who make this game worthwhile....aha hmmpf. THat is something really no one wants to hear.
I saw the video,was it the video or are the ships not even able to move smoothely?

anyways, what Crim said:)

[Acidrain2]

FRA,

Yeah in the last video i though the same thing on the ships as they seem to move not smooth enough and i though they stated they used physic. I dont think so, i really question the team they got to work on Legacy at MAddoc!

Acidrain

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

I have been reading the legacy forum for months, so I am up to speed in that regard. So many are disappointed that someone actually posted yesterday that all those with any negative thoughts towards the game should just stay off the forums.     I responded to someone else who posted we all must buy this star trek game or there won't be anymore.  I suggested buying a "lemon" would only encourage them to make more of the same.

[Lepton]

Ah, so this is the Legacy bitching area.  Hehe!!!  What a crock.  A Connie refit with 2 phaser hardpoints.  Did these guys ever watch TWOK?  Why disregard what is so clearly displayed in the most venerated battle scene in the Trek canon??  Because, hmm, I don't know, they were too busy shoving it out the door!!!

[Acidrain2]

Yeah go figure the modeler was Rick Knocks! I dont about this game it is becoming more and more disaapointing more i find out information about it.

Also, it would seem that they are going to have 4 players instead of the normal 8 that they implied earlier. Though it is unconfirmed but it has been confirmed on Xbox that that is the case but game informer mag has said otherwise. So, people are excited over 4players, iam i the only one that sees something wrong with this picture for PC?

Acidrain

[Rod ONeal]

I have been reading the legacy forum for months, so I am up to speed in that regard. So many are disappointed that someone actually posted yesterday that all those with any negative thoughts towards the game should just stay off the forums. I responded to someone else who posted we all must buy this star trek game or there won't be anymore. I suggested buying a "lemon" would only encourage them to make more of the same.

AMEN!! If it's crap then don't buy it. Let me see their logic, "Even if it's crap you should buy it so we can make you more crap to buy." It's like this whole "pay to play" thing with games. If nobody subscribed they wouldn't stop making games (trust me), they'd just stop making games that you have to subscribe to.

[Lepton]

I have to tell you that I am really torn.  In one respect, I have really been looking forward to Legacy and hoping that it will give Trek gaming a shot in the arm.  Also to some degree I actually welcome a simpler game.  Hell, I even thought I might like Encounters.  Just something different, but there is different and then there is just wrong.  I have a certain expectation that, when one of the best Trek modelers out there is hired on for a project, the game itself will match that kind of accuracy and professionalism, but I can't say that I have seen it thus far.  I mean seriously how tough would it have been to at least attempt to put the right number of phasers on a ship, even if some sources differ as to the exact number?  At least, try to make it near our expectations.

This is what really irks me.  Clearly, they could not or were not willing to attempt to create balanced tactical gameplay with something close to canon weapon loadouts.  Now, I could end up eating my words, but I have seen little to contradict what I just stated.  Have we seen one plasma torpedo??  Have they even attempt to set aside any of our concerns on this issue?  It takes scouring gameplay clips for one person to catch a glimpse of what might be one.  This is like being 13 years olds and watching the scrambled porno station just to maybe catch a glimpse of a booby.  I feel so dirty.  And the strategy guide calls everything phasers and photons when clearly they are not or certainly should not be.  What kind of sideshow is this??

[Rod ONeal]

I watched the gameplay video and there was virtually no mention of tactics. They mentioned fighting near a planet to stop your opponent from warping if you have a tactical advantage (like you have overwhelming firepower, for example). Cloaking to stop your opponents attack if overwhelmed (the cloak as shown in skirmish mode wasn't any more hidden than SFC2, just translucent. The "fade out" graphic was better.) 4 teams w/ 4 ships ea. was the limit in skirmish mode. No mention of gameplay in multiplayer campaign mode. No mention of what you are fighting for except death match, although there were other options that they didn't demonstrate. The only weapons mentioned were phasers and photons. Some ships are more geared towards one than the other (seems to have nothing to do with canon weapons loadouts). Attacking shields with phasers until the shields are gone and then attacking the "Shieldless" target with photons was a mentioned tactic. Many of the ships weren't canon (which is fine), but there are only 80 ships total for all 4 races in all eras (Ent. TOS, TMP, TNG). They think that the game would've gotten too "diluted" (their words, not mine) if there were more. That's only 5 ships per race per era, average. Think about how many options we have with SFC and how can anyone think that it'll dilute gameplay by having more than 80?

I can't figure out if it's a really lousy game or if it was just a really lousy demonstration.

[Acidrain2]

O'neal,

From what we can gather is this game is an old game that was brought back to life, Maddoc didnt build this game from the ground up so what ever the canceled was this is the game we have been told by our inside people. Also we know there isnt any love and alot of problems between Maddoc vs. Bethsoft.

Cheers,

Acidrain

[FRA.E.Kehakoul_XC]

Screwing up  titles is the only constant within the Treck games Franchise.

I mean ,i can understand if this happens once,..but this  looks like someone need s  to be fired.
Preferably the guy who is responsible .
proly alot of the paramount guys.
I really wonder how they got that far with braindead people like those on  the helm.