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

Thread Tools Display Modes
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,005
# 11
01-30-2013, 11:05 AM
Originally Posted by lilchibiclari View Post
A pulsed cannon shot is like whacking something with a hammer, while a continuous beam is like pressing the hammer against the object. For the same amount of energy, the pulsed shot has a higher peak.
While a pulsed cannon shot is like whacking something with a hammer, a continuous beam would be like hitting an object with the same force as the cannon, but then continually applying that same amount of force. Although, really, this analogy is flawed to begin with since there's not actually a kinetic component to energy damage.

It's really more about the heat energy that would be applied, which would be dissipated much more quickly with pulsed shots than a beam.

I think a more accurate analogy would be the difference between flicking lit matches at someone's face, and holding a lit match under someone's nose.

Last edited by thratch1; 01-30-2013 at 11:09 AM.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 659
# 12
01-30-2013, 11:25 AM
Originally Posted by eulifdavis View Post
Now see, this is a proposal that actually has merit. It doesn't attempt to (drastically) upset the existing *BALANCE* (yes, it is properly balanced) of the starship types, but does attempt to increase the general versatility of cruisers. I can support something like this.
If by 'balance' you mean escorts are massively overpowered, then yes it is balanced. Using any accepted definition of balance, there is absolutely no balance whatsoever in STO.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 28
# 13
01-30-2013, 11:30 AM
As the name implies escorts are to escort fast moving cover fire,and should no way over power a cruisers (that's way in other trek game and even the tv shows escorts except for DS9 which was a prototype ran in groups . It's like a PT boat or destroyer can easily sink a cruiers or Battleship it just can't happen SAME RULE SHOULD APPLY HERE! WANT BALANCE FINE MAKE THE ESCORTS PART OF A WING OF AT LEAST 20R 3 SHIPS UNDER YOUR CONTROL
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,699
# 14
01-30-2013, 11:42 AM
Only problem with beams is their drain mechanics, if they didn't murder their own power supply their damage would be fine (I have a spreadsheet, which can be provided if you wish to see it, that reinforces this), if they were to drain 2.5 power each time they fired a shot returning it at the end of the cycle they would be fine.
Tacofangs is (genuinely) the best dev ever and the forumites adore him
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,697
# 15
01-30-2013, 11:43 AM
Originally Posted by syberghost View Post
It's a truism. You're acting like it's a fact that's being denied, when it's an INTENTIONAL DESIGN DECISION. It's not a bug to be fixed, it's on purpose. "Fixing" it would be deliberately imbalancing the game to make Cruisers better for all purposes than Escorts. What you should be asking for, instead, is for Escorts that are maximized for durability to be less durable, or Cruisers that are maximized for durability to be more durable.

Asking for Cruisers to do more damage is akin to asking that rock beat both paper and scissors, with no other changes to either paper or scissors. It doesn't matter what happened on screen, this is a GAME. It absolutely must have different design goals than a TV series, or it will completely fail as a game.
Yes, I know it's an intentional design decision, but regardless, it does matter what happened on screen. If it didn't matter, why would Cryptic justify lock boxes by claiming CBS wanted to limit the number of jem'hadar attack ships, ferengi D'koras, and cardassian galors? Why would Cryptic be against adding in a tier 5 connie because they say CBS is opposed to it? In the same way, wouldn't CBS be likely to say the same thing about CRuiser versus escort weapons power if they actually played the game? Frankly, I would venture to say that CBS would be flabbergasted when they see escorts routinely destroying large cruisers in pvp and STF's. How is it that an 5 escorts can complete an STF without needing science or cruiser ships? How is it that a small escort with small beam emitter arrays can out DPS flagship cruisers that are 10 times the size of them? None of that make sense.

To address your concerns about escorts becoming too weak with respect to cruisers, I could see escorts getting a turn-rate buff, but not much more than that. Escorts aren't more durable than large cruisers because their hulls aren't designed to take as much of a pounding.

Edit: As somebody else has already said in this thread, escorts are "escorts," not destroyers. Escorts are meant for supporting a fleet, not for being the most powerful ships. If escorts are going to be the most powerful ships, don't call them escorts anymore; call them destroyers.

Last edited by knuhteb5; 01-30-2013 at 11:51 AM.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,697
# 16
01-30-2013, 11:49 AM
Originally Posted by lilchibiclari View Post
A pulsed cannon shot is like whacking something with a hammer, while a continuous beam is like pressing the hammer against the object. For the same amount of energy, the pulsed shot has a higher peak.

One thing that I think we need is to have 360 degree beam turrets to match with the existing cannon turrets. The damage would be scaled such that running all-turrets would give you less damage than an all-beam-array broadside, but more damage than facing the enemy and hitting him with only the forward beam arrays. This would also make a setup with Dual Beam Banks forward and Beam Turrets aft viable as a beam counterpart to the Dual Cannons / Cannon Turrets setup--you would get less damage overall than the cannons setup except at long range, but you would have a 90 degree forward cone instead of 45 degree and could use beam BOFF abilities. This would go a long way towards addressing the main weakness of beam weapons--the fact that you can only use your fore and aft weapons together in a broadside attack where your torpedoes and other forward-facing abilities are facing AWAY from the enemy.

Another possibility would be a broadside-only torpedo launcher, for shooting torpedoes at an enemy during a broadside beam strike. Instead of firing only in the fore/aft 90 degree cone, it would fire in the broadside arc (e.g. anywhere that is more than 60 degrees away from your fore/aft). You would need to have a fore, aft, and broadside torpedo launcher mounted (i.e. 3 weapons) in order to obtain near-360-degree torpedo coverage, which in practice would mean that you would have to sacrifice one of your beams to mount it (e.g. 3 beams / 1 torp fore and 2 beams / 1 regular torp / 1 broadside torp aft).
Very good, sound ideas. I particularly like the idea of beam turrets doing as much damage as an all forward beam attack but not as much as a full on broadside attack. The broadside torpedo is also a fantastic idea, but unfortunately, Cryptic already shot themselves in the foot on that one by introducing the Sovereign refit in the c-store. The broadside console on that is essentially the same thing as what you're proposing, and if cryptic did introduced broadside torpedo weapons, refit owners would feel the value of their ship is significantly diminished.

However, let me say this. You still aren't addressing the inherent imbalance in weapon power between escorts and cruisers. How would you address this? Would you give cruisers an innate +5, +10 to power while raising turn-rates for escorts?

Last edited by knuhteb5; 01-30-2013 at 11:52 AM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,753
# 17
01-30-2013, 11:52 AM
Originally Posted by eulifdavis View Post
Yet another in a long line of "nerf escorts, buff cruisers" threads. At least you didn't hide from the fact that you're asking for increased damage output without a corresponding decrease in defense, healing, or other measurable statistic that matters in combat.

To you, I say "good try", but I won't actually ridicule you because you were at least open and honest with your "super cruiser" request.
I agree, such honesty is rather refreshing!
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 696
# 18
01-30-2013, 11:54 AM
I'm on my cell phone, and therefore cannot type a long detailed reply. I do have some quick thoughts to leave, though.

The best forms of power generation increase exponentially - as physical space increases, power generation increases by a factor of 2. This is true with nuclear power, and would be true with any other form of power generated at the atomic or subatomic level.

Energy fields, meanwhile, work differently. As the size of the field increases, the power required to generate it increases GEOMETRICALLY, or by a factor of 3.

It actually makes more scientific sense for a smaller ship with energy weapons and energy shields to deal more damage (and have more shielding) than a larger ship with energy weapons and energy shields. The power generation-to-power consumption ratio will always favor the small ship.

In STO, we only see this in the form of escorts having higher damage. Cruisers still get better defenses in the form of better shield modifiers, more hull points, and a much larger selection of heals.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,753
# 19
01-30-2013, 11:59 AM
Originally Posted by certox View Post
As the name implies escorts are to escort fast moving cover fire.....
They called them escorts because the Federation balks at seeming like a threat. The Defiant was a warship through and through.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 190
# 20
01-30-2013, 12:06 PM
Can you not nerf an Escort's damage with Tractor Beam Repulsors? Pop an aux battery or red matter capacitor just before TBR and watch that escort go ziiiiing. Push him out of his butter zone, and laugh as his alpha strike ping-pings on your shields like pea-sized hail. If he's running APO, you should still be able to tank through his alpha with a tac team and resistance boosts from EPtS and A2S.

What kind of damage numbers are you seeing? My non-fleet Engineer Excelsior can pull ~5k DPS in a HulkSmash setup, with all the buffs tied to an idiot-bar. If I spent the effort to actually space out EPtW, Weapons Battery, and Aux 2 Batt properly, and get better gear I could probably go higher. It's an alt toon I only play with my son, so I don't bother.

Some in my fleet have cruisers that can hit 10k+ DPS. If you're not hitting at least 5k, time to spruce up your build.

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 03:02 AM.