Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > PvP Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
03-09-2012, 11:40 AM
I got a heartattack. Its a dev response?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
03-09-2012, 11:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BorticusCryptic
I'd like to hear repro steps on how it has been verified that Power Insulators are still not working. There may be a scenario I've overlooked in my internal testing. Are you using parsing tools to examine the actual amount of shield drain?
does the drain from Tet Glider show up on the combat log? if not, it would be really difficult to test anything
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
03-09-2012, 11:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by seussified View Post
does the drain from Tet Glider show up on the combat log? if not, it would be really difficult to test anything
And whats with the drain? 10% less is not 75%, or its the tooltip what shows wrong numbers again?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
03-09-2012, 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BorticusCryptic
I'd like to hear repro steps on how it has been verified that Power Insulators are still not working. There may be a scenario I've overlooked in my internal testing. Are you using parsing tools to examine the actual amount of shield drain?
I think the first assumption in the testing that I know of was that Tet glider, which is modified by Flow Capacitors, is also resisted by Power Insulators. . What I know they did was they monitored menu stats for shield facings when the attacker was using Tetryon Glider, and saw no change in shield facing drain between equipping and unequipping power insulator boosting equipment. Fire weapon once, see glider drain in numbers on shield facings in menu, equip consoles, repeat and see numbers again.

I think similar tests have been/were conducted by equipping/unequipping power insulator boosting consoles while being targetted by power-draining abilities, but I'm not aware of the exact results from those tests.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
03-09-2012, 12:08 PM
From (PvP Gameplay / insulators) Iamid:

"I had tested this w/another player last night. I used a turret, DHC, and DBB using disrupter DBB and polaron turret & DHC. The tet glider does hit side facings, and I was draining 78/facing per shot. I turret volley = 4 shots, 1 DBB volley = 4 shots, 1 DHC volley = 2 shots.

I got 78/facing by Astrometrics +10, 26x3 consoles, 24 deflector, 99 SP investment for 212 in Flow Caps @ 125 weapon power. The player subbed in various power insulator consoles and it made no difference to the damage to the side shield facings. There was no difference between a crit hit and a normal hit in terms of tet glider damage.

We didn't test how many volleys/skill (eg FaW CRF CVS). But this shows why this is so effective on ships using beams & faw as a team. Also, we didn't check to see if any captain powers reduce the tet glider damage.

Edit: We also didn't test w/different shields."

Sorry if its against rules to quote but its on topic here :S

(Dev gone offline wonder if he comes back here )
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
03-09-2012, 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof.Gast
I think the first assumption in the testing that I know of was that Tet glider, which is modified by Flow Capacitors, is also resisted by Power Insulators. . What I know they did was they monitored menu stats for shield facings when the attacker was using Tetryon Glider, and saw no change in shield facing drain between equipping and unequipping power insulator boosting equipment. Fire weapon once, see glider drain in numbers on shield facings in menu, equip consoles, repeat and see numbers again.

I think similar tests have been/were conducted by equipping/unequipping power insulator boosting consoles while being targetted by power-draining abilities, but I'm not aware of the exact results from those tests.
That's pretty much the way I tested power insulators when they first were added.

Borticus, If you do this, you will be able to come to a firm conclusion on whether or not the maths are working. There is no downside to doing it. You can either shut us up or discover there is a problem
Again. The steps are:
1 unequip power insulator consoles.
2 Have someone use a power draining ability on you.
3 Record the drain.
4 Equip a power insulator console and repeat steps 2 and 3. Compare results. Haven't done it myself yet. But will when I log in a while.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
03-09-2012, 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle-Phoenix View Post
From (PvP Gameplay / insulators) Iamid:

"I had tested this w/another player last night. I used a turret, DHC, and DBB using disrupter DBB and polaron turret & DHC. The tet glider does hit side facings, and I was draining 78/facing per shot. I turret volley = 4 shots, 1 DBB volley = 4 shots, 1 DHC volley = 2 shots.

I got 78/facing by Astrometrics +10, 26x3 consoles, 24 deflector, 99 SP investment for 212 in Flow Caps @ 125 weapon power. The player subbed in various power insulator consoles and it made no difference to the damage to the side shield facings. There was no difference between a crit hit and a normal hit in terms of tet glider damage.

We didn't test how many volleys/skill (eg FaW CRF CVS). But this shows why this is so effective on ships using beams & faw as a team. Also, we didn't check to see if any captain powers reduce the tet glider damage.

Edit: We also didn't test w/different shields."

Sorry if its against rules to quote but its on topic here :S


Whoops missed the earlier posts....


Another questions, is this like other sci skills now where unbuffed it is weaker but buffed it way stronger than before?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
03-09-2012, 12:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BorticusCryptic
I'd like to hear repro steps on how it has been verified that Power Insulators are still not working. There may be a scenario I've overlooked in my internal testing. Are you using parsing tools to examine the actual amount of shield drain?
I mentioned in another thread. But I tested w/another player last night (a person from OPvP channel who I don't remember). I was the one shooting, he/she reported the results. He/she measured the damage by observing the loss to the the side shields (ie the shield facings I wasn't shooting). I tested using a polaron turret, a polaron DHC, and a disrupter DBB. I single fired the weapons. I was @ 212 Flow cap 99 from skills, 10 from astrometrics, 26x3 from consoles, and 24 from deflector. He observed the damage w/o any consoles for power insulators and w/. He reported there was no change in the damage regardless if there were consoles or not. My tooltip reduction of 78 damage was what he/she reported observing to the side shield facing. I don't remember the strength of Power insulators he/she was @ when using consoles.

Side notes:

The turrets and dbb have 4 shots/volleys while DHC only had 2. The damage was per shot not volley.
Crit hits didn't impact damage from tet glider.
Distance from target didn't impact damage from tet glider.

Assuming there was no human error on the observers part there still seems to be issues. Also, I was @ low 90s w/similar build before so the % reduction after taking into account build isn't 25%.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
03-09-2012, 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aldo-Raine
Whoops missed the earlier posts....


Another questions, is this like other sci skills now where unbuffed it is weaker but buffed it way stronger than before?
As in earlier posts, one guy said it is 29 drain now and it was 29 before. As i know its unskilled. Buffed or skilled what should be 75% less than before patch is actualy 10% less. Or the tooltip (or mouseover if you call it so) is wrong. The other thing is the insulators... some ppl said they tested it, and they doesnt working, but no "hard evidence" and i hope you experienced ppl can test it for us.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
03-09-2012, 12:38 PM
Also, @ 1st when he/she was looking @ the facing I was shooting thought there may have been some benefit. But, later chalked it up to human error. Perhaps the reduction if there is one is only being applied to the forward facing?
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 11:10 AM.