Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > PvP Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
being tired of beam arrays only on cruisers, ive been trying out other things in as many combinations as i can think of, all of which require good turn rate, but that can be costly on a cruiser. just trying to have fun, im well aware of what i should be flying. i have tactical captains in a vorcha and excelsior and im struck by just how different their final turn rate was after all the skill and item modifiers were in place.

base
vorcha-10
excelcior-8

final, both with mkXI omega engine, 9/9 impulse thrusters, 44 engine power level,
vorcha-17.2
excelcior-13.1

and with 2x +35% rcs consoles
vorcha-22.1
excelcior-16.6

so they went from a 2 point difference to a 5.5 point difference. why? why cant it be linier? its so limiting and stupid for there to be this sliding scale, just the tiniest difference at the base level caused such a huge variation at the end. the end result is a vorcha that can use duel cannons easier then an excelsior can use single cannons.

the game mechanics should be supporting varied weapons build, with torpedoes on every ship type too. its not our fault 8 beams works best and everything else isn't only bad but nearly non viable, that's cryptic's doing. turn rate is the biggest limiter to more varied weapons use, followed by limited tactical station abilities, those make huge differences

if a pvp revamp is going to happen, there should be a weapons mechanic update to go with it. and rcs consoles should give a flat + too impulse thrusters, that would be more of a flat boost instead of favoring high base turn rate so much

i dunno why im posting this, just tired of choice limiting for no good reason, i mean you cant even give a ship a somewhat cannon load out and be even remotely effective, that shouldn't be the case. go ahead and post other outside of the box changes you would like i guess, not just between the goal post tweaks. otherwise off to page 2 and beyond!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
04-25-2012, 03:39 AM
As I said elsewhere - Crypic knows how to derive the numbers, but they don't know which numbers they should derive to for a good gameplay.

Ultimately, I agree, the turn rate calculation is bad as it only really helps those with already good turn rates. As so many parts of the game, it leads to bigger extremes.

I think it would be better if the turn rate consoles would work differently:
A turn rate console gives either a fixed bonus to your turn rate, or acts as a multiplier, taking the better result.

Say, a +35 % turn rate console is actually a +7 bonus or a +35 % bonus console. This would lead to the Vor'Cha still having its ~22 turn rate, but the Excelsior would have a turn rate of ~20.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
04-25-2012, 06:10 AM
Different take on this issue increase dhc dc to a 90 degree arch.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
04-25-2012, 07:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimsonoa View Post
Different take on this issue increase dhc dc to a 90 degree arch.
They should increase all arcs for everthing.

With 2.5D space the current arcs are a joke. How exactly is 2.5D space canon anyway? Space is 3D, there are no if's or buts about it - its the laws of physics.

Either fix space to match the laws of physics, or change the arcs to something like this:

HEAVY CANNONS: 90'
DUAL BEAM/TORP: 180'
CANNON: 240'
BEAM ARRAY: 360'
TURRET: 360' (with dmg increased to match beams)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
04-25-2012, 07:53 AM
The turn rate difference gets even higher if you throw in the honor guard engine onto the vor'cha, which is unavailable for a fed ship.

Alternative they could give all cruisers a flat +2 extra base turn rate instead of readjusting all weapon arcs.
Or increase weapon arcs when equipped on a cruiser, since its a more stable weapon platform with a wider array of mounts then a tiny escort.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
04-25-2012, 04:03 PM
thats long been my position as well. all cruisers, even the klingon cruisers and carriers should get a +2 to their turn rate, the turn rate floor needs to be raised. the big ships will still feel the most huge and ponderous compared to other ships like they want them too feel, and it wont be unfair to any 1 ship because its an across the board change. its an improvement, its not nerfing something that people already payed money for.

i'd like to see a firing arc bonus to duel cannons and duel beams just for kdf cruisers. klingon ships are cannon heavy, increasing their arc will increase their firing up time, resulting in them dealing damage more often. it will open up new options and result in 8 beam arrays perhaps not being the only real choice, which is stupid.

also a damage bonus for any beam arrays mounted forward on fed cruisers. make them fire 3 shots per cycle instead of 4, and end up having a higher dps score. federation cruisers have large beam arrays that stretch across half the ship, these weapons should be just about the most powerful thing in game, but you couldn't exactly balance that against lower firing arc cannons. buffing forward beam arrays only on big cruisers is a nod to canon, and a little something special.

not just these cruisers, but all the other ship types should get some little special thing like this too, to help incurage and make useful different build options, i just cant think of any right now.

well, maybe on fed and kdf escorts a DBB could be effected by CRF as long as theres at least 1 DC/DHC equipped too. just make it look like its firing with FAW only it shoots just your target. and a bonus fireing arc on DC/DHC so they have a 55 deg firing arc above and below, with just 45 still side to side. stuff like that
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
04-25-2012, 05:24 PM
I'd love to see the Sovereign get a +2 boost... and a buff overall. But that's a whole nother story.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
04-26-2012, 06:53 AM
RCS consoles should be either a fixed increase, or they should benefit slow-turning ships MORE.

Seriously, if you are going to tie up a console slot or two with RCS, it ought to be a significant boost.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
04-26-2012, 06:56 AM
Guys guys guys, stop stop it right now!

We all know that this kind of fix involves Math, and that cryptic's system team and devs are scared of it to the point that they won't even do the most basic aspects of it... Also do remember they nerfed our turn rates on escorts once before... that shows they are more likely to do the opposite of giving everyone turn rate. After all it wouldn't be very "tall ship like" if ships could actually move like ships would it. The funny thing is, there isn't a single ST writer in CBS that says no Z axis, big slow dumb ships was ever the intent... they didn't have the tech at the time to make the ships as agile as they would have liked.

And here we sit in a game, where the ships can be what ST always alludes to them being "riker alpha" anyone? , and the devs go "no silly ST has always been big slow stupid ships!"
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
04-26-2012, 08:16 AM
I've always liked the proposal to make RCS consoles add a flat value or percentage increase applied according to whichever is greater. With consoles you give something up and that makes sense.

As for an innate increase I wonder what the trade off should be. Better turning makes a tanky ship even tankier.
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 01:08 PM.