Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,553
# 71
11-09-2012, 03:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tudenom View Post
Oh yeah, the incident. Wasn't that when Galaxy told Nebula that Excelsior's refit made her look "chunky and a little trashy too"?

Of course Nebula blabbed, she's always looking for attention and she sometimes has a big mouth. Poor girl, she has all of the good features of her sister Galaxy but they look out of place on her. I think it's becasue she has no neckline and her nacels droop below her saucer, it's not all that attractive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
And the way she leaks little spurts of plasma as she walks.........................
Not that I mind the levity, but can we please stay on topic you guys?
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Tired of Wasting EC and Time trying to get Superior Romulan Operative BOffs? Here's a cheap and easy way to get them, with an almost 100% chance of success.
Why the Devs can't make PvE content harder.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,553
# 72
11-10-2012, 03:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hereticknight085 View Post
I did some tests last night because I was incredibly annoyed at the fact that engi consoles don't work as well as any others when it comes to their job (stopping damage). I also confirmed a suspicion that putting all neutronium is exactly the same as putting varied consoles. So whoever started that rumor that putting varied consoles for the resistances is better than putting straight out of one console or straight out neutronium needs to uninstall.

Anyways, back on response topic. I put on 4 mk XI blue neutroniums (cheap, easy to get, and still decent), which gives an effective bonus of +70 to all resistances. After checking the numbers on my resistances (not nearly as high as I thought it would be, which explains why I had to modify my playstyle a little XD), I then put on 2 mk XII white diburniums (+70) and checked, confirmed my resistances were the same as the 4 mk XI blue neutroniums, and then added 1 mk III diburnium white console. That equated to a total of +80 resistance, which is what you get from 4 mk XII purple neutroniums. And guess what I found? Only a miniscule 2.4% increase in defense. I then ran the test with +75 resistance (the equivalent of 4 mk XII blue neutroniums), and was just as disappointed to find that I only got a 1.6% bonus in defense over the 4 mk XI blues.

So I now can safely say. Any mk XII purple engi consoles aren't worth their cost. ESPECIALLY neutroniums. Why pay 120 mil ecs for a 2.4% increase in defense over just paying 1.1 mil ecs?

I also did some tests with tactical consoles and science consoles. And guess what? The ones that aren't directly skill related (aka a lot of sci consoles) are all linear progressions in effectiveness. You don't lose out ANY of the listed values, whereas the engi consoles are all logarithmic in progression, which means... Good at lower values, but the curve levels out quicky as you get to higher values and you quickly lose out on actual bonus to resistance.

For the record, this was done in system space outside of DS9, about 25k away from the docking ring. It should also be noted that my energy damage reduction skill is maxed out, should that affect results.
A post I put up in another thread, but I think this is relevant for the simple reason that Cruisers are heavy in engi consoles.

So this diminishing returns in their primary consoles in comparison to the seeming lack thereof of the same weakness in other console types is another thing I should be noted about Cruisers.

And even though this is a killed statement, this is perhaps one of the reasons that cruisers are a little underpowered. I mean, their primary method of absorbing damage, other than that huge amount of hull they have, is their engi consoles.

And if those consoles are suffering from diminishing returns, when other consoles aren't, it stands to reason that maybe they aren't quite equal to the other classes which main consoles that do NOT suffer from those same weaknesses.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Tired of Wasting EC and Time trying to get Superior Romulan Operative BOffs? Here's a cheap and easy way to get them, with an almost 100% chance of success.
Why the Devs can't make PvE content harder.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,976
# 73
11-10-2012, 03:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hereticknight085 View Post
A post I put up in another thread, but I think this is relevant for the simple reason that Cruisers are heavy in engi consoles.

So this diminishing returns in their primary consoles in comparison to the seeming lack thereof of the same weakness in other console types is another thing I should be noted about Cruisers.

And even though this is a killed statement, this is perhaps one of the reasons that cruisers are a little underpowered. I mean, their primary method of absorbing damage, other than that huge amount of hull they have, is their engi consoles.

And if those consoles are suffering from diminishing returns, when other consoles aren't, it stands to reason that maybe they aren't quite equal to the other classes which main consoles that do NOT suffer from those same weaknesses.
Not entirely true remember this?

For those of you who don't want to read it this thread details how Tac consoles lie (also known as diminishing returns)
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,014
# 74
11-10-2012, 03:24 PM
It all depends on how you 'look' at the numbers but they do have to have diminishing returns because they add a % instead of a flat number. Ok that might go over some heads and I probably said it wrong so I'm just going to pull imaginary numbers outta my bum to show example.

Attacker does 1,000 damage, each tac console adds 100 damage.
Defender has 10,000 hull, each armor console adds 20 resist.
So with 0 consoles on both sides it takes 10 shots to kill the defender.

*note I do not know if this is the true resist formula*

So lets give them each 2 consoles.
Attacker does 1,200 damage
Defender has 10,000 hull with 40 resist or 28%
Attacker only deals 860 damage per hit takes 12 hits to kill target

Now lets go nuts, 6! consoles muhahaha
Attacker does 1,600 damage
Defender has 10,000 hull with 120 resist or 54%
Attacker only deals 736 damage per hit takes 14 hits to kill target

Now how a normal game design would handle that would be to add things that reduce a target's resistance by a percent, so the more resistance they have the more they loose and it is a real question of if you should focus on the penetration or flat bonus damage. Or they would have limited methods to increase your resistance in the game heavily and allowed you to gain bonus hit points/hull instead.

But no, we get diminishing returns and a system that gets really skewed when the numbers start getting too big.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,462
# 75
11-11-2012, 06:23 AM
Armor is a little counter intuitive. The armor consoles stack survivability, not damage reduction which is not the same thing. Let me try to explain...

If we consider that the attacker is trying to cause 1000 points of damage on the target, then at 10% resistance he would need to start with 1111 damage because 1111*90% is 1000. 11.1% more firepower is needed to have the same impact against a 10% resistant target. In other words you have 10% damage reduction but can absorb 11.1% more total firepower.

The percentage of damage reduced shows diminishing returns, but the actual survivability of your ship, the amount of firepower you can absorb, goes up much faster than the percentage reduction. This is because from an attacker's perspective he also needs to make up that chunk which simply vanishes.

* At 20% resistance, you would need to start with 1250 damage to cause 1000 which is a 25% increase in total damage absorbed.

* At 30% resistance, you would need to start with 1500 damage to cause 1000 which is a 50% increase in total damage absorbed.

* An easy one to conceptualize: at 50% resistance, you need 2000 damage to cause 1000, which means you can absorb 200% damage. If you take half damage, you can take twice as MUCH damage!

(the game's maximum resistance of 75% is effectively 400% survivability)



In game terms:

* With no armor, my kinetic resist is 9.2% = 110% survivability

* Adding one layer of neutronium ("17.5") increases my kinetic resist to 21.5% = 127% survivability (i.e. +16%)

* A second layer of neutronium ("15") increases my kinetic resist to 29.5% = 142% survivability (i.e. +15%)

* Adding a layer of monotanium ("35") increase my kinetic resist to 42.4% = 174% survivability (i.e. +32%)

You can see that the survivabilityincreases pretty closely follow the resist rating of the armor even though the damage reduction does not. It would probably be dead on if I didn't have that small bonus from skills.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 484
# 76
11-11-2012, 09:12 AM
I can see two possible solutions for the cruiser.

1st and easist, add a cruiser and maybe science ship phaser that does either allot more damage or fires more often at a shorter range, maybe 1/2 the normal range, but is still affected by FAW, and Beam overload. either way, one or two of these would help out with damage, but only at knife fighting ranges, so the playing field would be roughly even.

The 2nd possibility would be some sort of passive to buff cruisers. Maybe give them a slightly reduced refire rate on either Phaser arrays or torpedoes (probably not both).

Either could make cruisers more competitive, although I think both might be overkill.

..and like children playing after sunset, we were surrounded by darkness." -Ruri Hoshino
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 69
# 77
11-12-2012, 01:54 PM
Overall I like cruisers, I just don't like using one in an elite STF where bringing in a cruiser is a hinderance to a good team.

My Tac Captain flys an all cannon excelsior in normal PUG STF's and it's a capable set up and useful. I can take out BOP/Probe spam in one pass, loiter in front of gates without fear, and when things get rough I can dump plamsa on spheres / Neg'vars and lay a beating on them with APA. At the same time I can heal up the Kang or people who are having troubles (for whatever reason). Overall I'm useful.

But I'm not as useful as my Engineer character in my Patrol Escort, who doesn't even use most of his higher engineering skills except for rotate shield frequencies. I can do everything my Tac/Cruiser can (except hull heal team mates) but faster.

So even an unbuffed escort is better than a DPS cruiser buffed by a Tac Captain in STF's.

I don't feel that cruisers in PVE need a huge overhaul (maybe a few tweaks here and there bitemePWE has some good ideas on that) but the STF's certainly do. Right now there's no reason to be a tank or a healer in STF's or pretty much any of the PVE. Even the new fleet stuff can be done easily in an escort. Laying a TT and TSS on a freighter gives you enough time to blast the attackers out of the sky ad you can zip around faster than anything else. Seige ships require escort DPS to kill fast enough.
Ensign
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7
# 78
12-09-2012, 12:29 AM
Yes well speaking from just trading my old junky Odyessy to an escort is the right choice for the game as it stands. The cruisers lack all around when it comes to STF's. Since death really isn't an issue (cause the cruiser can last a wee bit longer, but the speed of the return of the escort back into combat more than compensates the loss in time from a death). The cruiser lumbers into combat and puts up its dukes, but its like Kangaroo only allowed to use its arms to fight, small and not much punch behind them.

I started to notice it when back in season 6 i'd regularly get 1st - 3rd in an STF, but something happened in S7. The rules of the match or something has changed, now i'm lucky to pull out 3rd place. But purchased a fleet escort today and did 9 STF's and placed 1st 5 times, 2nd 4 times and 1 time third. The difference to me is quite obvious, The cruiser is now a joke a big iconic joke that kind of offends a Star Trek fan. I could care less about PvP (since Ultima Online ruined MMO pvp for me) but from what i hear that if you aren't in an escort in pvp you're more than likely just gonna die A LOT.

Kind of silly for PW to just pardon the expression take a big dump on the cruiser like they have, cause I for one would love to fly around in my Odyessy cruiser but cause i actually want to have a chance to place in STF's there is no chance for me to do this. Sorry PW until you make Cruiser's viable again I will not buy them, nor waste my time with events to get a special Cruiser...just isn't worth the effort for a ship that is only 1/4th as good as an Escort.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,976
# 79
12-09-2012, 03:39 AM
There are a few things they could do with relative ease for cruisers based more around the weaponry aspect to make it easier for cruisers to be more noticed in STFs etc, even my fleet excelsior barely sits above a well built Wells class for damage output.

1: Give beam arrays a 10% dmg buff, it's not much in the grand scheme of things and escorts will still easily outperform it in their current state.

2: It is logical to assume that people would have made beam arrays quite efficient, let's face it, for most ships in the trek universe they are the weapon of choice, so bring the drain down to 7/8 making it easier to hold up a broadside. Again, escorts wouldn't feel this much as the current system makes 3 DHCs = 6 Beams.

3: Change beam buffs around a little
- Make Beam Overload affect all beams for 50% extra damage on all beams for X seconds with 50% extra power drain per beam for the same duration, this would make a broadside dangerous for a few seconds and makes weapon batteries and EPS power transfer all the more useful on broadside cruisers, it would also be more sustainable tan the current version while likely putting out more damage than the current version if managed properly.
- Beam Fire At Will... Make it work with accuracy mods again otherwise I'd say it's fine.

4: Give some cruisers a movement buff, realistically a cruiser should get moving and stop in exactly the same time as an escort using the same equipment as cruiser engines and other related systems will be more powerful to compensate for size.
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,593
# 80
12-09-2012, 03:45 AM
90% of Cruisers are fine (5% are lame and 5% are over powered)
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 05:48 AM.