Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,845
# 121
11-30-2012, 05:38 AM
[quote=bareel;6852011]
Quote:
Originally Posted by bitemepwe View Post

10% more defense translates into taking less damage, not quite 10% less but still less and it takes a lower amount of engine subsystem power to hit this mystical impulse speed.

And once again you are mixing boff abilities vs ship type. But on that note the damage increase you gain from attack patterns or weapon abilities are effected by how powerful your weapons are to begin with. At the same time a heal ability will grant the same exact value to any ship regardless of its shield modifier or maximum hull health.

Finally if anyone dies quick in PvE then they are doing something wrong.
True, 10% is still basically 10% and I mixed the BOffs versus vessel because the Escort only gets the ApO advantage mainly on Escorts.

Those two bonuses hardly make the escorts a Tank, though they do help.

If the Cruiser thinks its unfair then someone needs to invent , devise or experiment with a cruiser viable cycling defense becuase the Escort is not breaking any rules or exploiting by cycling 2 ApO's. Its a benefit that is well within thier design.

Say like, cycling A2D with A2sif for the resists, or TSS with EPTS for the resists, or HE with PH for the resists. Cruisers that can't tank are doing something wrong.
Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....

R.I.P
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,845
# 122
11-30-2012, 06:02 AM
[quote=canis36;6850021]

I was actually thinking of ......[quote]


I am not disagreeing. It is evident that the Escort can learn to tank very well. Though that tanking is not done by a method that can't be replicated by the Cruiser and none of it is against the rules.

The real issue is that the escort can tank well and dish out damage. The Cruiser not so well.

The Escort suffers when removes that speed bonus, so when one is sitting still about to unleash the Spike (we all know thats what he is doing), prep for the spike and hit him while his bonus defense is near zero.

Possibly that is the a nod to the flipside of speed based bonus defense? The Escort gets a bonus buff of 10% for being a fast mover so possibly the Cruiser/Science and hybrids need a similiar bonus for not being fast moving?

How about the idea that Cruiser do not suffer as much loss of defense for moving slower to help represent thier much larger mass?

I was thinking they could just change ApO and drop the two defense buffs for a single Bonus defense buff of say +5% or something but you would still see speed tanking escorts with scores close to 95% defense.
Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....

R.I.P
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,753
# 123
11-30-2012, 07:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bareel View Post
And I do fly escorts and battlecruisers because from a PvE standpoint they are optimal. However I have exhausted my build options in them and would like to use other hulls for variety sake but their current underpowered state annoys me. As does the concept of the holy trinity being used in a star trek MMO while in space.
I dispute them being underpowered. I like how they have different strengths than escorts and play radically different. As far it being a trinity.... have you actually played a hard trinity game like WoW? I have, for several years. What we have in STO is NOT a trinity. It gives people the option to fit into broadly defined archetypes but does not require it, I would even say it penalizes you if you try to fit into it a trinity like set up too much.



Quote:
Originally Posted by bareel View Post
Incorrect, with a dedicated healer the escort is a stronger tank because they can both hit resistance caps, get the same numeric amount of healing, but the escort avoids more raw damage and can better position themselves.
With a healer any ship can tank almost indefinitely. Sadly,that means you're dooming someone to play what is an almost universally despised role. There are some exceptions of course, but by and large most players do NOT want to play healers. Besides, if your theoretical escort can have a healing buddy my tanky cruiser can have an escort buddy and overall a tanky cruiser with an escort buddy will do more damage than your escort and their healing buddy. So in this case I believe you are "Incorrect".

Last edited by skyranger1414; 11-30-2012 at 07:27 AM.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,489
# 124
11-30-2012, 08:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bareel View Post
I believe they do, just not on the important factor. Tac Team skill bonus gets lower the more of your crew that die off it just does not effect the shield transfer rate last I checked.
Thats why I was arguing it should affect the abilities as a whole, otherwise having large crews has a minimal impact.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,489
# 125
11-30-2012, 08:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shimmerless View Post
Moving the subject away from claims that cruisers are underpowered (which are hard to take seriously given so few seem to understand how to build their ship) and onto the issue with beam arrays is more productive, I think.

As I see it, the problem is two-fold:

a) Cryptic cannot seem to balance the Fed cruiser's main damage ability, FAW. It was once (intentionally? Unintentionally?) too strong so it's been nerfed to the point where it's too weak.

b) This is more a personal opinion coming from someone who likes fast or agile ships, but the Fed snoozer is penalized too hard through beam damage dropoff due to distance from their target(s). Ships that struggle to turn shouldn't be punished so hard, it's a kind of double-dipping.
Have you ever driven an Excelsior? It is far from a "snoozer". It can keep up with Klingon cruisers maneuverability and give up a little to KDF Cruisers without the use of DC/DHC, but they can make good use of DBB, Torps (especially if you bought a Regent and too its torp') and Single cannons, especially if you use turrets in the aft and are an engie that makes use of their innate energy boosting abilities.
Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 302
# 126
11-30-2012, 08:29 AM
I have a tac/escort and an engie/cruiser and I run STF elite daily with them both. When there isn't a hardened cruiser dominating the aggro I see escorts, sci ships, and dps cruisers popping like sizzling oil in a pan.

Season 7 has made escort tanking a dinosuar. Defense and agility make no difference verse Gates and Tac Cubes. The only thing that can survive that brutal a beating is a cruiser running the right boffs and skilled for maximum survival.

The only times I see little to no popping in pugs I run is when I am playing my engineer/tac odyssey. And occasionally, when I do get popped, usually a couple more die before I can respawn and return. With my cruiser I am making a big difference in STF's because my tenacity equals more consistant dps from the rest of the team.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,845
# 127
11-30-2012, 09:25 AM
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by shimmerless View Post
a) Cryptic cannot seem to balance the Fed cruiser's main damage ability, FAW. It was once (intentionally? Unintentionally?) too strong so it's been nerfed to the point where it's too weak.
I agree. FAW could use some help but I also like the idea of a Beam based version of Cannon rapid fire, which could help the Cruiser be a better DD without buff the cruiser directly.

Quote:
b) This is more a personal opinion coming from someone who likes fast or agile ships, but the Fed snoozer is penalized too hard through beam damage dropoff due to distance from their target(s). Ships that struggle to turn shouldn't be punished so hard, it's a kind of double-dipping.
Quote:
Note: Testing Method
All the test results detailed below were achieved by finding stationary, unshielded targets in missions (defence turrets, mining facilities and the like), firing on them multiple times with a single weapon at a given range, averaging the results, then moving to a new range and repeating the process. A few things to bear in mind:
  • The average damage listed is ?per strike? ? for example, a beam array ?strikes? four times each time it?s fired
  • All weapons used were common (white) versions, with no special bonuses
  • Within each test, weapon power settings and captain skills were kept constant ? the only thing that changed was the range
  • Each attack was followed by a pause of a few seconds to make sure that the current weapon power level was at maximum before firing again
  • As I don?t have a log analyser or anything similar, the sample sizes were not very large. As such, the average damage has been rounded to the nearest integer, and all results should be treated as approximate

Beam Weapons
Average damage of a phaser beam array at different ranges:

Range (km) [right]Damage[right]
0
144
1
144
2
140
3
135
4
128
5
121
6
115
7
109
8
104
9
98
10 9
3

Allowing for a margin of error in the data, then, it appears that beam weapons do maximum damage up to 1km, and then start to drop by around 4% damage per km, down to about 65% damage at 10km.

I haven?t yet done extensive testing with dual beams or other damage types, but some quick comparisons of damage at 10km and 1km with a variety suggests that all beam weapons are affected by range in a similar fashion.

Cannon Weapons
Average damage of a dual phaser cannon at different ranges:

Range (km) [right]Damage[right]
0
175
1
175
2
175
3
157
4
146
5
128
6
120
7
102
8
92
9
75
10
66

Once again allowing for a margin of error in the data, it appears that cannon weapons do maximum damage up to 2km then start to drop by around 8% damage per km, down to about 35% damage at 10km.

I haven?t yet done extensive testing with cannons, dual heavy cannons, or other damage types, but some quick comparisons of damage at 1km, 2km and 10km with a variety suggests that all cannon weapons are affected by range in a similar fashion.

LINK
unless the Devs have altered the Range Drop-off over the last few years this is what the drop-off should be for beams and cannons.

Beam get a better damage at range than cannons hence why cannons must be close to maximize damage.

As I said though this may be too old or something has been changed. Only a re-test will show for true.
Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....

R.I.P
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,601
# 128
11-30-2012, 09:43 AM
And what you've just proven is that until 7Km cannons outperform beams...
Tacofangs is (genuinely) the best dev ever and the forumites adore him
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 69
# 129
11-30-2012, 09:53 AM
[quote=bitemepwe;6864861]
Quote:
I agree. FAW could use some help but I also like the idea of a Beam based version of Cannon rapid fire, which could help the Cruiser be a better DD without buff the cruiser directly.
If they altered fire at will so it does both:

- if you have a target seleted you focus your shots in one area (30 degree cone?)

- if you have no target selectred you do the disco ball

then beam weapons would become more attactive. This matched up with 360 beam arrays might make beams something for escort builds too.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 680
# 130
11-30-2012, 09:56 AM
No he's proven something that I'm ashamed it's taken me almost a full year to realize. This game penalizes you for using beams instead of cannons.

If you want to have any kind of appreciable damage output you must use cannons because they draw less power, have more chances to proc, have no penalties applied to their attack upgrades, and have better synergy the more of them are in use as opposed to beams which are the complete opposite.

This is the real reason cruisers are underpowered, they can't use dual cannons to make up for the fact that they only have one tactical slot that can be used to upgrade cannon attacks. Science ships make up for it with their ability strip shields and/or bypass them without the use of weapons.
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 01:22 AM.