Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > PvP Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 846
# 21
08-28-2012, 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by teleon22 View Post
Ummm.. DHC and DC don't work at all like my proposal. DHC actually do more damage. Stop posting on assumptions and actually reply to relevant information!!! See I can be bossy too!
You want to A decrease Beam Rate of Fire. And B Increase the damage per shot they deal as a result.

Yes?

That is Exactly how a DC (current beam) works vs a DHC (your new idea).

Also, QED doing this takes a piss on DHC cruisers.


DHCs do not do more overall DPS than a DC does or is not supposed to. It does because of how badly Cryptic coded the game, and how they failed to realize a DHC does it's dps in one volley a DC needs 4, which means you need more TOT to get the damage dealt, it also takes longer to do it which gives the target more time to heal up.

Seriously, go look at the state line DPS for a DC and then go look at a DHC.

This is Exactly what you are trying to do for Beams. Which are already retardedly powerful as it is. And now you want them to be even stronger.
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,736
# 22
08-28-2012, 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostyandfrosty View Post
If you want to increase your dps as a cruiser for pve, equip single cannons and Torp Spread. It's not terribly hard guys. Also Eject Warp plasma is pretty sexy zone control, for quite a few of the STFs, (KA and cure particularly) and Fleet Actions. needed zone control even if everyone's running around in scorts.

Solo PVE is auto win, it doesn't need a buff, I say this as someone that flies an eng and cruiser.

Quit trying to balance the game for LOLPvE. It's not going to work, and will only screw up pvp in the process.

Also increasing Cruisers Burst Damage (which is what you are doing by increasing damage per volley. It's the EXACT same reason why DCs Blow Ass and DHCs rule the field) will also greatly swing things further to the cruisers favor in pvp. Stop it.

This is how you fix the DPS Race of pve. Start having actual NPCs on the field and not just target dummies. Make it so that zone control is even more important, as is healing and you fix the problem without screwing PvP.
sorry but this whole cruisers online is a straw-puppet. Good escorts frequently outheal reasonably skilled heal boats, so there is less of a reasons for cruiser. Since everybody seems to be fine with super tanky escorts, its seems only fair that cruisers get more burst. If all the signs are in favor of cruisers, why does almost everyone fly escorts in the 1v1 league? give me 5 of your best cruisers, and me 5 of the best escorts, and lets see who is getting done with eg. Infected space in less time? Cruisers are not OP in this game, if anything its non class specific healing, which devalues the big asset of cruisers.

So how have your balance suggestions for PvP gone down with Cryptic?? We all know that without thinking about PvE there will never be any adjustments.

Yes, EWP and single cannon builds ....been there done that. EWP on bop or armitage will always be better at zone denial then EWP on a cruiser. This isn't even close to a fix for sci boats, let alone for the fact that TAC again outshine everyone else in this setup.

I would love those changes for NPCs, but as it stands there is no reason to bring sci boats, and without toning the healing of escorts down, the native role of eng/cruisers is equally diminished. Just because some melancholic ailuropodae are putting their sci in cruisers doesn't mean that cruisers are OP and at the heart of all problems for PvP
Joined 06.10
PvP 2010-2011
PvP 2012-2013
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 423
# 23
08-28-2012, 09:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostyandfrosty View Post
You want to A decrease Beam Rate of Fire. And B Increase the damage per shot they deal as a result.

Yes?

That is Exactly how a DC (current beam) works vs a DHC (your new idea).

Also, QED doing this takes a piss on DHC cruisers.


DHCs do not do more overall DPS than a DC does or is not supposed to. It does because of how badly Cryptic coded the game, and how they failed to realize a DHC does it's dps in one volley a DC needs 4, which means you need more TOT to get the damage dealt, it also takes longer to do it which gives the target more time to heal up.

Seriously, go look at the state line DPS for a DC and then go look at a DHC.

This is exactly what you are trying to do for Beams. Which are already retardedly powerful as it is. And now you want them to be even stronger.
Well there are a few differences in my Proposed Beams in comparison with the DHC and DC. First of all, my proposed Beam Array modifiers on cruisers would do the same exact damage over the same exact duration of five seconds (5 seconds). This means, the same amount of time on target is required to achieve the same amount of damage. In fact, against targets with high defense, you will likely do less damage in comparison with the regular beams.

In a Cruiser to Cruiser fight with my proposed changes to beams, you certainly will see the damage stacking up more quickly. Like I said, I want to see high and low points. Otherwise, the damage is easily overcome with little effort.

In a Cruiser to Escort fight, there should not be a big difference! Spikes will be more infrequent than with the cruiser to cruiser! Also, Escorts, due to the new slow rate of fire coming from the Cruiser and the higher miss margin at high defense, Escorts should be able to have more time on target before suffering enough damage to force them to withdraw. Only, the time on target might change from sitting on a single shield facing to maneuvering in and out, because, sitting on target will decrease defense with decreased speed and thus increase spike events.
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 846
# 24
08-28-2012, 09:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by teleon22 View Post
Well there are a few differences in my Proposed Beams in comparison with the DHC and DC. First of all, my proposed Beam Array modifiers on cruisers would do the same exact damage over the same exact duration of five seconds (5 seconds). This means, the same amount of time on target is required to achieve the same amount of damage. In fact, against targets with high defense, you will likely do less damage in comparison with the regular beams.

In a Cruiser to Cruiser fight with my proposed changes to beams, you certainly will see the damage stacking up more quickly. Like I said, I want to see high and low points. Otherwise, the damage is easily overcome with little effort.

In a Cruiser to Escort fight, there should not be a big difference! Spikes will be more infrequent than with the cruiser to cruiser! Also, Escorts, due to the new slow rate of fire coming from the Cruiser and the higher miss margin at high defense, Escorts should be able to have more time on target before suffering enough damage to force them to withdraw. Only, the time on target might change from sitting on a single shield facing to maneuvering in and out, because, sitting on target will decrease defense with decreased speed and thus increase spike events.
You are still decreasing the # of shots required to get the results. That's how DHCs work.
Cruiser damage is hardly a joke. There's a reason the 4 cruiser 1 escort team works. Because cruiser damage is additive. You get enough cruiser beams cranked and target defenses, especially with burn builds start crumbling unless they have cruiser levels of D themselves as it is. Now you want to effectively decrease the amount of time required to do damage.

You're trying to fix a round hole problem with a square peg. The problem in STO is the lack of effective CC from sci ships. And in lolpve the problem is a complete lack of reason (because the npcs are nothing but Target Dummies) to use anything but DPS.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 423
# 25
08-28-2012, 10:56 AM
Quote:
You are still decreasing the # of shots required to get the results. That's how DHCs work.
Similarly, yes.

Quote:
Cruiser damage is hardly a joke. There's a reason the 4 cruiser 1 escort team works. Because cruiser damage is additive. You get enough cruiser beams cranked and target defenses, especially with burn builds start crumbling unless they have cruiser levels of D themselves as it is. Now you want to effectively decrease the amount of time required to do damage.
Cruiser damage is a joke! In the 4 Cruiser 1 escort team, it is the cumulative damage of the pack that any team can accumulate on a target. However, that team works solely because of cross healing and Extend Shields! It isn?t because Cruisers put out overly impressive damage simply because they are cruisers. They output ridiculous amounts of cross healing and unless your team has at minimum two Sci-Escorts for Buff clearing with SUB Nuke. You are likely to lose a match verses a cross healing cruiser group if your group is all Escort?s. But again, let?s get one thing strait here, it isn?t because the Cruisers are OP in the DPS arena.

Quote:
You're trying to fix a round hole problem with a square peg. The problem in STO is the lack of effective CC from sci ships. And in lolpve the problem is a complete lack of reason (because the npcs are nothing but Target Dummies) to use anything but DPS.
You described the issue with the game from a very narrow perspective; only considering PVP. The solution I?m presenting addresses both PVP and PVE, whereas Science ships and Cruisers need a little help in the DPS arena to remain competitive for PVE end game content and whereas my proposal improves Cruiser verses Cruiser PVP and Science Verses Escort PVP. Escort Verses either Cruiser or Science ship doesn?t need a change and Cruiser verses Escort is barely even touched because a properly built Cruiser has a very hard time actually hitting a properly built Escort to begin with. Science Verses Cruiser is also slightly improved by my proposal because the Science ship will PROC more often and do more DPS over duration of time; yes, sensor analysis was figured in.



[qoute] You are still decreasing the # of shots required to get the results. That's how DHCs work. [/quote]

Similarly, yes.

Quote:
Cruiser damage is hardly a joke. There's a reason the 4 cruiser 1 escort team works. Because cruiser damage is additive. You get enough cruiser beams cranked and target defenses, especially with burn builds start crumbling unless they have cruiser levels of D themselves as it is. Now you want to effectively decrease the amount of time required to do damage.
Cruiser damage is a joke! In the 4 Cruiser 1 escort team, it is the cumulative damage of the pack that any team can accumulate on a target. However, that team works solely because of cross healing and Extend Shields! It isn?t because Cruisers put out overly impressive damage simply because they are cruisers. They output ridiculous amounts of cross healing and unless your team has at minimum two Sci-Escorts for Buff clearing with SUB Nuke. You are likely to lose a match verses a cross healing cruiser group if your group is all Escort?s. But again, let?s get one thing strait here, it isn?t because the Cruisers are OP in the DPS arena.

Quote:
You're trying to fix a round hole problem with a square peg. The problem in STO is the lack of effective CC from sci ships. And in lolpve the problem is a complete lack of reason (because the npcs are nothing but Target Dummies) to use anything but DPS.
You described the issue with the game from a very narrow perspective; only considering PVP. The solution I?m presenting addresses both PVP and PVE, whereas Science ships and Cruisers need a little help in the DPS arena to remain competitive for PVE end game content and whereas my proposal improves Cruiser verses Cruiser PVP and Science Verses Escort PVP. Escort Verses either Cruiser or Science ship doesn?t need a change and Cruiser verses Escort is barely even touched because a properly built Cruiser has a very hard time actually hitting a properly built Escort to begin with. Science Verses Cruiser is also slightly improved by my proposal because the Science ship will PROC more often and do more DPS over duration of time; yes, sensor analysis was figured in.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,414
# 26
08-28-2012, 11:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by teleon22 View Post
In what way did I NERF Escorts? Explain given my proposal if you will why you think that I did any such thing!

What i did is I propose Cruisers do more DPV and the same DPS. If an escort has a high defense, than in fact I just buffed the Escort defense verses a Cruiser because a higher DPV with the same DPS, when it misses, will be worse for a cruiser. All that means is, it is a bit more dangerous to sit on the aft arc at low speed and fire away non-stop into the cruiser. So you have to manuever a bit more...

I did buff Science verses both Cruiser and Escort. Just saying. Science ships need help right now.
Buffing cruisers and sci vessels alone is what is commonly known as a "ninja-nerf" of the escort.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 438
# 27
08-28-2012, 11:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by teleon22 View Post
I?m not trying to balance things based entirely on how one class fights its own class. I gave specific examples of how the changes I proposed would affect the other classes in my first post. Did you forget what you read already? That is some serious short term memory! I feel I already rebutted your complaint here in my first post.


You entirely missed the point of my argument. However, this I can explain better and with mathematics so that it will be more clear and evident that I was predicting high and low points in the DPS curve, although, overall no change in DPS over time.

Let us take for example a single beam array that does one hundred (100 DPV) damage per volley. This beam array fires four times over five seconds (5 seconds). Thus, we can figure out mathematically, that it will do an average eighty damage per second (80 DPS). Now, let us take my proposed beam array and assume it does two hundred (200 DPV) damage per volley. Now, in order to maintain the eighty damage per second on average; this beam array can only fire twice over the same five seconds (5 sec.).

So let?s summarize!!!

We have the regular beam array that has these values: 100DPV ? 80DPS: 4 cycles over 5sec.
We have the proposed beam array that has these values: 200PDV -80DPS: 2 cycles over 5sec.

Now let us figure in an average accuracy of eighty percent (80%) just like you wanted to use in your argument above. Four cycles of the regular beam array yield an average of 3.2 shots that will hit the target. Two cycles of the proposed beam array yield an average of 1.6 shots that will hit the target. Now let?s plug those averages in shall we? (200 DPV * 1.6 = 320) (100 DPV * 3.2 = 320) So far it looks like your assumption was correct, as it should be because I specifically stated I didn?t want to change the overall DPS over duration of time. Now, what you might not understand immediately is that there will be periods where DPS actually fluctuates even though over an extended period of time the average DPS should be actually equal.

For example, the game does not calculate a half of a hit. It either hits or it does not hit. So let us use an accuracy of only 70% and see what happens.

Regular Beam Array (100 DPV * 3 = 300)
Proposed Beam Array (200 DPV *1 = 200) or (200 DPV * 2 = 400)

So what happened above? Well, we had to round to the nearest whole number. Therefore, the proposed beam array will seemingly sometimes have a 50/50 chance to hit because it only has two cycles while the four cycle beam array will seemingly hit 70% of the time. However, mathematically, the DPS over time will even out.

I hope that helps you better understand the proposed change with Cruiser Weapon. Now, how that plays into fighting against Cruisers, Escorts and Science Ships. Well? obviously higher Defense will play into the Escorts favor more often. Cruisers with their lower defense, will be able to damage each other due to better spike potential and science vessels, like escorts, could benefit from higher defense as well.

Anyway, I put a huge amount of effort into this proposal. If people don?t like it, that is fine. However, I made sure not to bias against any particular ships type. If anything, Science Vessels are getting the best tweak with these proposed changes in my original post.



You absolutely wrong, wrong, wrong! What I?m trying to do is slightly even out the DPS potential of each of the three classes in PVE because in PVE Defense hardly matters against the AI.

However, in PVP, Defense value and accuracy are extremely important. With my proposed changes, overall DPS over duration of 60 seconds will not change between an Escort to Cruiser or Cruiser to Science Vessel. It will change slightly Cruiser to Cruiser and it will change even more slightly Science to Escort, but not Escort to Science. The only reason Science will see a bigger change, although still small, is because the Science vessel will have a innate better accuracy modifier. Thus why the damage penalty I applied to that class of ship.

BTW, I appreciate your continued rebuttals, it allows me to further build my case that these modifiers will indeed help bring some more balance between the three classes in PVE DPS and slightly improve the PVP in Cruiser to Cruiser and Science to every both Cruiser and Escort, while hardly touching Cruiser to Escort/Escort to Cruiser or Cruiser to Science.
Well first off your last counter argument was "So that Cruisers are more effective when fighting at each-other. It has nothing to do with how Cruiser deals with Escorts. See, you didn?t even consider that did you?" does that not sound like a balance to cruiser v cruiser?

Im not sure what your argument with my logic of dps is. I'm saying the dps over time will be the same, and your arguing with me on that point despite continually saying yourself that the dps over time will be the same?

As far as me being wrong,wrong, wrong, I thought you wanted discussion on the subject. I'm giving you my opinions on it and your reacting like Sophie. I stated that your trying to lessen the gap of threat that cruisers weapons produce vs an escorts. Your counter argument is that your not trying to lessen the gap, but instead trying to even it out? Isn't that the same thing

Tell you what will happen with this change. Ppl ******** about 4 cruiser teams will really have something to complain about. Biggest drawback to a 4 cruiser team is lack of burst damage. This change would only encourage this team setup
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 438
# 28
08-28-2012, 11:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by teleon22 View Post
Well there are a few differences in my Proposed Beams in comparison with the DHC and DC. First of all, my proposed Beam Array modifiers on cruisers would do the same exact damage over the same exact duration of five seconds (5 seconds). This means, the same amount of time on target is required to achieve the same amount of damage. In fact, against targets with high defense, you will likely do less damage in comparison with the regular beams.

In a Cruiser to Cruiser fight with my proposed changes to beams, you certainly will see the damage stacking up more quickly. Like I said, I want to see high and low points. Otherwise, the damage is easily overcome with little effort.

In a Cruiser to Escort fight, there should not be a big difference! Spikes will be more infrequent than with the cruiser to cruiser! Also, Escorts, due to the new slow rate of fire coming from the Cruiser and the higher miss margin at high defense, Escorts should be able to have more time on target before suffering enough damage to force them to withdraw. Only, the time on target might change from sitting on a single shield facing to maneuvering in and out, because, sitting on target will decrease defense with decreased speed and thus increase spike events.
Teleon, what's your @handle and toon names ingame? I'm just curious because your responses and the way you describe balance in one ship vs another ship (1v1) scenarios sure reminds me of someone else that frequents these forums.

I'll say it again, balance should be determined on how each class fits into a team, not how it performs on its own
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 438
# 29
08-28-2012, 12:23 PM
Ghostys analogy of dc's vs dhc's is actually EXACTLY what your talking about. Look at the stats of both. They have the same dps, but dhcs do more dpv (burst) which also equates to more dps due to power draw which will also happen in your idea.

So essentially, your idea gives cruisers the ability to make any energy weapon a "heavy" version of itself...INCLUDING dhc's on Klingon cruisers (dual heavy heavy cannons), that no other class can use. Are you still not understanding how that isn't balanced? A BO3 from a dual beam bank on a cruiser will be way more powerful than from an escort since on a cruiser it would be a heavy dual beam bank.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 438
# 30
08-28-2012, 12:25 PM
Ghostys analogy of dc's vs dhc's is actually EXACTLY what your talking about. Look at the stats of both. They have the same dps, but dhcs do more dpv (burst) which also equates to more dps due to power draw which will also happen in your idea.

So essentially, your idea gives cruisers the ability to make any energy weapon a "heavy" version of itself...INCLUDING dhc's on Klingon cruisers (dual heavy heavy cannons), that no other class can use. Are you still not understanding how that isn't balanced? A BO3 from a dual beam bank on a cruiser will be way more powerful than from an escort since on a cruiser it would be a heavy dual beam bank. Single heavy cannons on cannon builds would be crazy on tacbuilds and have the ability to BO spike harder than anything else in the game?
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 06:43 PM.