Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,417
# 21
06-13-2013, 12:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordhavelock View Post
The difference I see between AP and Disruptors is the proc chance. Disruptors only proc 2.5% of the time. AP's bonus, .........
Okay. Close. But no. Still sorta close. Anyways. Depending on the AP weapon in question you can have 30 to 40% additional Crit D.

Your crit hit is likely to be over 10% in any case, and it is not unheard of to reach 20% all day long. There are other abilities you can use to temporarily increase your crit hit.

Misses don't crit. Only hits can crit. So actually hitting something does matter. Hitting at 100% rate is also not unheard of in PVE or PVP. At 100% your crit hit is your crit rate.

But anyways. If you were critting at 20% with a 50% severity bonus that would add 10% to your overall damage. If you make no other change but simply add in 20% Crit D that would further increase your overall damage by 4%.

Keep in mind that that is only output. You still have to deal with shields and resistances etc.

It isn't terribly hard to crit when you really need to to turn in some huge numbers to make the kills, or to simply do higher than avg DPS.

BUT....those other weapons are the type of weapons you use on ships that are just MADE for debuffing targets. That's why those ships are there. You can moan about that one all day if you wish, won't change it. It's like making a team build. Someone needs to bring disruptors, someone needs to bring polarons, let the damage dealers bring the antiprotons.
If I don't respond to posts on this forum don't be offended. I don't sub or follow any of them.
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 171
# 22
06-13-2013, 01:38 PM
And antiproton is an antiproton. It is the same mass as a proton, but instead of a +1 charge it has a -1 charge. It is a nuclear particle, while electrons (and antielectrons) orbit an atom's nucleus.

A single antiproton is an antihydrogen nucleus. An antiproton orbited by an antielectron is an antihydrogen atom. An antiproton's valance quarks are antiup, antiup, antidown.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,660
# 23
06-13-2013, 01:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by o1derfull1 View Post
First off, would not 'anti-proton,' by definition, simply be electron?
10^6 faceplam


NO MY GOD IT IS NOT!

Let a physicist sort this out.

This Baryon, a Proton, has 2 positively charged Quarks (part of the Fermion Group) and one negatively charged quark. The charge of the positive quark is 2/3, and the negative charge of -1/3 , therefore, the charge of the proton is +1 . An ANTI-proton has 1 ANTI-DOWN (+1/3 charge) quark and 2 Anti UP quarks (the sum of the anti up is -4/3) , resulting in a charge of -1.

A POSITRON is the anti-particle of a lepton, an Electron.
This info was brought to you by a kid younger than 16!
Hopefully I'll come back from my break; this break is fun; I play intellectual games.

I hope STO get's better ...
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,660
# 24
06-13-2013, 01:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by weirdoman1 View Post
Edit: Being an antineutron does make it different from a neutron because if they were to come into contact, then they would undergo annihilation. Another way to say annihilation: BOOM!

BOOM IS NOT RIGHT

MY GOD!

E=MC2 says that the more mass lost, the more energy gained. There is no boom! A boom implies a shockwave through a medium! They annihilate , 100% mass loss means full conversion to energy. Fusion has mass loss, but FAR smaller than the above figure (probably a lot less than 1%)

I would think that they annihilate into a Gamma ray, or another form of energy.
Hopefully I'll come back from my break; this break is fun; I play intellectual games.

I hope STO get's better ...
Commander
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 290
# 25
06-13-2013, 02:00 PM
Quote:
I would think that they annihilate into a Gamma ray, or another form of energy.
Geez, you don't know? Didn't you guys build a black hole in Switzerland to find stuff like this out?


I kid.

I was looking at the term from a strictly etymological perspective. Forgetting the physics that, as I stated earlier, wouldn't make it an electron, specifically the masses involved. It's been along time since high school, and I dropped my subscription to Theoretical Physics Quarterly in 2007.
_________________________________________________

::WARNING:: This game is not intended for use as a source of self-esteem.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,660
# 26
06-13-2013, 02:21 PM
EDIT:

Nothing to say , sorry
Hopefully I'll come back from my break; this break is fun; I play intellectual games.

I hope STO get's better ...
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 27
06-13-2013, 03:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by weirdoman1 View Post
This. As everyone SHOULD know, the three subatomic particles of matter are the proton, neutron, and electron. For antimatter, they are the antiproton, antineutron (which doesn't even really change anything because they are basically exactly the same), and the positron or antielectron (depending on whichever you prefer to use).

Edit: Being an antineutron does make it different from a neutron because if they were to come into contact, then they would undergo annihilation. Another way to say annihilation: BOOM!
Your statement that there are, "three subatomic particles of matter, " is in error.

The standard model of physics recognizes seventeen fundamental subatomic particles, fifteen of which probably have some mass and all of which either have an antiparticle or are their own antiparticle, bringing the total number of fundamental subatomic particles to 61, 52 of which probably have mass and none of which is a neutron nor a proton.

And no, an antineutrons are not "basically the same" as neutrons. They have a baryon number of -1 and are comprised of three anti-quarks.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model

Last edited by logicalspock; 06-13-2013 at 03:17 PM.
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 28
06-13-2013, 03:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by o1derfull1 View Post
Geez, you don't know? Didn't you guys build a black hole in Switzerland to find stuff like this out?


I kid.

I was looking at the term from a strictly etymological perspective. Forgetting the physics that, as I stated earlier, wouldn't make it an electron, specifically the masses involved. It's been along time since high school, and I dropped my subscription to Theoretical Physics Quarterly in 2007.
It would actually be particle physics quarterly. Theoretical physics deals with the mathematical underpinnings of the universe whereas protons and antiprotons have been studied experimentally and their properties well-established for nearly a century.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 132
# 29
06-13-2013, 03:48 PM
Wouldn't a hit from anti-protons be , well, very disruptive to anything it struck, given that matter/antimatter interactions are, ah, unhealthy?

I wish the proc was even more devastating.
Commander
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 290
# 30
06-13-2013, 03:56 PM
Sigh. I know it's tantamount to blasphemy to admit ignorance on the internet, but I honestly had no idea that anti-matter was anything more than theoretical. After spending an hour down a rabbit hole of physics links, I just learned not only has it existed and been observed in nature for some time, but has also been synthesized in labs.

Thanks for the new (to me!) info.
_________________________________________________

::WARNING:: This game is not intended for use as a source of self-esteem.
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 04:16 AM.