View Single Post
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 568
# 18
07-31-2012, 09:06 AM
Originally Posted by thissler View Post
Somewhere this thread sort of got onto tactical captain vs science captain, and also tactical bridge officers and science bridge officers. And that would be okay except for the discussion quickly devolved into DPS knuckle dragging. More DPS is never the answer to any question outside of "How can I do more DPS?"

Q: "How can I do more DPS?"
A: "More DPS."


(I don't get it... though since I'm the one who posted the DPS numbers above, perhaps my Knuckle-dragging disposition is to blame?)

Also, since the OP stated "only 6 weps, and 2 tac slots seems a little weak" we can safely assume they're talking from a standpoint of "More Damage is better"...

First suggestion, stop saying DPS. It really does more harm then good. DPS is simply a convention that was agreed upon that allowed for some sort of comparison between otherwise different abilities. It is an extremely weak tool. Burst damage is an excellent tool to use in this game.
I disagree.

"DPS" is perfectly fine to use in this game. It's a convention for a reason - 'the amount of Damage that can be Done in a Second' is immediately understood and can easily be used to compare the myriad of different weapons and abilities in this game which cause damage. How else would you compare the damage inflicted by a Cannon firing with that same Cannon Firing under identical conditions, plus Cannon Rapid Fire? Or compare it with the damage done by that Cannon under different Energy Weapon drain levels? Let alone compare it with the damage done by an entirely different ability such as Photonic Shockwave.

There are two "DPS" Conventions: The first is "Sustained DPS" - this basically translates to "attrition" damage, it's performed over a prolonged period of time; typically minutes. It can take a while to "build up" (example: Sensor Analysis) and therefore will be optimal versus things that don't try and dodge out of your firing arcs and have loads of hitpoints to whittle down. Most useful in PVE versus targets such as Borg Structures or Cubes.

The second is "Burst DPS" - this translates to "spike" damage, it's performed over a very short period of time; typically a few seconds. The idea is to try to kill your target before they have time to respond, or at least before they can start to mount an effective defence (by dodging out of range, CC abilities, healing over time, etc). It's therefore the favoured option for games with fast-paced PVP where jerk reflexes are king. [Skills like APA, BO3, ET3 and RSP make PVP combat in STO quite spike orientated and fast paced, but I will refrain from further commenting on the phrase "jerk reflex"]

So stop thinking dps for pvp.
Engineering, Tactical and Science roles (not Captain job, but the different ship/build roles in a team situation) are certainly different, but I'd not downplay DPS as a Primary Concern for any of them. Whether that's Spike DPS ("Kill the enemy NOW!" Escorts?) or Sustained DPS ("Tank that you can't afford to ignore" Cruisers?).

Once you get the basics of your build in place (I want to buff and heal my teammates, I want to annoy or CC the enemy, I want to be survivable, etc.) then DPS should be your next concern - certainly your team's achievable DPS (over whatever period of duration you fancy), if not your own.

The classic example would be a team of tanks with insane levels of survivability but rubbish levels of damage output: they'll find it hard to ever score a kill, and the best they'll be able to achieve will be a stalemate. Likewise, a team of CC-ships with the ability to lockdown their enemies is very powerful, but might lack the damage output to finish those enemies off. However a team of "glass cannon" Full-Damage builds in theory could kill the enemy (but probably take a lot of losses doing so - encounters would get much shorter but more risky, so luck and reflexes would come into play very heavily here).

I'm not advising a focus on Damage Output above everything else, but I don't think it should ever be dismissed entirely or treated as an annoyance.

[ <<<--- @Maelwys --->>> ]

Last edited by maelwy5; 07-31-2012 at 09:11 AM.