Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,825
# 71
09-30-2012, 03:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexindcobra View Post
Cannon arc does nothing but cripple are cruiser that tries to use them because it can't turn on a dime like an escort. Cruisers have to use weapons 90 degrees or higher to compensate for lack in turn rate. If the most powerful weapons are mounted on the quickest turning ship, then firing acs are irrelevant. Thats not even a legitmate argument, when it comes to balance of the game.

If you think distance affects cannons that much to make a difference, check your combat log. You will see that beams' damage drops off alot faster with distance than cannons do. Besides, distance don't matter when it comes to an escort being the fastest ship in the game. If you're in a cruiser, you can't outrun an escort, if you tried. He will be all in your "cheese" with ease, until you are destroyed, so the argument about distance is irrelevant because escorts can easily close it.

Escort are they only type of ship that makes all other types irrelevant. They are the fastest, most manuverable, most powerful, and most defended ship type in the game. Not only are their defense rating is off the scale, so half of your weapons actually touch them, but they are allowed to shield tank better than science ships. They Borg console setup with MACO shield makes it possible. The only cruiser that is good at shield tanking is the Odyssey, but you will be stuck with second slowest turn rate, and you won't be able to outrun your attacker, so eventually he will wear you down and destroy you. To add salt to the wound, they created escort carriers. Why does the fastest, most powerful ship need fighters to help it destroy its target or hold them in place so it can catch it? I have a good idea why they came up with them because regular carriers can't escape the Borg's firepower in the STF's like an escort can, so you combine the two types and now you can deal damage to the Borg while its destracted with your fighters.


All this shows is the devs bais for escorts. There is no other reason you can explain this type of imbalance. Nevermind the escort players that will defend their ship to the end by trying to make you feel less of a person, focus on the Devs. They are the reason why the game is imbalaced.
100% true.
Escort lobbyist will always want to think to be in disadvantage because they like to see themselves that way. where is the fun if everyone knows they are just destroying big target practices in PvP. But they will never admit that, of course.



Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post
Beams dont drop in damage until farther out from target and drop less so per km. Cannons drop off at 2km and at almost double the rate per km afterwards.

All your anti escort cruisers suck badly oh woe is the cruiser plater rhetoric is way off target.
I am sorry to say that but, you should at least be honest enough to admit that escorts have far more advantages than crusiers.
If you would, you would try to do PvP in a Slow, boring and toothless Federation Crusier in Ker'rat system, without any friends or any other help. See how it is to be just a target practice of other players, with their ships having almost all advantages on their side. Do that day, after day, after day. Do that for a year and honestly tell me that things are allright as they are.

I just sick of people not wanting to see how things really are and i don't want to discuss that anymore because you guys don want to discuss anything, you just to be right.

You have the devs on your side, what else do you want? The game fits perfectly to your needs, Escorts rule more than any other ship in this Game, why do you even bother?
Do you really expect us to agree with you even if we see the injustice every time we try to PvP?

Sorry, but i don't want to waste my time on things like that anymore.

-> -> -> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- <- <-
T6 Guardian Class design / A 25th century Ambassador refit
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 216
# 72
09-30-2012, 03:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh View Post
So, you're running 8 beams at 123 power.
That's ... not ideal.
The 8th beam's extra potential is totally neutralized by the extra power drain, you get no extra damage at all (okay, technically: 0.05%).
Even the 7th beam at that low power is pretty useless, and only adds 3.75% extra damage - a torpedo launcher, even if used only once a year, would still be a better choice.

Your main issue though: Y U NO EPtW????
EPtW, even a lowly EPtW1, even at only 6 beams and 123 base power, would be a damage increase of 23.9%. And it'd make 7 beams at least somewhat viable, and 8 at least not totally useless - in fact, with the same setup you have now, the increase in dps would be 31%.

... and you're wondering why cruisers suck?
Because their captains don't know what they're doing!

P.S.: Not to mention that you're using a Dreadnought with beams (L2 DHC/Turret + Aux2Damp!), or that you're using Feedback Pulse in your valuable Sci slots ...... ARGHH

Edit @adamkafel: You're just as bad. Weapon Power to 1xx/100, or you're wasting EPtW - you're making the same stupid mistake.

Cruisers are suck power like mad, with all their weapons slots, and you really need to set power to max AND run EPtW to buffer all that drain, or your damage will inevitably suck.
Lol.
Its 6 Arrays 2 Dual Beam Banks. I'm aware that 8 Arrays without constant rotating of EPtW is a dud.

As for my current lack of any EPtW being used he wasn't equipped at the time of the parse.

Concerning my lack of DHC's.
Its more viable and not as situational to use arrays.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 232
# 73
09-30-2012, 04:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by veraticus View Post
Lol.
Its 6 Arrays 2 Dual Beam Banks. I'm aware that 8 Arrays without constant rotating of EPtW is a dud.

As for my current lack of any EPtW being used he wasn't equipped at the time of the parse.

Concerning my lack of DHC's.
Its more viable and not as situational to use arrays.
...
Using FAW, 'guess what your frontal DBBs will be doing?
Yes: shoot at stuff, drain power.
And I gave you two sets of numbers, even with only broadsides you're losing massive dps lacking EPtW.
Also: there's no, really NO reason at all to not "equip" EPtW on a cruiser, at any time. It's the engineering section's single most effective dps buff, and actually one of the best in the game (EPtW3 gives nearly the same increase in dps as CRF3).

"more viable and not as situational" ........
Really, L2P! Unless you're in PvP, Aux2Damp is more than enough. 'Gives you a low 20'ish turnrate on the dreadnought, with Impulse Thrusters skill at 6 points and an RCS console or two - same turnrate as a Vor'cha, actually, and ... guess what a Vor'cha is running: Cannons! (okay, the Vor'cha doesn't need Aux2Damp, but ... that's the price for flying a Fed Battle Cruiser(!)).

To make sure you understand: Run cannons, run EPtW, max power - and you will deal more than 5k dps, effectively. That's more than DOUBLE(!) what you got in your parse, and very much up to what most Escorts can deliver.
It really IS an L2P problem, not a "Cruisers suck"-problem.

Last edited by flekh; 09-30-2012 at 04:15 PM.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 216
# 74
09-30-2012, 04:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh View Post
...
Using FAW, 'guess what your frontal DBBs will be doing?
Yes: shoot at stuff, drain power.
And I gave you two sets of numbers, even with only broadsides you're losing massive dps lacking EPtW.
Also: there's no, really NO reason at all to not "equip" EPtW on a cruiser, at any time. It's the engineering section's single most effective dps buff, and actually one of the best in the game (EPtW3 gives nearly the same increase in dps as CRF3).

"more viable and not as situational" ........
Really, L2P! Unless you're in PvP, Aux2Damp is more than enough. 'Gives you a low 20'ish turnrate on the dreadnought, with Impulse Thrusters skill at 6 points and an RCS console or two - same turnrate as a Vor'cha, actually, and ... guess what a Vor'cha is running: Cannons! (okay, the Vor'cha doesn't need Aux2Damp, but ... that's the price for flying a Fed Battle Cruiser(!)).
They lack the same arc so when broadsiding, the only time all 8 beams would be firing anyways, they are not.

Using EPtW II saw a roughly 400 dps increase. The Net DPS figure goes up to 2,980.
Which does equal your 23.9% increase figure. Using your 31% figure it would put me at roughly 3,148 dps. And overall increase of about 745. Not bad.

Running DHC's in the Dread also means giving up AP:B for one, just one, of the cannon abilities. This may very well be worth it to do too. But until I have cannons of even remotely comparable grade I can't really test that can I.

But if what you say is true, and I've no reason to doubt it, then why are their not more Dreads in PvP? Wouldn't they be the Fed Cruiser of choice?
Heck! Wouldn't they be the Fed ship of choice for PvP and possibly even PvE?

P.S. Have you found equipping RCS consoles instead of other universals or damage reduction consoles to be of a larger benefit? Equipping two RCS means that on the Gal X you only have two slots for Engineering, Science will taken up with Field Emitters, Tactical with Tactical slots.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 232
# 75
09-30-2012, 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by veraticus View Post
They lack the same arc so when broadsiding, the only time all 8 beams would be firing anyways, they are not.
True, if you're very careful that there's nothing in your front arc when triggering FAW. Don't get me wrong, I understand the purpose of the two DBB up front, to build up additional damage/threat while approaching a target, and it's not totally wrong. A Torp + TS does a better job at it though, and with less risk of accidently lowering your dps output on your intended broadside target.
That part is pretty harmelss, the EPtW part isn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by veraticus View Post
Using EPtW II saw a roughly 400 dps increase. The Net DPS figure goes up to 2,980.
Which does equal your 23.9% increase figure. Using your 31% figure it would put me at roughly 3,148 dps. And overall increase of about 745. Not bad.

Running DHC's in the Dread also means giving up AP:B for one, just one, of the cannon abilities. This may very well be worth it to do too. But until I have cannons of even remotely comparable grade I can't really test that can I.

But if what you say is true, and I've no reason to doubt it, then why are their not more Dreads in PvP? Wouldn't they be the Fed Cruiser of choice?
Heck! Wouldn't they be the Fed ship of choice for PvP and possibly even PvE?

P.S. Have you found equipping RCS consoles instead of other universals or damage reduction consoles to be of a larger benefit? Equipping two RCS means that on the Gal X you only have two slots for Engineering, Science will taken up with Field Emitters, Tactical with Tactical slots.
Acutally, I'd keep AP:B, since it helps the entire team and has a higher effective uptime, it's not a bad choice.

Suggested dread-build (PvE):
Lt Tac: TT1, AP:B1 (or CSV)
Ens Tac: TT1 (or TS1)
Cmdr Eng: EPtS1, Aux2Damp1, EPtW3, Aux2SIF3
LCdr Eng: EPtS1, Aux2Damp1, EPtW3
Lt Sci: HE1, HE2

Weapons Fore: 3xDHC, torp (Quantum if going for TS, else: Photon)
Weapons Aft: 4xturret

Consoles Tac: phaser damage x3
Consoles Eng: 2x Neutronium, Borg, 1x your choice
Consoles Sci: Field Generator x2

(if you're Eng or Sci - if you're Tac, switch EPtS and EPtW. 'Might need to drop one aft turret in that case. DOffs: Shield Distri, TT-Conn, Warp Core as needed).
The only thing that build lacks compare to other Cruisers and Battle Cruiser is utility. You get DPS instead. Aux2Damp locks out Aux2SIF though, so you need to think a bit ahead and go brick-mode when you're in need of heals. HE will take care of bleedthrough, plus whatever the Borg tend to throw at you all the time.

RCS: actually, with Aux2Damp, using RCS is pretty much a waste, but ... it doesn't hurt. Higher turnrate always means more time on target, always means lower turn-radius, leading to closer distance -> more damage ... and it makes flying more fun. I can not recommend using it, but I can defend it. Usually it's more optimal to replace if with an armor console.

As for PvP: In PvP, even at 20'ish turn, the Dread is too slow to win turnfights against Escort'ish ships, especially since it also has very low inertia. In addition, in organized PvP Cruisers are indeed healers (Note: Healers ONLY make sense in organized PvP, in any other part of the game they're a liability), and the dread is outperformed in that role.
That being said, with Subspace jumper console and cloak the dreadnought can actually be quite effective in PvP: jump in behind the target, nuke it with all tac cooldowns popped, then run away to cloak again. Most people prefer a Defiant for that job though.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 445
# 76
09-30-2012, 05:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamkafei View Post
in all fairness any ship can only hold out for a limited amount of time provided you are able to lay down sufficient damage which, due to the cruisers severely lacking damage potential in casual player builds (such as mine, I want to have fun playing the game not feel like its a chore), gives escorts a tanking advantage as they don't need to hold out for as long .
Two things. First, I've seen ships hold out against 5 or 6 ships indefinitely. Proper rotation of healing powers can let you ensure your resistance spikes match the incoming damage spikes, and then you can use your backup powers to maintain through the lower damage cycles. Now, granted, eventually any coordinated 5 man team will ALWAYS beat a single player, but that just shows that 5 ships is better than one ship, provide the 5 ship team works together. If they don't, then it is entirely possible to see a ship soak up fire for an entire match and never die. Besides, just because all ships will eventually explode doesn't mean that the tanking difference isn't evident, or important.

Second, you are right that damage can make a difference in terms of tanking, "the best defense" and all that jazz. However, I am puzzled by the assertion that a 'casual player' can't make up for the lack of damage in a cruiser by using the superior healing powers from the eng. slots. I assume here, you are using the qualifier of 'casual player' in an attempt to invalidate the easy to find, well researched, and proven-effective guides to ship building on these forums as somehow onerous to the player experience. I'll be honest, this may just be an intractable difference between us. I don't view testing powers, experimenting with builds, and getting feedback/advice as some chore separate from the game, I view it as an integral part of it. If you don't like that part of it, and are only interested in slapping some beams that look cool on a cruiser and using some flashy powers, that is a TOTALLY VALID way to play, but it will NEVER result in the same kind of performance that the optimized builds get, and the more you try to buff casual play, the easier you make it for the optimizers to really, really break things.

As for your cute time travel reference (I see what you did there) you are right, I ignored your assertion about your subjective personal experience in the game in a post that was quoting and replying to a different player. Clearly I must not have read the thread.

Also, let me take you on my own journey through time.
Here are the Season 6 patch notes that 'broke' your cruiser. Please point to the note that indicates what changed - I admit I read them pretty casually, but I didn't see anything about reducing damage of beam weapons, or re-balancing tactical consoles, or anything else that would reduce your ships damage output. If I missed something, I'm sure you'll find it for me, unless that's too much of a chore.

Of course, it's entirely reasonable and proper to assert that there must have been some kind of undocumented change that the devs snuck in, either through incompetence or deliberate malice, and that in the intervening months it was un-noticed by anyone but you, or even that it WAS noticed, but the pro-escort PVP crowd quashed any mention of it, and the devs silence any player who mentions it. Or, you know, maybe your experience just doesn't match what other people experience. Either way.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 216
# 77
09-30-2012, 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh View Post
True, if you're very careful that there's nothing in your front arc when triggering FAW. Don't get me wrong, I understand the purpose of the two DBB up front, to build up additional damage/threat while approaching a target, and it's not totally wrong. A Torp + TS does a better job at it though, and with less risk of accidently lowering your dps output on your intended broadside target.
That part is pretty harmelss, the EPtW part isn't.
Thought about it.
And the idea of getting to use something than a wasted BO for a torp is much more entertaining. So long as the Aux2Damp is being used.
Lol, agreed on the EPtW part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flekh
]Acutally, I'd keep AP:B, since it helps the entire team and has a higher effective uptime, it's not a bad choice.

Suggested dread-build (PvE):
Lt Tac: TT1, AP:B1 (or CSV)
Ens Tac: TT1 (or TS1)
Cmdr Eng: EPtS1, Aux2Damp1, EPtW3, Aux2SIF3
LCdr Eng: EPtS1, Aux2Damp1, EPtW3
Lt Sci: HE1, HE2

Weapons Fore: 3xDHC, torp (Quantum if going for TS, else: Photon)
Weapons Aft: 4xturret

Consoles Tac: phaser damage x3
Consoles Eng: 2x Neutronium, Borg, 1x your choice
Consoles Sci: Field Generator x2
I actually just ran a match with that type of build, minus the torp.
Turrets were total crap but I did have MkX and MkXI DHC up front.

Change wasn't as impressive as I would have liked, and you are spot on when it comes to limiting yourself to just DPS.

Raw Damage
Min: 0
Max: 26,571
AVG: 602
DPS: 4,059 (4,723 peak)

Net Damage
Min: 0
Max: 7,671
AVG: 448
DPS: 3,023 (3,545 peak)

Raw Damage is fairly comparable but the Net is where you see the Difference.

I would also like to point out that it seems you get a much larger benefit from Rapid Fire than an Array gets from FAW.

In that last parse the DHC accounted for 38.7% of the damage dealt.
DHC when Rapid Fire is active accounted for 22.9% of the damage dealt.
Whereas in the first parse the Phaser Arrays accounted for 60.3% of the damage dealt.
And FAW accounted for just 6.3%...
Dual Phaser Banks accounted for 16.2% and FAW with the DBB accounted for 4%

Last edited by veraticus; 09-30-2012 at 05:56 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 598
# 78
09-30-2012, 05:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtshead View Post
So, other people have pointed out some of the factual inaccuracies in the rest of this post, but I thought this was worth a special mention. See, what you are doing here is asserting that equipment that ANY ship can carry is somehow making escorts BETTER at shield tanking than the alternatives. This makes no sense. At a base level, any cruiser or Science vessel has a higher potential for tanking than an escort. If you equip both ships with the same kind of gear, then the gear should cancel, and the relative tankiness of the ships will remain the same.

I suspect that what is happening behind the scenes is you are comparing escorts with tanking gear (Shield dis. Doffs, MACO shields, Borg set, etc) to ships WITHOUT that gear, which is obviously nonsense. Same thing with the 'Odyssey is the only cruiser good at shield tanking' comment. How is that? Tanking slots are generally understood to be either engineering or sci slots. Cruisers as a whole have the SAME sci consoles and powers that escorts do as a whole, and more Eng slots. If sci powers are what matters, then if escorts are good at shield tanking, cruiser should be at least the same, and if eng powers matter as well, then all cruisers should be BETTER at shield tanking than an escort (and escorts are, in your world, already too good).

If your argument was that the tanking gear in this game is too good, that would be one thing, but that's NOT a problem with escorts, nor is it a reason to (as you keep suggesting) nerf escort damage. If you feel like escorts are able to tank so well that it makes the heals from cruiser obsolete, I disagree, but at least that argument makes some sense - the solution, however, is NOT to reduce escort damage. The solution is to reduce the effectiveness of heals, so that the ships that have more heals have a larger relative advantage.
This thread is about offense and firepower. Before you shoot down my statement, did you actually test putting a borg console/ Maco shield setup on an escort and one on a cruiser like the Galaxy? I think you didn't. When I put that settup on my Galaxy Dreadnought in comparison to my current setup, my weapon power drops from 125 to 123, and my turn rate goes down from 9.1 to 8.9. May not seem much to you but every decimal point makes a big difference in DPS. I don't want to fly around as a useless brick. I want to deal damage in STF's and PVP as well. Escorts don't give up DPS for defence using the Borg consoles because it comes with a natural weapon power modifiers and damage multipliers. Plus you gain the autonimus healing which brings up your overal healing as fast as a cruiser. Since you are so smart, how come you don't know that consoles have different stats based on the type of ship you apply them to? Every ship type have their natural modifiers. Also, cruisers suffer from lack in defense rating because the ship moves so slow, so most the damage dealt is recieved without missing.

I have two Galaxy type ships, one X and one R. My X is armed with a combination of 2 DHC's, 2 single cannons, and all beams in the rear. My damage stats are: Phaser array-- 1,027 phaser damage(821.6 DPS), DHC--1,796.9 phaser damge(1,197.9DPS), Phaser Cannon--739.4 phaser damage(985.9DPS). I average about 12 kills and maybe 1 or two deaths per match with 5 solo kills. My Galaxy-R is all beams, and I average 5 kills, 4 deaths a match with 0 solo kills. You see those cannons make a big difference in damage dealing and getting you kills. Beams just cause agro and get you killed.

Leave it to some escort players to try to turn this thread into something about their ships and how much cruiser players suck. Not one of them have brought any stats comparing the same setups on the escorts and cruisers, making their argument seem childish: "No, its not, yes it is, my ship is better than yours, your are stupid." Base stats don't lie, it has nothing to do with the player but everything to do with the game mechanics. This thread is about firepower and how it needs to be balanced, either bring DPS down from cannons or bring up DPS for beams. This will make ships like the cruiser competitive with an escort minus the speed.

Last edited by alexindcobra; 09-30-2012 at 06:06 PM.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 216
# 79
09-30-2012, 06:01 PM
So while you can boost its damage output when in a Galaxy X, I can't say it applies to other Cruisers Fed side.

Take away the DHC and I'm not sure how any Fed Cruiser can really compete in a meaningful way. Not taking the top spot, while I think that is how it should be it isn't what I am after, but being within a reasonable margin of the Escorts.

It also serves to highlight some of the issues with the Cruiser. In my own opinion.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 232
# 80
09-30-2012, 07:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by veraticus View Post
So while you can boost its damage output when in a Galaxy X, I can't say it applies to other Cruisers Fed side.

Take away the DHC and I'm not sure how any Fed Cruiser can really compete in a meaningful way. Not taking the top spot, while I think that is how it should be it isn't what I am after, but being within a reasonable margin of the Escorts.

It also serves to highlight some of the issues with the Cruiser. In my own opinion.
Can you turn every Cruiser into a Battle Cruiser that can keep up with Escorts? Of course not.
Can you make every Cruiser push decent dps and be able to kill things? Yes, with the proper build, and knowing how to use it.
Is there a hirachy in Fed Cruisers? You sure bet there is, and it's very much a question of Pay-to-Win: Free T5 Cruisers are worse than a 20$ Cruiser which is worse than a 25$ Cruiser which gets owned by the 50$ brick. The Dreadnough is the only exception to that rule, and pretty much a "bargain".
I've posted a comparison in the Galaxy-joke thread.
Is that working as intended? You bet it is!
Does the same P2W mechanic apply to escorts? ..... oh, such a surprise, it does.

But the general "Cruisers suck"-whining is really bull. Even a lowly Star Cruiser deals enough damage for all current content and can solo at acceptable killing speeds. What sucks are many captains, especially Cruiser-captains.
Why do Cruiser-captains suck proportionally more often? Because even the most sucky Cruiser can still complete solo-content. A sucky Sci-ship will die too often, and a sucky Escort will die all the time. Cruisers are noob-friendly.
When those noob-Cruisers suddenly have to compare themselves to other players though ... yeah, then it gets ugly, we get threads like this one (and dozens more) - because ... it's really impossible that the captains are the problem! It can't! It mustn't! It has to be ... the ships! The combat mechanics! The Illuminati! *sigh*
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 02:08 PM.