Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,078
# 191
10-05-2012, 01:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexindcobra View Post
I did not make your point because those turrets on the bombers were made to shoot holes in other planes. They are .50 calibur or machine guns. The pilots wore flak vest that doesn't stop bullets and will minimize wounds from shrapnel from flak. You can look up flak for yourself. The plate in front of the pilot was made to stop flak and will only stop 9 mil, through 7.62. Nothing is stopping .50 cal rounds but tank armor, and there are no such planes flying around, even today with that kind of armor. Bombers never went one on one with fighter planes, there were always groups of fighters to take on bombers. The fighters didn't have avionics so they had to fire from close distance while straight on to target, and risk getting killed by the the machine gun turrets. Since you are so ignorant on the supbject, I suggest you get off your lazyboy chair, and go to the library read the books on this subject, go to your Military Day events, or go to a museum where there are WWII fighter planes and bombers and asked veterants who operated these things. Better yet, join the military and you will have all the access to this information and more, as long as you're not a criminal.
just do us a favour and klick on the link i provided and actually read the subsection i pointed out, before further derailing this thread. it is little known fact that machine guns had proven little effective on bombers during the second world war.

but knowing you, you chose to ignore facts in fovour of your own opinion.
Go pro or go home
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,766
# 192
10-05-2012, 04:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by veraticus View Post
This is just like the 31/31/31 arguments against Paladins in WoW.

If a Cruiser is loaded to the gills with DPS abilities, they lose most of their tanking abilities.
Not all true, but most. Due to the increased number of Engineering BOff ability openings when compared to an Escorts.

Even if they give Cruisers a more flexible BOff layout allowing greater access to Tactical abilities it won't change much in the way of their damage output due to the design of FAW and BO. I wouldn't recommend cannons for Cruisers as a way of increasing damage, let the Escorts keep their Defiant styled weapons.

Again, increasing the turn rate and changing the inertia is not going to put us over the top or anywhere near the mobility of Escorts. You act as if we want a mid teens turn rate.
For the largest ships Fed side we aren't even asking for a 9, we are asking for an 8 tops.

When tweaking numbers you don't tweak based on the average or poor players performance. You tweak or create based on its maximum potential.
So when I say I think that gap should be smaller, I mean smaller when played by competent players closest towards its best performance. Right now that gap is 83%+ for Escorts when played by players of equal skill.

Bumping that to close the gap to something closer to 38%-42% for Enginner/Science piloted Cruisers. I believe for Tac Captains in a Cruiser that difference would be something closer to a 20%-24% difference for Tac Captains. And there wouldn't be a very large increase in durability for the Tac Captain over the Escorts because the abilities of the BOffs would all be geared towards damage and not survivability.



Why did players choose to play anything other than a Warrior for melee dps in WoW?
Why did players choose to play anything other than a Priest for healing in WoW?
Why did players choose to play anything other than a Mage for ranged dps in WoW?
Never played wow and you missed the point.
Richard Hamilton (1975-2014)
goodbye good friend. We will see you in the DMZ in the sky oneday, save a shot for us.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,766
# 193
10-05-2012, 05:03 AM
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexindcobra View Post
There reason why the cruiser concept in this game is muddled because the game was not created by those who study war, obviously.


Except the federation Cruiser is not a battleShip nor was it ever designed with that sole purpose in mind. In the confines of STO the Devs have made the Federation Cruiser more Defensive in nature.
Star Fleet is a psuedo military construct built for exploration first and foremost with defense of its members second and while a Cruiser can bring firepower to a conflict, that application of damage is not its primary function.
Really? Children on a BattleShip? Families on a vessel of war?
Richard Hamilton (1975-2014)
goodbye good friend. We will see you in the DMZ in the sky oneday, save a shot for us.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,078
# 194
10-05-2012, 05:26 AM
if you want to play a realistic interpretation of naval combat, then you should play a naval combat simulation like silent hunter or whatever.
A sci fi MMO is therefore hardly suited to meet your expectations nor will it ever try to represent combat in a realistic way...it is by definition: fiction.
Go pro or go home
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,766
# 195
10-05-2012, 05:27 AM
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexindcobra View Post

Well, it sounded like you implied that i fly with my backside facing my opponents on purpose.
No, your ego heard what it wanted.

Quote:
I don't have to imagine a military versions of a plane because know military tech and civilian tech. There couldn,t be a military version of it without changing the whole wings of the plane thus changing what it does. If you made the 787 a military plane, it would have to be a new type of AWACS because that plane don't make manuvers that are drastic from civilian airliners.
and you still missed the point of my metaphoric example.
Richard Hamilton (1975-2014)
goodbye good friend. We will see you in the DMZ in the sky oneday, save a shot for us.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,766
# 196
10-05-2012, 05:57 AM
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by zubo100 View Post

And the weapons are not really that different. Sure a beam array does far less damage than a cannon, but then you can shoot 8 at the same time, but only 4 cannons. If you do a plain dps calculation (without any mods etc.) you will see that a 4 cannons 3 turrets vs. 8 beams setup is only ~15% different.
Beams do more DPV than cannons and Cannons do more DPS than beams.
Two different types of damage are applied by weapon in STO.
Beams are designed for sustained High Damage Per Volley attacks with low DPS.
Cannons are designed for Burst Damage Per Second attacks with low DPV.

To say beams do less damage than Cannons is misleading and only half true. Beams do less DPS than cannons only. They are not a burst weapon.
Richard Hamilton (1975-2014)
goodbye good friend. We will see you in the DMZ in the sky oneday, save a shot for us.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,766
# 197
10-05-2012, 06:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
My beams manage a little over 500 DPH at 5km with EPtW cycling I scrape 300 unbuffed so for me this would be an upgrade and this is AFTER I refined my character and ship build in favour of beams

So on these grounds yes I do suck, apparently I suck majorly but me being me I won't deny that as I have no self respect so yeah, call me what you will.
Have you looked at DontdrunkImshoots testing on overclocked Weapon Power used with beams? You should, with EPTW be able to push your weapons power past 125 and see a benefit in increased damage for the effort.
Use some other abilities mentioned in the same thread and you can get some outstanding damage from beams with or without a Tactical Toon at the helm.

Cannons it seems do not benefit from this quirk in the mechanics of the game.
Richard Hamilton (1975-2014)
goodbye good friend. We will see you in the DMZ in the sky oneday, save a shot for us.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,766
# 198
10-05-2012, 06:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bareel View Post
Or they could simply make beams and cannons different by:

Beams: Accuracy Bonus
Cannon: Resistance Penetration (ignore x% of target resist)

would work out well and help to counter the extreme defense or shield resists that are beginning to run rampant.
Actually that might work.
Gives beams an inherent 5% bonus accuracy and give cannons a inherent 5% resistance penetration.
Richard Hamilton (1975-2014)
goodbye good friend. We will see you in the DMZ in the sky oneday, save a shot for us.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,766
# 199
10-05-2012, 06:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
Not really, I found the cycling EPtX really failed dismally in my hands, I trid to do it but I always found the next one in line to be on cooldown or I got blown up because I needed something that was unavailable to me. I find I can usually put a hole in those build though, there is usually some weakness (usually warp plasma) that I exploit the moment it shows up and while it isn't a game ender it's enough to keep a stalemate going
Unless you are a master clicker, cycling can be a little difficult without a good Key bind.

What cruiser do you enjoy flying the most, and I will try to suggest a KB that may work for you to tie to your Spacebar (or any key).
Though it may require you using a bindfile for the key bind to be possible.
Richard Hamilton (1975-2014)
goodbye good friend. We will see you in the DMZ in the sky oneday, save a shot for us.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,153
# 200
10-05-2012, 07:19 AM
I have a keybind now and I fly an excelsior.

I have never been a clicker I've always used for keyboard for anything I can
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:48 AM.