Go Back   Star Trek Online > Information and Discussion > Star Trek Online General Discussion
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Captain
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,738
# 81
01-24-2013, 11:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by picardtheiii View Post
Do we really need a threat about cruiser/beam array captains complaining that they can't DPS like an escort in every thread and every week?

As soon as escorts get 4 device slots, increased hull, increased shield, and more tanking abilities we can talk about making beam array cruisers do escort DHC level damage.

YES DHC are a superior weapon, as they are the "perk" of flying squishy little escorts. This has been rehashed over and over and over, no it is not getting changed no matter how much forum spam you and your buddies try and cook up.
------------------------------------------------------

I fly a Fleet Defiant and hold agro on donatra the Tac cube at infected most of the time and seek out and take down the Neg'vars that spawn at Cure elite.

Not only do i tank there damage i kill the target

Nothing squishy about that , if your squishy in a escort you need more time in the big chair
Jellico....Engineer.....Stargazer KDF Tac
Saphire.. Science.....Ko'el Rom Kdf Tac
Leva........Tactical.....Mailu KDF Sci

JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
Rihannsu
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 717
# 82
01-24-2013, 11:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by virusdancer View Post
Explain the difference in Beams and DHCs on the same squishy little Escort then...hrmm?

edit: I mean it, totally ignore the Cruisers. Explain the difference on Escorts then...
Or look at this the other way, ignore escorts. Compare a six beam array two other setup with a cannon/turret set up on the same cruiser. Has anyone done a test like that? I might do that myself, I think I have a spare cruiser somewhere. This would be a fairer test since you can "broadside" with both setups. Actually, since you could "broadside" anywhere 180 degrees ahead of you with this and fire torps as well, this is again better than a beam array set up.

And to answer the question earlier about how many of these threads there have to be, how about until we get a dev to answer some questions on this?
Joined September 2011
Nouveau riche LTS member
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 84
# 83
01-24-2013, 11:30 AM
If you want DHCs on your cruiser buy a galaxy X? Or just just single cannons and screw beams.
Ignorance is an obstacle not an excuse
Let the stupid suffer
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 514
# 84
01-24-2013, 12:03 PM
I think the point of beam arrays is not damage but other things (coverage, subsystems, getting aggro)

A dps cruiser ought to focus on torps -- my engineer with Romulan hyper-plasmas in a cruiser can compete with escorts (at least in pve).

Or in other words, beam arrays are less damaging, by design.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,966
# 85
01-24-2013, 12:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by malkarris View Post
Or look at this the other way, ignore escorts. Compare a six beam array two other setup with a cannon/turret set up on the same cruiser. Has anyone done a test like that? I might do that myself, I think I have a spare cruiser somewhere. This would be a fairer test since you can "broadside" with both setups. Actually, since you could "broadside" anywhere 180 degrees ahead of you with this and fire torps as well, this is again better than a beam array set up.

And to answer the question earlier about how many of these threads there have to be, how about until we get a dev to answer some questions on this?
The cannon/turret combo does infact out DPS beam setups provided the cruiser has a decent quantity of tac boff slots. Keep in mind though cannons and turrets suffer from half the issue beam arrays do, being that half their shots are at low power. Three out of four shots from a beam array are at low power. None, zero, zilch, of a DHCs shots are at low power.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,025
# 86
01-24-2013, 12:26 PM
How is it that on 9 pages of comments, nobody has mentioned the most significant thing noticed in the OPs test? It isn't that BAs are inefficient, which we already knew, its most of the power-boosting stuff designed to mitigate that inefficiency doesn't work. To me thats a heck of a lot more significant than a rerun of the beams-vs-cannons flame-fest.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,462
# 87
01-24-2013, 12:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eatsmart View Post
How are you getting such low damage numbers o.0 are you powering them by treadmill?
Read more closely. I said the test took place at 9.5km. My target had to simply sit and take my fire, so I went to long range to make it easier for him to stay alive. The absolute damage fell dramatically due to range, but relative difference in damage between the different power profiles is valid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sophlogimo View Post
The OP's damage is low, likely because he doesn't run his ship on full weapon power.
You're silly. What would be the point of conducting tests on power drain if I didn't have my power set to maximum.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 168
# 88
01-24-2013, 03:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophlogimo View Post
It makes sense that such powerful beam weapons will drain energy out of the weapon capacitators.

What does not make sense, though, is that there are weapons (all types of cannons, most notably the DHC's) for which this is somehow not the case, yet they do even more damage. WTF.
actually that makes perfect sense. Cannons utilize short self contained highly charged intermittent bolts of energy. As such they do not drain as much energy as Beam Arrays which use highly charged continuous beams of the same kind of energy. A Continuous beam is always going to be a larger drain on a system than a short intermittent bolt of energy.

I mean there is a reason that Sub Machine Guns are still the weapon of choice in this day and age and not Directed Energy Weapons which do actually exist in this day and age but which are so bulky as to make them unwieldy.
______________________________
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,462
# 89
01-24-2013, 03:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by helixsunbringer View Post
actually that makes perfect sense
No it doesn't.

Over the course of 15 seconds, DHCs consume 60 power (12 per second for 1 second per firing * 5 firings) and generate what we will call 1X damage (at mark 1, 188 damage * 2 shots per volley * 5 firings = 1880). A beam array consumes 120 power (10 per second for 4 seconds per firing * 3 firings) and does 0.63X damage (at mark 1, 100 damage * 4 shots per volley * 3 firings = 1200).

In other words, a beam array consumes twice as much power to generate around 2/3 as much damage.

Your argument is that because cannons buffer their drain with capacitors, so are not as hard on the ship's power grid and that's why they don't drain as much. The problem is that cannons don't drain power all at the time, only when they fire, which leads to them being ridiculously more efficient despite the whole problem of adding a level of capacitance, which would not be lossless.

This is all kind of moot though since the way STO's power mechanics work makes no sense as a whole because weapons "refund" their power at the end of their firing cycle. The total effect is to model a system with infinite power output but only limited transmission such that multiple simultaneous devices can overwhelm the transmission grid. If that were the case, the logical conclusion would be to build your ship to have only 1 weapon connected directly to your infinite power source, and that single weapon would be a beam whose constant throughput is only limited by the melting point of the systems involved.

Nothing about the weapon power situation makes sense, either with our physics or with theirs. *shrug*
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,191
# 90
01-24-2013, 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by helixsunbringer View Post
actually that makes perfect sense. Cannons utilize short self contained highly charged intermittent bolts of energy. As such they do not drain as much energy as Beam Arrays which use highly charged continuous beams of the same kind of energy. A Continuous beam is always going to be a larger drain on a system than a short intermittent bolt of energy.
By that logic, the beam should deal as much, if not greater, amounts of damage than cannons.

Conservation of energy, natch.

"Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference." - James T. Kirk
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 10:59 PM.