Bolded part. That's where you are wrong. Sure, the Enterprise is massive, but it's also rather nimble, for it's size. And it's been shown as such many times over.
Second, who says we need to conform to the "traditional" Tank/Healer/DPS combo? Why can't all ships have a relatively "equal" balance, with Cruisers having Higher hull, and Escorts having Higher dps? Why does it automatically have to be that the "massive ships are nothing more than lumbering bricks" ?
Becuase then people would start arguing that the higher mass of the ships means that they should carry more and heavier guns than the escorts, and escorts should do less dps. It's a cyclic thing. I guess we could all just play Asteroids or Galaga. Big ships turning noticeably worse than little ships maintains credibility to the senses.
If I were to install a V8 engine into a Model-T Ford (assuming the two are remotely compatible), the Model-T wouldn't be a "lumbering brick" anymore.
No it wouldn't be a lumbering brick, just a brick that is fast for a short time until it had to stop, turn or twist/ snap drive-line components because the whole vehicle wasn't designed by modern vehicular standards of road-going. You would have to spend much more resources than its worth to bring it up to spec'. But people can still comment on the nice, shiny valve covers though.
Why couldn't the same idea be applied to starships? If you have a high power output, and advanced engines, both of which should be capable of compensating for the large mass. After all, in Newtonian physics, an object in motion, tends to stay in motion. Mass has very little difference in space.
Umm.... whaaaaaaaaaaaaat? Mass has a great deal to do in space, per Newtonian Physics, mass is in every equation in that realm!. Especially when you are being pulled by more than one object (and because everything in the universe is pulling on each other, that mean all the time).
Even in space, heavier ships need more energy to alter its path than a lighter ship would, to the point of it being exponential.
Becuase then people would start arguing that the higher mass of the ships means that they should carry more and heavier guns than the escorts, and escorts should do less dps. It's a cyclic thing. I guess we could all just play Asteroids or Galaga. Big ships turning noticeably worse than little ships maintains credibility to the senses.
No it wouldn't be a lumbering brick, just a brick that is fast for a short time until it had to stop, turn or twist/ snap drive-line components because the whole vehicle wasn't designed by modern vehicular standards of road-going. You would have to spend much more resources than its worth to bring it up to spec'. But people can still comment on the nice, shiny valve covers though.
Umm.... whaaaaaaaaaaaaat? Mass has a great deal to do in space, per Newtonian Physics, mass is in every equation in that realm!. Especially when you are being pulled by more than one object (and because everything in the universe is pulling on each other, that mean all the time).
Even in space, heavier ships need more energy to alter its path than a lighter ship would, to the point of it being exponential.
The mass of a ship has no effect in game, its down to bridge layouts, hull hp and but mainly down to class of each ship. There are lots of examples of where ships in game are larger than others but have a higher turn rate just because of the class they are put in.
I don't know why we even bother with these threads anymore. According to hours of forum digging (I have no life on weekends), and observation of the 6 threads I have participated in actively, I see lots of questions asking for cruiser turn rate increases, cruiser firepower increases, cruiser smoothie machines, cruiser day care centers, etc. And guess what? It seems the only things that get buffed are escorts. Sci got nerf bat to the crown jewels, and escorts got tankier and more firepower.
On a positive note, cruisers never got debuffed. They just have not been enhanced to be able to keep up with the higher speed gameplay ever since the game went f2p. They are still the "space humpback whales" in a world of tiger sharks. You won't see em die, but you won't see em do much. They can move, but they take forever to get anywhere with the sharks swimming in circles around them.
In all honesty, we all know that the devs will never buff cruiser anything. So all you guys defending escorts, you can get off your soap boxes, you're dominion is safe. And just let us vent. Seriously.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Fed cruisers also have insane defense abilities. If you want a better turnrate it has to be at the expanse of hull point and shield modifier. That's the problem of kdf cruisers, they have a rather low shield tanking ability, which makes them really weaker.
Anyway if you want to fly a fleet Vor'cha you can create a kdf character, STO isn't a game you should play with 1 or two characters only.
Current cruisers have excellent layouts, but it's difficult and technical to play them well. It may not be pleasing to hear but you musn't be good at it if you feel your cruiser is inferior to other ships.
Fed cruisers also have insane defense abilities. If you want a better turnrate it has to be at the expanse of hull point and shield modifier. That's the problem of kdf cruisers, they have a rather low shield tanking ability, which makes them really weaker.
Anyway if you want to fly a fleet Vor'cha you can create a kdf character, STO isn't a game you should play with 1 or two characters only.
Current cruisers have excellent layouts, but it's difficult and technical to play them well. It may not be pleasing to hear but you musn't be good at it if you feel your cruiser is inferior to other ships.
KDF fleet ships have the same shield modifer as fed cruisers, the only difference is 1 batter slot and hull hp. And yes, I would sacrifice from 0 hp to 4k hp on certain ships for better turn rate.
KDF fleet ships have the same shield modifer as fed cruisers, the only difference is 1 batter slot and hull hp. And yes, I would sacrifice from 0 hp to 4k hp on certain ships for better turn rate.
Don't compare c-store fed cruisers with kdf fleet ships. C-store ships are well knowned to be inferior to fleet ones.
I don't get why you CAN'T play with 7 tunrate, I don't need even 5 to get quite often the highest DPS value with my sci. Turnrate has never been an issue if you know how to play the game.
Again, if you really want kdf ships why don't you create a kdf character instead of asking for the kdf stuff for your old chars? Because obviously you won't get it.
Don't compare c-store fed cruisers with kdf fleet ships. C-store ships are well knowned to be inferior to fleet ones.
I don't get why you CAN'T play with 7 tunrate, I don't need even 5 to get quite often the highest DPS value with my sci. Turnrate has never been an issue if you know how to play the game.
Again, if you really want kdf ships why don't you create a kdf character instead of asking for the kdf stuff for your old chars? Because obviously you won't get it.
I was comparing fed fleet to kdf fleet not c-store ships. And I do have a KDF character and no, im not asking for kdf stuff. I was simply correcting your lack of knowledge regarding ship stats. If you cant tank your kdf cruiser as well as a fed, then your doing something wrong.
The mass of a ship has no effect in game, its down to bridge layouts, hull hp and but mainly down to class of each ship. There are lots of examples of where ships in game are larger than others but have a higher turn rate just because of the class they are put in.
Look at the inertia factors, mass is inversely proportionate to the ships rating. The bigger the ship, the lower the inertia rating. The inertia rating states how easily the ship overcomes acceleration and turning due to the ships mass.
I don't know why we even bother with these threads anymore. According to hours of forum digging (I have no life on weekends), and observation of the 6 threads I have participated in actively, I see lots of questions asking for cruiser turn rate increases, cruiser firepower increases, cruiser smoothie machines, cruiser day care centers, etc. And guess what? It seems the only things that get buffed are escorts. Sci got nerf bat to the crown jewels, and escorts got tankier and more firepower.
Hey, I am all for the "cruiser smoothie machines". That IS a cause worth fighting for.
Escorts did not get more tankier.
The top end Escort players learned how to make them more tankier and that information has made its way down through the ranks so even a new Escort player with a modicum of ability to surf the forums will find the same tricks to increase an Escorts survival.
Cruisers where not mysteriuosly nerfed when no one was looking.
Only Science has been truelly nerfed into being subpar.
All of this happened becuase Cryptic can't balance a game they do not micromanage but keep throwing more fluff OP items into at an alarming rate.
The game has become a DPS monster in that burst DPS is the only solution to every conflict and that is why Cruisers seem to suck becuase they do not do burst DPS but sustained DPS.
Cryptic needs to balance thier game by making it viable to do indirect sustained damage that is meaningful without making the Cruiser a Burst DPS vessel that replaces the Escort.
Look at the inertia factors, mass is inversely proportionate to the ships rating. The bigger the ship, the lower the inertia rating. The inertia rating states how easily the ship overcomes acceleration and turning due to the ships mass.
So if im understanding this right, the smaller the ship in mass and size means higher inertia which means higher turn rate?
Escorts did not get more tankier.
The top end Escort players learned how to make them more tankier and that information has made its way down through the ranks so even a new Escort player with a modicum of ability to surf the forums will find the same tricks to increase an Escorts survival.
Cruisers where not mysteriuosly nerfed when no one was looking.
Only Science has been truelly nerfed into being subpar.
All of this happened becuase Cryptic can't balance a game they do not micromanage but keep throwing more fluff OP items into at an alarming rate.
The game has become a DPS monster in that burst DPS is the only solution to every conflict and that is why Cruisers seem to suck becuase they do not do burst DPS but sustained DPS.
Cryptic needs to balance thier game by making it viable to do indirect sustained damage that is meaningful without making the Cruiser a Burst DPS vessel that replaces the Escort.
item sets and doffs have atleast doubled an escorts survivability, combined with speed tanking they can be very hard to kill. though a cruiser with good dps and those same doffs and sets can outlast and out attrition just about any escort
burst has been made even more important now to try to counter the huge burst healing potential there is.
annnnnnd none of this has anything to do with letting fed cruisers have a base turn rate that is 2 better then it is now. that would effect none of this.
item sets and doffs have atleast doubled an escorts survivability, combined with speed tanking they can be very hard to kill. though a cruiser with good dps and those same doffs and sets can outlast and out attrition just about any escort
burst has been made even more important now to try to counter the huge burst healing potential there is.
annnnnnd none of this has anything to do with letting fed cruisers have a base turn rate that is 2 better then it is now. that would effect none of this.
True, all the new stuff allows many vessels to strecth outside thier normal chatacteristics.
Burst still seems the same as does healing, relatively speaking.
Im not against Cruisers and KDF battle cruisets both getting a turmratr and onertia rating buff/fix to be more nimble but also not erasing the existing difference between flying fed versus KDF.
Also as long as it does not infringe on the territory of the escort.
Guys can we stay on topic. As dontdrunkimshoot pointed out, NONE of this cruisers vs escorts really has anything to do with asking for a better turn rate. And roach is right, as I posted in my most recent post, cruisers were never nerfed, but neither have they been enhanced to match the current gamestyle.
So basically back on topic, I think most of us are in agreement that a turn rate buff of +2 to fed cruisers, and maybe one to KDF battlecruisers is a fair ask right?
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
True, all the new stuff allows many vessels to strecth outside thier normal chatacteristics.
Burst still seems the same as does healing, relatively speaking.
Im not against Cruisers and KDF battle cruisets both getting a turmratr and onertia rating buff/fix to be more nimble but also not erasing the existing difference between flying fed versus KDF.
Also as long as it does not infringe on the territory of the escort.
indeed. the bug and other 5 tac console ships for offense, and the tholian ships for healing and defense, even the flagships too.
if you gave a vorcha and ktinga any more turn rate they would squarely be in escort territory, with 1 or 2 turn consoles they are in the mid 20s for turn rate, thats more then enough to make DHCs work, especially if you use TB, TBR, EWP, and APO in the fleet vorcha. i just cant support kdf cruisers getting more turn rate because it would push rapters even more off to the side. though their inertia scores at least on the vorcha and ktinga are much lower then they should be, that getting raised im for.
+10 inertia to negvar, vorcha, and ktinga, +2 turn for all fed cruisers and fed clone kdf cruisers.
fed cruisers would still be extreamly far behind their extreamly dangerous and varied escorts, the offense difference and defense difference between the 2 would still be huge.
and fed cruisers arent a joke, haven't been nerfed or any of that TRIBBLE. as long as i focus everything on defense, i can tank 2 bug ships in a fed cruiser build im using now, damage potential is hilariously behind healing potential, as long as a cruiser makes no effort to kirk it up.
Guys can we stay on topic. As dontdrunkimshoot pointed out, NONE of this cruisers vs escorts really has anything to do with asking for a better turn rate. And roach is right, as I posted in my most recent post, cruisers were never nerfed, but neither have they been enhanced to match the current gamestyle.
So basically back on topic, I think most of us are in agreement that a turn rate buff of +2 to fed cruisers, and maybe one to KDF battlecruisers is a fair ask right?
Well, sooner or later someone has to protest this in the name of Sci-ships.
Protest!
... okay, seriously: the current relative mobility of Carrier < Cruiser < Battle Cruiser < Sci < Escort/Raptor < BoP makes sense. And really should be kept.
On the other hand, I certainly understand that flying bricks is not very fun.
What could be done: A general mobility upgrade, for ALL ships.
That's upgrades to Turn-rate and/or Inertia.
No more than ~20/25% increase to mobility though.
But: Even this would have impact on game balance.
- combat would be more fast-paced, and at shorter range.
- it would be more difficult to keep attacking the same shield facing.
- frontal arc powers would get an indirect buff by doing this.
- game-play for escorts/raptors and BoPs would become even more twitchy.
- carriers could become just a bit too much too strong - but carriers are even more effected by the "not fun to fly"-problem, and not buffing them too would leave them behind.
As said before: I can understand the desire for less bricky ships. But not at the expense of gamebalance, and not out of some selfish "I want my ship to be the best"-motivation. And I really don't see much concern for gamebalance in this thread ...
If I were the devs, I'd rather keep things as they are then follow one of the ideas in this thread so far, you're totally ignoring any consequences beyond "'would be more fun for me" ... and that's just short-sighted.
indeed. the bug and other 5 tac console ships for offense, and the tholian ships for healing and defense, even the flagships too.
if you gave a vorcha and ktinga any more turn rate they would squarely be in escort territory, with 1 or 2 turn consoles they are in the mid 20s for turn rate, thats more then enough to make DHCs work, especially if you use TB, TBR, EWP, and APO in the fleet vorcha. i just cant support kdf cruisers getting more turn rate because it would push rapters even more off to the side. though their inertia scores at least on the vorcha and ktinga are much lower then they should be, that getting raised im for.
+10 inertia to negvar, vorcha, and ktinga, +2 turn for all fed cruisers and fed clone kdf cruisers.
fed cruisers would still be extreamly far behind their extreamly dangerous and varied escorts, the offense difference and defense difference between the 2 would still be huge.
and fed cruisers arent a joke, haven't been nerfed or any of that TRIBBLE. as long as i focus everything on defense, i can tank 2 bug ships in a fed cruiser build im using now, damage potential is hilariously behind healing potential, as long as a cruiser makes no effort to kirk it up.
I like the way you think though just a thought, having cruisers up to turn rate of 9, would the Nebula class then need a turn rate increase?
So if im understanding this right, the smaller the ship in mass and size means higher inertia which means higher turn rate?
Yes, they look at the ships mass as an "inertial encumbrance penalty". Think of the inertia rating as a 1-100 scale; 100 being the least encumbered and 1 the most encumbered, due to its mass. That factored is then used as a multiplier factor in the actual "real" turn rate value.
Escorts did not get more tankier.
The top end Escort players learned how to make them more tankier and that information has made its way down through the ranks so even a new Escort player with a modicum of ability to surf the forums will find the same tricks to increase an Escorts survival.
Cruisers where not mysteriuosly nerfed when no one was looking.
Only Science has been truelly nerfed into being subpar.
All of this happened becuase Cryptic can't balance a game they do not micromanage but keep throwing more fluff OP items into at an alarming rate.
The game has become a DPS monster in that burst DPS is the only solution to every conflict and that is why Cruisers seem to suck becuase they do not do burst DPS but sustained DPS.
Cryptic needs to balance thier game by making it viable to do indirect sustained damage that is meaningful without making the Cruiser a Burst DPS vessel that replaces the Escort.
I think the best way to do that without upsetting the system too much is to improve the way that Single Cannons do damage. There is a reason to why they aren't so highly valued in the exchange. People tend not to use them because they don't see much in the way of damage from them. Right now they are more a crit' device than anything else. I think that they should do a tad more damage than they do.
I like the idea of the cruiser being the anvil to the escort's hammer; so I just thought of this, which will never happen:
1: No turn rate changes. "What?!" I hear you cry. Hear me out.
2: A drop across the Escort/BoP board in shield multipliers.
3: Increase damage on DHCs further, but decrease RoF; same with DCs.
4: Decrease efficacy of EPtS 1 significantly, and 2 slightly.
5: Give cruisers innate Tractor Beam 2.
6: Give cruisers a slight boost in shield capacity and regen rate.
7: Give cruisers an innate +10% damage boost on beam weapons.
8: Slight boost in movement speed of BoPs, to make up for extreme killability.
This would change gameplay completely. Escorts become even greater spike damage machines, but they end up absolutely needing the support of cruisers. Cruisers, on the other hand, end up dealing a bit more damage; but become much more effective anvils for the escort to hammer home.
I like the idea of the cruiser being the anvil to the escort's hammer; so I just thought of this, which will never happen:
1: No turn rate changes. "What?!" I hear you cry. Hear me out.
2: A drop across the Escort/BoP board in shield multipliers.
3: Increase damage on DHCs further, but decrease RoF; same with DCs.
4: Decrease efficacy of EPtS 1 significantly, and 2 slightly.
5: Give cruisers innate Tractor Beam 2.
6: Give cruisers a slight boost in shield capacity and regen rate.
7: Give cruisers an innate +10% damage boost on beam weapons.
8: Slight boost in movement speed of BoPs, to make up for extreme killability.
This would change gameplay completely. Escorts become even greater spike damage machines, but they end up absolutely needing the support of cruisers. Cruisers, on the other hand, end up dealing a bit more damage; but become much more effective anvils for the escort to hammer home.
I would argue to have some increases in dps for BA's and Single Cannons as well. If not that, slightly increase the rate of fire and slightly increase the damage per shot on each type as well.
I like the idea of the cruiser being the anvil to the escort's hammer; so I just thought of this, which will never happen:
1: No turn rate changes. "What?!" I hear you cry. Hear me out.
2: A drop across the Escort/BoP board in shield multipliers.
3: Increase damage on DHCs further, but decrease RoF; same with DCs.
4: Decrease efficacy of EPtS 1 significantly, and 2 slightly.
5: Give cruisers innate Tractor Beam 2.
6: Give cruisers a slight boost in shield capacity and regen rate.
7: Give cruisers an innate +10% damage boost on beam weapons.
8: Slight boost in movement speed of BoPs, to make up for extreme killability.
This would change gameplay completely. Escorts become even greater spike damage machines, but they end up absolutely needing the support of cruisers. Cruisers, on the other hand, end up dealing a bit more damage; but become much more effective anvils for the escort to hammer home.
This I like, heck it might even cause me to go back from my tank build to my team heal build or of course it might just cause me to buy some new boff slots for it.
I prefer the ideas of Heavy Beams, new beam BOff abilities, + 1-2 turnrate boost for Cruisers & Battle cruisers, opening DBBs to 200degrees and mountible aft, new cannon BOff abilities and so such.
I prefer changes and fixes that add to the game as a whole and, in this case, favoring cruisers instead outright just buffing cruisers alone.
I like the idea of the cruiser being the anvil to the escort's hammer; so I just thought of this, which will never happen:
1: No turn rate changes. "What?!" I hear you cry. Hear me out.
2: A drop across the Escort/BoP board in shield multipliers.
3: Increase damage on DHCs further, but decrease RoF; same with DCs.
4: Decrease efficacy of EPtS 1 significantly, and 2 slightly.
5: Give cruisers innate Tractor Beam 2.
6: Give cruisers a slight boost in shield capacity and regen rate.
7: Give cruisers an innate +10% damage boost on beam weapons.
8: Slight boost in movement speed of BoPs, to make up for extreme killability.
This would change gameplay completely. Escorts become even greater spike damage machines, but they end up absolutely needing the support of cruisers. Cruisers, on the other hand, end up dealing a bit more damage; but become much more effective anvils for the escort to hammer home.
I've been PvPing for 2 years across both Fed and KDF cross all classes.
What this poster has suggested is not at all feasible for improving the balance of STO. For a number of reasons.
1.) STO, although a game which is designed to be played on a team with others, is played by most people alone, or as part of PUGS. PUGS are horrendous at support.
2.) Cruisers in theory become the only ship which can be risk free and solo-ed. If you are a TAC, you remain even more exposed and probably hanging on a loose thread as there is little or no support coming your way, as cruisers will now try to play offensively and further move out of their potential of being team defensive.
I don't get this argument. Professional sportsman, e.g. rugby or football, know what positions they play and are brilliant at it. Hookers don't go up to the Captain halfway through the match and say, "Geez Capt' I want to be a fly-half. Or better, please make me a wing. But so to make it that I shine, please can we shoot the rest of the team in the knees."
3.) TACs can fly cruisers too. So you are essentially opening the door again to Cruisers Online from Beta.
4.) You are advocating (I think) four (4x) nerfs to escorts, and three (3x) buffs to cruisers. In essence they are all against the escort. That is hardly balanced solution by a long shot.
4.) You are advocating (I think) four (4x) nerfs to escorts, and three (3x) buffs to cruisers. In essence they are all against the escort.
Heh, nice try.
He's suggested 1 nerf to escorts to put them back into that glass cannons zone, you know, where they SHOULD be. He's also suggested a slight reduction to EPtS to bring it in line with others. If I read it right he's made no real change to escort weaponry, having reduced EPtS he's suggested a slight increase in cruiser shield stats and the 10% boost to beams on cruisers will give them that boost many have called for without breaking anything.
So all in all he's suggesting that cruisers should be able to be healboats without complete loss of damage output which is a GOOD thing, he's suggested escorts pay for their damage which is a GOOD thing, if we cruisers have to pay damage for healing then escorts have to pay tank for damage (it's called fairness and balance), The innate tractor beam 2 I'm not too sure about, I think 1 is a better idea but that works in FAVOUR of ESCORTS as their support ships will be able to hold their target still without paying a heal to do so.
So actually if you step back from the escort AND cruiser point of view and look at it from a game balance perspective what he is suggesting is a very GOOD thing.
Comments
Becuase then people would start arguing that the higher mass of the ships means that they should carry more and heavier guns than the escorts, and escorts should do less dps. It's a cyclic thing. I guess we could all just play Asteroids or Galaga. Big ships turning noticeably worse than little ships maintains credibility to the senses.
No it wouldn't be a lumbering brick, just a brick that is fast for a short time until it had to stop, turn or twist/ snap drive-line components because the whole vehicle wasn't designed by modern vehicular standards of road-going. You would have to spend much more resources than its worth to bring it up to spec'. But people can still comment on the nice, shiny valve covers though.
Umm.... whaaaaaaaaaaaaat? Mass has a great deal to do in space, per Newtonian Physics, mass is in every equation in that realm!. Especially when you are being pulled by more than one object (and because everything in the universe is pulling on each other, that mean all the time).
Even in space, heavier ships need more energy to alter its path than a lighter ship would, to the point of it being exponential.
The mass of a ship has no effect in game, its down to bridge layouts, hull hp and but mainly down to class of each ship. There are lots of examples of where ships in game are larger than others but have a higher turn rate just because of the class they are put in.
On a positive note, cruisers never got debuffed. They just have not been enhanced to be able to keep up with the higher speed gameplay ever since the game went f2p. They are still the "space humpback whales" in a world of tiger sharks. You won't see em die, but you won't see em do much. They can move, but they take forever to get anywhere with the sharks swimming in circles around them.
In all honesty, we all know that the devs will never buff cruiser anything. So all you guys defending escorts, you can get off your soap boxes, you're dominion is safe. And just let us vent. Seriously.
Anyway if you want to fly a fleet Vor'cha you can create a kdf character, STO isn't a game you should play with 1 or two characters only.
Current cruisers have excellent layouts, but it's difficult and technical to play them well. It may not be pleasing to hear but you musn't be good at it if you feel your cruiser is inferior to other ships.
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
KDF fleet ships have the same shield modifer as fed cruisers, the only difference is 1 batter slot and hull hp. And yes, I would sacrifice from 0 hp to 4k hp on certain ships for better turn rate.
Don't compare c-store fed cruisers with kdf fleet ships. C-store ships are well knowned to be inferior to fleet ones.
I don't get why you CAN'T play with 7 tunrate, I don't need even 5 to get quite often the highest DPS value with my sci. Turnrate has never been an issue if you know how to play the game.
Again, if you really want kdf ships why don't you create a kdf character instead of asking for the kdf stuff for your old chars? Because obviously you won't get it.
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
I was comparing fed fleet to kdf fleet not c-store ships. And I do have a KDF character and no, im not asking for kdf stuff. I was simply correcting your lack of knowledge regarding ship stats. If you cant tank your kdf cruiser as well as a fed, then your doing something wrong.
Look at the inertia factors, mass is inversely proportionate to the ships rating. The bigger the ship, the lower the inertia rating. The inertia rating states how easily the ship overcomes acceleration and turning due to the ships mass.
Hey, I am all for the "cruiser smoothie machines". That IS a cause worth fighting for.
The top end Escort players learned how to make them more tankier and that information has made its way down through the ranks so even a new Escort player with a modicum of ability to surf the forums will find the same tricks to increase an Escorts survival.
Cruisers where not mysteriuosly nerfed when no one was looking.
Only Science has been truelly nerfed into being subpar.
All of this happened becuase Cryptic can't balance a game they do not micromanage but keep throwing more fluff OP items into at an alarming rate.
The game has become a DPS monster in that burst DPS is the only solution to every conflict and that is why Cruisers seem to suck becuase they do not do burst DPS but sustained DPS.
Cryptic needs to balance thier game by making it viable to do indirect sustained damage that is meaningful without making the Cruiser a Burst DPS vessel that replaces the Escort.
R.I.P
So if im understanding this right, the smaller the ship in mass and size means higher inertia which means higher turn rate?
item sets and doffs have atleast doubled an escorts survivability, combined with speed tanking they can be very hard to kill. though a cruiser with good dps and those same doffs and sets can outlast and out attrition just about any escort
burst has been made even more important now to try to counter the huge burst healing potential there is.
annnnnnd none of this has anything to do with letting fed cruisers have a base turn rate that is 2 better then it is now. that would effect none of this.
The KDF Sci Carrier is far harder to turn than any Fed criuser
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
Star Trek Gamers
True, all the new stuff allows many vessels to strecth outside thier normal chatacteristics.
Burst still seems the same as does healing, relatively speaking.
Im not against Cruisers and KDF battle cruisets both getting a turmratr and onertia rating buff/fix to be more nimble but also not erasing the existing difference between flying fed versus KDF.
Also as long as it does not infringe on the territory of the escort.
R.I.P
So basically back on topic, I think most of us are in agreement that a turn rate buff of +2 to fed cruisers, and maybe one to KDF battlecruisers is a fair ask right?
indeed. the bug and other 5 tac console ships for offense, and the tholian ships for healing and defense, even the flagships too.
if you gave a vorcha and ktinga any more turn rate they would squarely be in escort territory, with 1 or 2 turn consoles they are in the mid 20s for turn rate, thats more then enough to make DHCs work, especially if you use TB, TBR, EWP, and APO in the fleet vorcha. i just cant support kdf cruisers getting more turn rate because it would push rapters even more off to the side. though their inertia scores at least on the vorcha and ktinga are much lower then they should be, that getting raised im for.
+10 inertia to negvar, vorcha, and ktinga, +2 turn for all fed cruisers and fed clone kdf cruisers.
fed cruisers would still be extreamly far behind their extreamly dangerous and varied escorts, the offense difference and defense difference between the 2 would still be huge.
and fed cruisers arent a joke, haven't been nerfed or any of that TRIBBLE. as long as i focus everything on defense, i can tank 2 bug ships in a fed cruiser build im using now, damage potential is hilariously behind healing potential, as long as a cruiser makes no effort to kirk it up.
Well, sooner or later someone has to protest this in the name of Sci-ships.
Protest!
... okay, seriously: the current relative mobility of Carrier < Cruiser < Battle Cruiser < Sci < Escort/Raptor < BoP makes sense. And really should be kept.
On the other hand, I certainly understand that flying bricks is not very fun.
What could be done: A general mobility upgrade, for ALL ships.
That's upgrades to Turn-rate and/or Inertia.
No more than ~20/25% increase to mobility though.
But: Even this would have impact on game balance.
- combat would be more fast-paced, and at shorter range.
- it would be more difficult to keep attacking the same shield facing.
- frontal arc powers would get an indirect buff by doing this.
- game-play for escorts/raptors and BoPs would become even more twitchy.
- carriers could become just a bit too much too strong - but carriers are even more effected by the "not fun to fly"-problem, and not buffing them too would leave them behind.
As said before: I can understand the desire for less bricky ships. But not at the expense of gamebalance, and not out of some selfish "I want my ship to be the best"-motivation. And I really don't see much concern for gamebalance in this thread ...
If I were the devs, I'd rather keep things as they are then follow one of the ideas in this thread so far, you're totally ignoring any consequences beyond "'would be more fun for me" ... and that's just short-sighted.
I like the way you think
Yes, they look at the ships mass as an "inertial encumbrance penalty". Think of the inertia rating as a 1-100 scale; 100 being the least encumbered and 1 the most encumbered, due to its mass. That factored is then used as a multiplier factor in the actual "real" turn rate value.
I think the best way to do that without upsetting the system too much is to improve the way that Single Cannons do damage. There is a reason to why they aren't so highly valued in the exchange. People tend not to use them because they don't see much in the way of damage from them. Right now they are more a crit' device than anything else. I think that they should do a tad more damage than they do.
if it ever came to that, sci ships except the nova should proboly get +1 turn, especially the neb
1: No turn rate changes. "What?!" I hear you cry. Hear me out.
2: A drop across the Escort/BoP board in shield multipliers.
3: Increase damage on DHCs further, but decrease RoF; same with DCs.
4: Decrease efficacy of EPtS 1 significantly, and 2 slightly.
5: Give cruisers innate Tractor Beam 2.
6: Give cruisers a slight boost in shield capacity and regen rate.
7: Give cruisers an innate +10% damage boost on beam weapons.
8: Slight boost in movement speed of BoPs, to make up for extreme killability.
This would change gameplay completely. Escorts become even greater spike damage machines, but they end up absolutely needing the support of cruisers. Cruisers, on the other hand, end up dealing a bit more damage; but become much more effective anvils for the escort to hammer home.
problem solved.
Ain't Nobody Got Time for That
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I would argue to have some increases in dps for BA's and Single Cannons as well. If not that, slightly increase the rate of fire and slightly increase the damage per shot on each type as well.
This I like, heck it might even cause me to go back from my tank build to my team heal build or of course it might just cause me to buy some new boff slots for it.
Either way, I give this my blessing
I prefer changes and fixes that add to the game as a whole and, in this case, favoring cruisers instead outright just buffing cruisers alone.
R.I.P
I've been PvPing for 2 years across both Fed and KDF cross all classes.
What this poster has suggested is not at all feasible for improving the balance of STO. For a number of reasons.
1.) STO, although a game which is designed to be played on a team with others, is played by most people alone, or as part of PUGS. PUGS are horrendous at support.
2.) Cruisers in theory become the only ship which can be risk free and solo-ed. If you are a TAC, you remain even more exposed and probably hanging on a loose thread as there is little or no support coming your way, as cruisers will now try to play offensively and further move out of their potential of being team defensive.
I don't get this argument. Professional sportsman, e.g. rugby or football, know what positions they play and are brilliant at it. Hookers don't go up to the Captain halfway through the match and say, "Geez Capt' I want to be a fly-half. Or better, please make me a wing. But so to make it that I shine, please can we shoot the rest of the team in the knees."
3.) TACs can fly cruisers too. So you are essentially opening the door again to Cruisers Online from Beta.
4.) You are advocating (I think) four (4x) nerfs to escorts, and three (3x) buffs to cruisers. In essence they are all against the escort. That is hardly balanced solution by a long shot.
Heh, nice try.
He's suggested 1 nerf to escorts to put them back into that glass cannons zone, you know, where they SHOULD be. He's also suggested a slight reduction to EPtS to bring it in line with others. If I read it right he's made no real change to escort weaponry, having reduced EPtS he's suggested a slight increase in cruiser shield stats and the 10% boost to beams on cruisers will give them that boost many have called for without breaking anything.
So all in all he's suggesting that cruisers should be able to be healboats without complete loss of damage output which is a GOOD thing, he's suggested escorts pay for their damage which is a GOOD thing, if we cruisers have to pay damage for healing then escorts have to pay tank for damage (it's called fairness and balance), The innate tractor beam 2 I'm not too sure about, I think 1 is a better idea but that works in FAVOUR of ESCORTS as their support ships will be able to hold their target still without paying a heal to do so.
So actually if you step back from the escort AND cruiser point of view and look at it from a game balance perspective what he is suggesting is a very GOOD thing.