Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
I really hope they go over the overall balance again and equalize the ship a bit more.

especially turnrates.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xylander View Post
This post was written by someone who tries to shield tank cruisers. It's the nub way that most people use. Now, if you hull-tank, you can spike damage on the Excelsior. The hull tank when backed up by an RSP or two becomes nearly a 14k sustainable DPS hull tank with damage output that is unmatched by any cruiser class ship.
Why is it one or the other? Why not shield-tank while your shields are in good shape, and hull-tank when your shields are weak. With the cooldowns on abilities which share the same system, there is a pretty big advantage to having more than one approach available.

If you screw up hull-tanking, you explode. If you screw up shield-tanking, you can still hull-tank.

Having a two-tiered defense is also a big advantage in that if you don't really need to protect both your hull and shields, you'll have some abilities you can spare for team support.

You can't get 100% up-time without some shield tanking abilities anyway; the Science abilities have long cooldowns and while Aux to SIF has a short cooldown, it's the same whether you run one or two copies.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalnar
You CAN turn armor off, its called hull resistance debuff. You know, all those beta, sensor scans, disruptor breeches and other crap flying around.

And as i said, you need more practise with cruisers. You can have pretty impervisou shielding, while having 125+ weapon power at the same time.

Beside averages are meaningless. Do you know about the statistically dead rabbit ? there is a hunter shooting at rabit with his shotgun, on average, at least one bullet (or whatever is it called in english) should have hit him...yet the rabbit happily runs away.
No, you can never reduce armor to zero. Shields, I can press 2 buttons on a science ship and make yours go to zero. Without armor plates, you have zero resistances for the duration.

You can debuff my armor, but not turn it off.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
You cant turn off my shields either, because it just takes 2xEP-S + engineering team to have max 3s vulnerability window (on your average).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
In protoss vs protoss there no battlecruisers -.-
..................Oh wait
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomicile
Galaxy X needs a LtC Tac BO slot at the very least. Perhaps the ability to equip DC and DHC in the Aft Weapon slots?
THIS >>>>>>>> ... Would love to run one but think i will decide based on what fits my bo and play style in the end..........
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
THe reason why I don't like the Galaxy-X is pretty straight forward. If you use it as intended and put dual or DHCs on it... it is gravely limited by its turning strength and beyond the initial volley, the ship's available damage output is poor. This is because of the combined effects of the narrow firing arc and having the slowest turn rate in the game.

If you try to overcome that by using beams, you're making the ship weaker than any other top tier ship by a large margin. The X has a good tank, but past the initial decloak and burst volley, that's pretty much all it has. When I look at the cost I paid for it vs what it does... eh.

Every ship has a use. I just think that anybody who uses a Galaxy X would find that an advanced defiant retrofit would get more bang for their buck out of that.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Despite your math problem Xylander you need to take into consideration how many ways there are to reduce hull resists vs. removing someone's shields. FOMM, APB, APD, Disruptors, and they're more commonly utilized then -shield x4 sides abilities that are usually exclusive to sci vessels. BTSS, BO is almost always cured instantly with all the ET spam. It is much more common to see someone's hull resist disappear vs. someone's shields.

Hull resists have diminishing returns whereas shield resists do not yet. You can achieve shield resist cap with EPtS III + TSS II. Recharging or regen shields isn't a big deal either. Dalnar has a brutal regen spec he brings out every once in a while in pvp.

Xylander you need to l2p and use a combination of both. Putting your all your eggs in one basket with hull resists / heals is noob pvp 101 and will fail horribly when facing any one of the pvpers listed in this thread.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Actually for the Excelsior, the shield tanking build works much more better. Because you can turn better and utilize more shields. Extra tactical slot means just more power and you loose some survivability.

Also, i would like to add, that Ninjas table is somewhat correct, but with his survivability, he probably means hull survivability only. As there is not much of fundamental difference in shield survivability for any of the ships, the excelsior is just a bit weaker than others, which have exact same potential.

So from my point of view, there is not that much difference them, except the a bit weaker excelsior, which compensates it with higher turn, which means more shield absorption.

So i would say, the faster and more manoeuvrable you make your excelsior, the less the difference is in survivability between those ships, while excelsiors retains its superior dmg potential.

And the higher turn rate just begs for shield tanking.

P.S. RSP is not shield tanking
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
06-09-2011, 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegeneric1 View Post
Despite your math problem Xylander you need to take into consideration how many ways there are to reduce hull resists vs. removing someone's shields. FOMM, APB, APD, Disruptors, and they're more commonly utilized then -shield x4 sides abilities that are usually exclusive to sci vessels. BTSS, BO is almost always cured instantly with all the ET spam. It is much more common to see someone's hull resist disappear vs. someone's shields.

Hull resists have diminishing returns whereas shield resists do not yet. You can achieve shield resist cap with EPtS III + TSS II. Recharging or regen shields isn't a big deal either. Dalnar has a brutal regen spec he brings out every once in a while in pvp.

Xylander you need to l2p and use a combination of both. Putting your all your eggs in one basket with hull resists / heals is noob pvp 101 and will fail horribly when facing any one of the pvpers listed in this thread.
100% right here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalnar
Actually for the Excelsior, the shield tanking build works much more better.

So i would say, the faster and more manoeuvrable you make your excelsior, the less the difference is in survivability between those ships, while excelsiors retains its superior dmg potential.

And the higher turn rate just begs for shield tanking.

P.S. RSP is not shield tanking
Agree 100% here. Xylander seems a little confused on how resistance and survivability works in the game. My advice would be for him to get some high level premade matching experience first.


EPtS III + TSS I = ~70% shield resists (near cap). Two abilities to hit cap resist + a fantastic turn rate + APO I = amazing survivability. Toss in a APA III and survivability increases even more. Also remember APO I has hull resists, speed, and turn increases as well as damage bonus, and movement immunities.

Good Excelsior pilots will feign RSP to Sci Captains then pop their real shield resists abilities and have hull resist / heals on reserve. Keep in mind a Tactical Cruiser isn't the same as an Engineering Cruiser who's sole purpose is to focus on healing his teammates. Engineering captains also stack +Heal consoles as well.

At the start of 2.0 (and as far as we know) there are no "diminishing return percentages" on shield resists whereas there are on hull resists. I run around 30% resist to all passive on hull. Activating a hull resist ability that provides +100 hull resist will not give you anywhere near 100% resistance but will require 100% more damage to kill you. The higher your hull resist the less % bonus you will see. That is not the case with shield resists.


Hull resists work like this:


Resistance = 1 – (1 / (1 + Total Resist Bonus)

For example, if you have a total +50 phaser resist bonus, your phaser resistance will be 33.3% (1 – (1 / 1.5)). If you have a total +100 phaser resist bonus, your phaser resistance will be 50% (1 – (1 / 2)).

The formula doesn’t give diminishing returns, it converts that exponential return into a linear one.

For example, with a +50 bonus, you get 33.3% resist, which means it’ll take 50% more damage to destroy your hull. With a +100 bonus, you get 50% resist, which means it’ll take 100% more damage to destroy your hull.


Shield resists work differently. There are no diminishing returns on a percentage basis. If you activate an ability that gives you +50% shield resist your phaser resistance will be 50% which means it will take 100% more damage to destroy your shields. If you have a fast turning cruiser stacked with other abilities that enhance your turn rate (APA I, APO I, Aux ot Damp) you're increasing shield tanking viability even more.


CPB is fun but it's a limited range and in match play you spread out to avoid abilities such as CSV, PSW, Trico Mine Explosions, CPB etc. Maybe to novice players you will have to worry about shields disappearing in a blink of an eye but good teams have counters and strategies to avoid that situation most of the time.

Furthermore you need to adapt to whatever situation is in front of you. There are lots of abilities that are not BO abilities which annihilate your hull resists such as FOMM + Disruptors proc. Add in APB or APD and your hull resists all of a sudden go bye bye. Ultimately shield resists vs. hull resistances debate can vary greatly on what situation you're facing and what ship you're flying.


edit:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylander
I have no idea who you are?
Arael = Xylander. see chat box.

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/9...ael273kdmg.jpg

273k dmg in an Excelsior, 5-3, and a 0 to 1200 loss. RSP + hull tanking + spectator spec doesn't seem like it's working out for you. Only a suggestion but you might want to try another build or spec into another ship and toss your teams some heals next time.
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 06:08 PM.