Lieutenant
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 94
# 201
02-13-2013, 04:30 PM
actually i did lay out what i did

foundry mission fed side: battleship 1 on 1. pits you against a single klingon neg'var which also has boarding party. 20 of them, one at a time. you are in constant combat the entire time

i used act

1st test - 6 turrets and cutting beam. cycled between rapid fire, scatter volley (because of boarding party). apb2 on cooldown. on a ship wit a turn rate of 7 and inertia of 70 vs. cruisers that turn and try to get their forward arcs towards you constantly ie. not slow ass borg ships.

4198 dps over 15 minutes of continual combat. 6,783 hits, 98.61 hit rate, 6% crit rate

2nd test - 5 turrets and cutting beam, one 180 degree quantum torpedo. same as above only also threw in torp spread 1 and 2.

4191 dps over 16 minutes. 7,169 hits, 98.52 hit rate, 5% crit


3rd test - 5 beams and cutting beam, one 180 degree torp. beam fire at will 2 and 3. apb 3. spread 1 and 2.

5071 dps over 13 minutes. 4467 hits, 97.51 hit rate, 6% crit rate


beams may not be better than dhc or even regular cannons - but don't feed me or the community bull that replacing them all with turrets is better. it's not. not unless you are always facing towards or or away from your opponent and in that case with that amount of manueverablity you should be in a ship using dhc.
Survivor of Remus
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 318
# 202
02-13-2013, 09:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixa1 View Post
actually i did lay out what i did

foundry mission fed side: battleship 1 on 1. pits you against a single klingon neg'var which also has boarding party. 20 of them, one at a time. you are in constant combat the entire time

i used act

1st test - 6 turrets and cutting beam. cycled between rapid fire, scatter volley (because of boarding party). apb2 on cooldown. on a ship wit a turn rate of 7 and inertia of 70 vs. cruisers that turn and try to get their forward arcs towards you constantly ie. not slow ass borg ships.

4198 dps over 15 minutes of continual combat. 6,783 hits, 98.61 hit rate, 6% crit rate

2nd test - 5 turrets and cutting beam, one 180 degree quantum torpedo. same as above only also threw in torp spread 1 and 2.

4191 dps over 16 minutes. 7,169 hits, 98.52 hit rate, 5% crit


3rd test - 5 beams and cutting beam, one 180 degree torp. beam fire at will 2 and 3. apb 3. spread 1 and 2.

5071 dps over 13 minutes. 4467 hits, 97.51 hit rate, 6% crit rate


beams may not be better than dhc or even regular cannons - but don't feed me or the community bull that replacing them all with turrets is better. it's not. not unless you are always facing towards or or away from your opponent and in that case with that amount of manueverablity you should be in a ship using dhc.

Ok, your numbers have some problems. If you insist on using parsing to determine the numbers, then you need to parse using otherwise identical equipment and eliminate as many variables as possible. No cutting beams, no torps, no set bonuses that significanly boost weapons energy or severely reduce energy weapon drain like the Borg set does. Beams are power-hungry, which is why their sustainable DPS isn't much higher than turrets when used in numbers of 5 or more. Furthermore, the weapons need to have identical modifiers all around.

I did so! It seemed fair to do it myself, afterall:

I ran two separate types of encounters: one on one vs. a battleship and 4 on x vs Nausicans in the Japoori Tau Dew sector patrol.

The ship was a science ship. Loadout was 6 vanilla mk xi tetryon weapons. No special item set bonuses were used that would adversely effect the consistency of the results either by providing power bonuses to weapons or by generating effects to reduce weapons drain. The turret loadout used two tac team 1's and cannon rapid fire 2 and 3. The beam array loadout used two tac team 1's, BFaW2, and attack pattern omega 1. No other powers were used that would otherwise effect overall DPS. The only other powers used were EPtS1, evasive manuevers, and aux2sif 1. I parsed the data using act 3 and was careful to avoid long lapses in combat in both instances.

In the patrol mission, the beam ship came out ahead slightly with an overall DPS of 20% more than the turret ship, but only finishing the patrols an average of 13% faster. A big help in this was the fact that there were multiple allies available to take advantage of the extra DPS generated by BFAW2, meaning less damage was wasted.

In the battleship one on one, the turrets came out ahead, dealing 8% less damage while finishing the individual engagement an average of 21% faster. Aiding in this was the turrets ability to consistently deal DPS regardless of facing, meaning I could loiter close to the Klingon battleships and concentrate solely on staying within the same shield arc for most of each engagement. Much of the additional DPS generated by the beams seems to have been directed at the incoming shuttles or was scattered over several shield facings, having no appreciable effect on overall engagement time.

In a follow-up 1 v X match run a single time for both kicks and also giggles, the turrets came out ahead again, dealing slightly less damage, while reducing the engagement time by about 15%. Without additional powers to take advantage of the BFaW-generated DPS, enough of it was healed to make the real-world usefulness of the extra damage less impressive than the raw numbers would seem to indicate.

Again, I simply state that turrets are, in general, more useful than arrays. The slower the ship turns and the more weapons it has, the more exaggerated and more pronounced this difference in utility becomes. Try it for yourself.
Commander
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 293
# 203
02-14-2013, 07:52 AM
try the turrets with csv as opposed to crf.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 94
# 204
02-14-2013, 11:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by squatsauce View Post
Ok, your numbers have some problems. If you insist on using parsing to determine the numbers, then you need to parse using otherwise identical equipment and eliminate as many variables as possible. No cutting beams, no torps, no set bonuses that significanly boost weapons energy or severely reduce energy weapon drain like the Borg set does. Beams are power-hungry, which is why their sustainable DPS isn't much higher than turrets when used in numbers of 5 or more. Furthermore, the weapons need to have identical modifiers all around.

I did so! It seemed fair to do it myself, afterall:

I ran two separate types of encounters: one on one vs. a battleship and 4 on x vs Nausicans in the Japoori Tau Dew sector patrol.

The ship was a science ship. Loadout was 6 vanilla mk xi tetryon weapons. No special item set bonuses were used that would adversely effect the consistency of the results either by providing power bonuses to weapons or by generating effects to reduce weapons drain. The turret loadout used two tac team 1's and cannon rapid fire 2 and 3. The beam array loadout used two tac team 1's, BFaW2, and attack pattern omega 1. No other powers were used that would otherwise effect overall DPS. The only other powers used were EPtS1, evasive manuevers, and aux2sif 1. I parsed the data using act 3 and was careful to avoid long lapses in combat in both instances.

In the patrol mission, the beam ship came out ahead slightly with an overall DPS of 20% more than the turret ship, but only finishing the patrols an average of 13% faster. A big help in this was the fact that there were multiple allies available to take advantage of the extra DPS generated by BFAW2, meaning less damage was wasted.

In the battleship one on one, the turrets came out ahead, dealing 8% less damage while finishing the individual engagement an average of 21% faster. Aiding in this was the turrets ability to consistently deal DPS regardless of facing, meaning I could loiter close to the Klingon battleships and concentrate solely on staying within the same shield arc for most of each engagement. Much of the additional DPS generated by the beams seems to have been directed at the incoming shuttles or was scattered over several shield facings, having no appreciable effect on overall engagement time.

In a follow-up 1 v X match run a single time for both kicks and also giggles, the turrets came out ahead again, dealing slightly less damage, while reducing the engagement time by about 15%. Without additional powers to take advantage of the BFaW-generated DPS, enough of it was healed to make the real-world usefulness of the extra damage less impressive than the raw numbers would seem to indicate.

Again, I simply state that turrets are, in general, more useful than arrays. The slower the ship turns and the more weapons it has, the more exaggerated and more pronounced this difference in utility becomes. Try it for yourself.
wrong on too many counts

the borg 2pc proc actually is more advantageous to the turret system. the proc has no icd, can proc multiple times in a row and due to the higher proc rate of turrets meant more time well above 100 power. yet it still could not overcome a 1k dps difference.

it's not my fault you refuse to fly your ship in pve in any other way other than face on, stopped or rolling in reverse like i see so many. with all of my beam testing in this foundry mission, i was able to keep all 5 beams and the 180 torp on target 100% of the time for the entire duration. you think i did this standing still when the spawn point of each battleship is somewhat random? it's also something i can maintain in elite stf's, hitting upwards of 15k dps in my lowly cruiser with enough tac debuffs on target, and a median dps of 8.2k over 18 ise's.

YOU parse your numbers. act is free. it's easy to set up. i also ran the same tests in the excelsior fleet refit and the assault cruiser refit and the results were the same - a full turret boat or turret boat + torp regardless of torp (i have fleet quantums and fleet plasmas, mk xii as well as 3 purple torp doffs) with lazy ass driving was 800-1200 less dps than a proper beam layout with a 180, lower-base-damage-torp setup that was driven properly. the only time turrets became close was when the beam boat was driven lazily and constantly face first.

yes yes whine whine 'oh you just said i need a cstore ship module to make that work'. so? the assault cruiser refit due to it's boff layouts is the ideal aux2batt platform for engineers and of the cruisers even though it has one less tac slot than the excelsior fleet does the most damage for a non-carrier. if you don't want to spend the money, or convert your dil into zen to buy it, then more power to you. but don't straight say that turrets are better than beams. even with DEM and lots of plasma dot procs, they are only better if you're a lazy face-forward player and iF YOU ARE you should be in a ship with DHC.
Ensign
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 6
# 205 Beams
02-18-2013, 06:21 AM
Interesting read through this thread. It would seem that everyone has different likes in weaponry but like some of the replies said, it all boils down to each person's liking.
For instance I personally like the Tetryon's as they do shield damage. I disagree with the fact that they are the weakest weapons because I actually had them all and found out that they all do the exact same damage when all the appropriate equipment is applied or depending on the modifiers they have. As far as torpedoes go, I favor the Transphasics as they do shield penetrating damage. My load out is two mkXI rapid reload transphasics coupled with two mkXI tetryon dual beam banks up front with two mkXI tetryon beam arrays and one mkXI croniton torpedo launcher and one breen transphasic clustor torpedo launcher in the rear. With all the skills and gear that I have, I do considerable amount of damage. I also favor the resiliant shields as they only have a 5% bleed through. This all works well in PvE as I have yet done any PvP so I have no idea how I would fair in that respect. I also have the Odyssey class cruiser as I favor the cruiser class.

Last edited by lackster42; 02-18-2013 at 06:25 AM.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 363
# 206
02-18-2013, 10:40 AM
I'm currently trying to get beamscort working. I want to feel the ship, so I deleted old toon and created new tac one for this.

For first two level (lt.cmdr and cmdr.) it's kinda working. The further one goes the more "one trick pony" it becomes, but currently combination of HYT1 and BO 2 with TT (yeah, I'm silly guy who is using TT for attack buff), FOMM, APA and APO is pretty deadly. Especially if I can get the timing right and lock TB on the target between his APO cycles (when we are talking about escort) or TT when it comes to pretty much everything else.

IF BO hits then the target is toast. following torps are enough to finish the target. Problem is that when it misses, torps are splashing on the shield and I have nothing to harm even squishiest BoP. I also pay pretty heavily for this setup because I need ens. tac. for HYT so only one TT and it is used for attack buff. And with all eng consoles being dedicated to EPS transfer to quicker recover after BO (following shots keep the shield down) such setup is true glass cannon (beam).

No - I know that I could run DBB and DHCs but I'm still cmdr so it's either BO2 with APO1 or CRF2+BO2 without APO at all. Not to mention that there are only 3 forward slots so with DBB and torp there would be only one place left for DHC.

So far so good and it works. If I get good team (good sci for some debuff) then it is a one-shot killer setup. I'm tempted to get the C-Store cmdr Akira for lt. tac so that I could slot two TT and HYT II, but meh.

I only wonder how it will look like when I reach admiral levels not to mention VA. I suppose it would be pretty decent, as I only PUG, but still. Meh, will see when I get there. Combination of BO 3, HYT III and APO III should be pretty deadly. Would just need AE (maybe invest into MVAE for console?) for some VM and TB debuffs.

Last edited by zarathos1978; 02-18-2013 at 10:42 AM.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 33
# 207
02-18-2013, 11:46 AM
I like my Excelsior-R with 3x Polaron DBB and 1 transphasic fore and 4x Polaron turrets in rear. Beams have been working for me in that sense
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 363
# 208
02-18-2013, 01:06 PM
In PvE everything works. In PvP getting something out of beams is pretty hard. I just got some hard lesson what happens when my BO misses and that Raptor survives and shoots back.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,460
# 209
02-18-2013, 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by s1ckbeard View Post
I like my Excelsior-R with 3x Polaron DBB and 1 transphasic fore and 4x Polaron turrets in rear. Beams have been working for me in that sense
Dual beams have WAY less of a drain problem than arrays do, and in my experience will usually outperform an unbuffed dual heavy cannon in practical conditions owing to its wider arc of fire and lesser damage reduction from range.

(Though, I run mine with 4 single cannons and 3 turrets, with Rapid Fire 1 and 2... shreds stuff awfully nice.)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 115
# 210
02-18-2013, 01:16 PM
T oget the best possible damage out of beams you need high end equipment (ship, BOFF abilities , DOFFs, Weapons, consoles, ship equipment).
This can get veeeery expensive.
To get most out of your beams you have to choices. Spike damage or pressure damage.
Beam Overload II and III are very potent powers espeacialy if they crit. I did 50000 point hits.
However against targets with high defence values you have to imobilize them to get a good chance to hit the target. This is the weakness of Beam Overload - its only one shot , so you wont see alot of crits with it, and it can miss quite alot against speedtanking escorts or BoPs.
If it hits its devastating, as long as you can either restore weaponspower qikly enough to keep on doing respectable damage.
With Fire at Will II or III you can increase the rate of fire alot, especialy against single target that can do quite some damage especialy because you do more shots in the same time wich increases your chance to do hits and crits. this is what brings up dps. However against multiple targets it spreads out the damage, fine against low defendet weak targets like those on the gorn minefields, not very usefull against multiple songer opponents, but it also has defencive value. Against a singe target it is usefull but against carriers or multiple strong oponents it tends to get you into trouble more than anything else.

Compared with cannons combined with rapid fire or scatterfire, beams, no matter what power are weak.
Imho a little less energy drain and natural accuracy bons would help beams alot. And maybe a boff ability along the lines of Fire at will but made for single targets.

And on a estetical side note, please make Dual Beam arrays use the same hadpoints as normal beam arrays. This would be benificial for two reasons. First it would look right, and second we could get rid of those red pimples on the ships, especialy on the older models.
Cruisers ftw!
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 08:24 AM.