Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,757
# 111
12-11-2012, 09:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by momaw View Post

If cruisers in general did what a fully tricked out Vor'cha can do, then they'd be just fine. Make Fed cruisers turn 9 or 10 deg/second and give them another 5 to 10 power in all areas and THEN we'll start having meaningful conversations about how Federation cruisers are performing.

.
As the Devils advocate, Why should the fed Cruiser get a power buff? Just becuase they do not have access to the Plasmonic Leech?

Is that really the defense to base such a buff for Cruisers on, becuase " Feds don't have it."?

How will you compensate those KDF players whom do not use it but are disadvantaged if the Cruiser get a buff to compensate for the KDF's use of the PL?

Should we also give said buff to Battle Cruisers since they are the KDF form of a Cruiser? Why would it be only a fed thing? Do they have better Power sources over the KDF?

I'm all for buffing the Cruisers turn rate and/or Inertia stats to give a better gameplay feel but only if its not a buff soley to them alone and a balance is maintained. Otherwise this is still a pointless debate as the "we need this " buff will quickly be turned by fan perceptions into a "we deserve this buff becuase we feel we do" buff.

Or such is what I think the Devils Advocate would respond with in this situation.
Roy Hatch (stryker) soldier, friend, and good man.
1945-2014
RIP
Lieutenant
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 51
# 112
12-11-2012, 10:17 AM
what if cruisers were able to carry a better hull/hull repair rate? while cruisers have the most crew, it still takes a long time for a cruiser to repair especially when that crew somehow gets blown up...
Lieutenant
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 84
# 113
12-11-2012, 10:31 AM
How about giving cruisers an inherent 10 - 20 degree boost to the fire arc of beams (and MAYBE torps) meaning broadsides are on target more often and creating a small arc where DBBs and aft arrays overlap (the super broadside sweet spot).

Allows a bit more punch, reduces the pain of bad turn rate, (and offers a new concept 4DBB 4 Array sweet spot hunting)

Or tweak BO and FAW to be a bit better than they currently are.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,333
# 114
12-11-2012, 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daiouvegeta2 View Post
The Odyssey is still a superior tank and superior all around cruiser compared to the excelsior, regardless of the version. Yes, the Excelsior is superior in firepower and hull total (4 tac slots and 900 more hull, really?). But in everything else, the Odyssey still comes out on top.

In fact, the Excelsior is outmatched by the Fleet Regent.

No redundant Ensign eng slot
+5 more power to weapons
LT universal boff slot

The only things the Excelsior has on the Regent is the 1 turn rate, and somewhat better inertia, both of which are not really an issue.

Same Hull
Same console slots
Same LTC Tactical
Same Shield Mod

So really, the Excelsior falls under the Regent in tactical power, under the Odyssey in tanking and all around abilities, and to top it all off. She's uglier then sin itself. So basically, an in between red headed step child that's in the Tier 3 ship yard and easier to get than the other two.
There is a NOTICABLE effective turn rate difference in the turn rate between the Excel' and the Regent. The ensign engie isnt redundant, it actually allows me to add lower defensive boff skills while keeping higher level abilities offensive. The Lt. is very useful in science both for offensive and defensive skills and most people will just use it for a sci boff anyways.

For those who like DBB's, the Excel' can make more effective use of them then either the Odyssey or the Fleet Regent and have more control of what stays in single cannon and 180' torps arcs to boot.
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,553
# 115
12-11-2012, 01:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daiouvegeta2 View Post
The Odyssey is still a superior tank and superior all around cruiser compared to the excelsior, regardless of the version. Yes, the Excelsior is superior in firepower and hull total (4 tac slots and 900 more hull, really?). But in everything else, the Odyssey still comes out on top.

In fact, the Excelsior is outmatched by the Fleet Regent.

No redundant Ensign eng slot
+5 more power to weapons
LT universal boff slot

The only things the Excelsior has on the Regent is the 1 turn rate, and somewhat better inertia, both of which are not really an issue.

Same Hull
Same console slots
Same LTC Tactical
Same Shield Mod

So really, the Excelsior falls under the Regent in tactical power, under the Odyssey in tanking and all around abilities, and to top it all off. She's uglier then sin itself. So basically, an in between red headed step child that's in the Tier 3 ship yard and easier to get than the other two.
Your post made me wince tbh... For starters, the Fleet Excelsior is actually a better tank than the Odyssey. A muuuch better tank, since she can actually move around. That added defense bonus from movement is very noticeable. Secondly, with her better turn rate, she can adjust which shield facing is on the enemy with far greater ease than the Odyssey.

And tbh, the Imperial is a joke. It really is. If you look at it's stats, and compare them to the Fleet Excelsior, yeah, she looks stronger in the Tactical region. Also that Univeral BOff you are almost forced to put into science. But until someone actually gets one and flies it, I think we need to leave her out of discussions.

The only thing the Odyssey has over the Excelsior (other than the arguable appearance factor) is versatility. The Excelsior is left in the dust when it comes to the ability to change roles from DD Cruiser, to pure tank cruiser, to healboat cruiser, all in the same battle. The Odyssey can do this because of her two universal BOff slots. But other than that, she's gotten left behind.
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.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 54
# 116
12-11-2012, 03:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericphail View Post
How about giving cruisers an inherent 10 - 20 degree boost to the fire arc of beams (and MAYBE torps) meaning broadsides are on target more often and creating a small arc where DBBs and aft arrays overlap (the super broadside sweet spot).

Allows a bit more punch, reduces the pain of bad turn rate, (and offers a new concept 4DBB 4 Array sweet spot hunting)

Or tweak BO and FAW to be a bit better than they currently are.
I like this idea. Honestly I think beams have more problems than cruisers, since nothing at all synergies with broadside firing.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,912
# 117
12-11-2012, 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by celillarnon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericphail View Post
Or tweak BO and FAW to be a bit better than they currently are.
I like this idea. Honestly I think beams have more problems than cruisers, since nothing at all synergies with broadside firing.
The problem is more with beams than cruisers.

As for no synergies with broadside firing there are two skills both engineer career skills (EPS Power transfer and Nadion inversion) those two allow a broadside cruiser to do a lot of damage however the lacking beam damage shafts anyone in their right mind playing anything that's not an engineer out of the cruiser ship range.

With regard to beam buffs, if FAW used acc mods it would be fine EPtW and an EPS flow reg will support it and an AP:B on top will do some considerable damage and raise team DPS as a side effect.

I do maintain that Beam overload needs a rethink though, since someone mentioned a bug with it in the past that made it affect all beams I have put forward an idea that was widely ignored, making it affect all beams for a given period of time (likely the same as CRF) costing an extra 50% power per beam for each beam to do 50% damage per hit with maybe a 25% reduction in firing rate for the power system to recover a little or make it good for 1 volley (likely a better option as a weapon battery will then have you back on your feet) with a 25% extra cooldown on each beam fired before you can fire a standard volley.

Having done this make DHCs cost an extra 50% power to fire, they ARE heavy cannons after all, it would also give DCs an advantage, and then make CRF and CSV an extra power cost, this would help things a little as well as making escort damage more reasoned rather than "I have pew pew, let's add straight buffs with no draw back, now rather than pew I have boom", then on top of this make heals of all kinds finally percentage based (a suedo-code can be found in one of the cruiser threads), forcing escorts to move more and making the cruiser's extra hull and science higher aux power mean more.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 132
# 118
12-11-2012, 04:33 PM
The ship balance is fine. The issue really is about the nature of the end game challenges that we're put against. Almost universally the challenge is "kill this bunch of stuff quickly", which naturally favours the heavy dps of the escort. The game would be completely different if all boss-like entities had their hull and shields full healed every time a player ship died. Heck, compare elite space to elite ground. If you go down in ISE, you just hit respawn after a few seconds, and then fly back into the fight. In IGE, someone has to walk over to you to get you up again, and release-reenter means restarting the entire of the end boss fight.

If you step into pvp, the relative balance is apparent. Put two good players of equal skill with one in a cruiser, one in an escort, its an even fight.

Yeah, i'd like to see some variety in the end game space fights.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,462
# 119
12-11-2012, 05:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
As the Devils advocate, Why should the fed Cruiser get a power buff? Just becuase they do not have access to the Plasmonic Leech?
The point was made that the KDF doesn't complain about their cruisers being useless. And I told you why. They turn better and they have, at minimum, +5 more power to everything. I didn't suggest anything beyond that.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,462
# 120
12-11-2012, 05:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
The problem is more with beams than cruisers.

I actually came here to underscore this point.

Normally on my D'kora I was using 3 dual beams with FAW3 and a torpedo spread. Pretty effective. I recently read about how unbelievably abso-freakalutely amazing Auxiliary To Battery was, and I wanted to try something new on the ol' space crab so I went for 6 beam arrays in a classic broadside cruiser arrangement.

Now let's consider:
* Power level set to 100, and my actual power is at least 125
* Switch to Battle Mode, +10 additional power
* Use Emergency Power to Weapons, +22 additional power
* Use Auxiliary to Battery, +17 additional power

For those playing at home, this means my effective weapon power level should be at least 174... And this still wasn't enough power to fire off a Fire At Will 3 broadside without my power level dropping in the middle of the salvo. The only ways to use beam broadsiding at full power are to use either Nadion Inversion, or use Directed Energy Modulation with the doff that adds drain resist while DEM is active. Both of these have a stupidly long cooldown. There's batteries too I guess, and you know what? Stupidly long cooldown.

Cruisers are typified as being all about the beam broadsides, and in reality, this mode of combat has so many limitations and support prerequisites just to reach any kind of parity with cannons that it's hard to justify it.

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 01:10 PM.