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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,176
http://bfinfobase.org/index.php?title=Phaser_(starship)

This is as much a game related discussion question as it a lore question. As of late, a lot of people have been complaining about the inadequacy of cruisers in PVP and STF's as compared to escorts. Now, what I'd like to know is why would a STO cruiser's beam hit's base damage against enemies/NPC's be the same as an escort when a cruiser's warp core is is larger and thus, capable of more energy output? Likewise, the beam arrays on flag ship cruisers were composed of more emitter segments than any small escorts beam arrays would have been. Therefore, assuming a Cruiser has a larger warpcore and has beam arrays composed of many more emitter segments than a escort's, then a cruiser's base damage should be greater than a escort.

On second thought, I don't think the warp core matters as much because it's more a question of the efficiency of the plasma distribution system in a starship which would be about the same for escorts and cruisers from the same period.

Edit: Anyways, the point of my question above is to get you to question the dev's decision to make base damage the same for all ships (or put another way, that escorts get innate ship bonuses to weapons when cruisers do not). This should be addressed in some way-for example, giving cruisers an innate +15, +20 power to weapons. It no longer makes sense, imo, that escorts should be dishing out more damage than a a cruiser that has beam arrays composed of many more emitter segments. This is further justified by how gimped cruisers have become because of their poor turn-rates.

I said it before, and I'll say it again. No tier 5 escort should be outclassing a Fleet Negh'var or Odyssey class cruiser. These are massive flagship cruisers with beam array emitter systems that could crush any Fed, Kling escort.
=^= Starfleet Code Red Message =^= Starfleet intelligence's central network was compromised by an insidious ARC virus. All captains are to avoid contact with the ARC until we can ascertain how dangerous it is. All ships remain on high alert!

Last edited by knuhteb5; 01-30-2013 at 09:37 AM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 658
# 2
01-30-2013, 09:47 AM
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.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 381
# 3
01-30-2013, 09:50 AM
Wow, and I thought I was something on these forums, you openly threadcrapped what was and is a valid concern about ship balance as if it's his fault the current space mechanics overwhelmingly favor escorts in space. It's a fact that's plain as day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jengoz View Post
Silly Rabbit, the Devs don't play the game. That's why they have no idea about the problems.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 658
# 4
01-30-2013, 09:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sekritagent View Post
current space mechanics overwhelmingly favor escorts in space. It's a fact that's plain as day.
Hah. Escorts kill, cruisers heal/tank, and science ships crowd-control. Each is just as important and valid as the others. It's not my fault (or his) that players focus too much on damage, solo-play, and being the perceived "hero" rather than working together as a group.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 722
# 5
01-30-2013, 10:06 AM
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).
How many Starfleet Engineers does it take to exchange an Anti-positronic Photon Emitter?
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,192
# 6
01-30-2013, 10:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eulifdavis View Post
Hah. Escorts kill, cruisers heal/tank, and science ships crowd-control. Each is just as important and valid as the others. It's not my fault (or his) that players focus too much on damage, solo-play, and being the perceived "hero" rather than working together as a group.
But you do not need heal/tank or crowd control in current PvE, 5 tac escorts can finish elite STF faster, than if they would have engineers in cruisers or science ships in team.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 84
# 7
01-30-2013, 10:13 AM
Cruisers get +10 to all systems because they have a bigger warp core, so your request has already been fulfilled.
Ignorance is an obstacle not an excuse
Let the stupid suffer
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,192
# 8
01-30-2013, 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by frontline2042 View Post
Cruisers get +10 to all systems because they have a bigger warp core, so your request has already been fulfilled.
You mean +5 to each subsystem. Do your homework.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 658
# 9
01-30-2013, 10:55 AM
Quote:
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).
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.
Community Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,659
# 10
01-30-2013, 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sekritagent View Post
Wow, and I thought I was something on these forums, you openly threadcrapped what was and is a valid concern about ship balance as if it's his fault the current space mechanics overwhelmingly favor escorts in space. It's a fact that's plain as day.
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.
Volunteer Community Moderator for the Star Trek Online Forums. My views do not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment.
If you wish to speak to someone on the community team, file a 'forums and website' support ticket here, as we are not able to respond to PMs regarding moderation inquiries.
Follow me: Twitter,Google
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 09:56 PM.