test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Firepower Balance

1356711

Comments

  • alexindcobraalexindcobra Member Posts: 608
    edited September 2012
    Cannon arc does nothing but cripple are cruiser that tries to use them because it can't turn on a dime like an escort. Cruisers have to use weapons 90 degrees or higher to compensate for lack in turn rate. If the most powerful weapons are mounted on the quickest turning ship, then firing acs are irrelevant. Thats not even a legitmate argument, when it comes to balance of the game.

    If you think distance affects cannons that much to make a difference, check your combat log. You will see that beams' damage drops off alot faster with distance than cannons do. Besides, distance don't matter when it comes to an escort being the fastest ship in the game. If you're in a cruiser, you can't outrun an escort, if you tried. He will be all in your "cheese" with ease, until you are destroyed, so the argument about distance is irrelevant because escorts can easily close it.

    Escort are they only type of ship that makes all other types irrelevant. They are the fastest, most manuverable, most powerful, and most defended ship type in the game. Not only are their defense rating is off the scale, so half of your weapons actually touch them, but they are allowed to shield tank better than science ships. They Borg console setup with MACO shield makes it possible. The only cruiser that is good at shield tanking is the Odyssey, but you will be stuck with second slowest turn rate, and you won't be able to outrun your attacker, so eventually he will wear you down and destroy you. To add salt to the wound, they created escort carriers. Why does the fastest, most powerful ship need fighters to help it destroy its target or hold them in place so it can catch it? I have a good idea why they came up with them because regular carriers can't escape the Borg's firepower in the STF's like an escort can, so you combine the two types and now you can deal damage to the Borg while its destracted with your fighters.


    All this shows is the devs bais for escorts. There is no other reason you can explain this type of imbalance. Nevermind the escort players that will defend their ship to the end by trying to make you feel less of a person, focus on the Devs. They are the reason why the game is imbalaced.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    Nevermind the escort players that will defend their ship to the end by trying to make you feel less of a person, focus on the Devs. They are the reason why the game is imbalaced.

    lets focus on the devs that don't bother reading these...

    I love your plan but regrettably all we can do is dream in that respect
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    Cannon arc does nothing but cripple are cruiser that tries to use them because it can't turn on a dime like an escort. Cruisers have to use weapons 90 degrees or higher to compensate for lack in turn rate. If the most powerful weapons are mounted on the quickest turning ship, then firing acs are irrelevant. Thats not even a legitmate argument, when it comes to balance of the game.

    If you think distance affects cannons that much to make a difference, check your combat log. You will see that beams' damage drops off alot faster with distance than cannons do. Besides, distance don't matter when it comes to an escort being the fastest ship in the game. If you're in a cruiser, you can't outrun an escort, if you tried. He will be all in your "cheese" with ease, until you are destroyed, so the argument about distance is irrelevant because escorts can easily close it.

    Escort are they only type of ship that makes all other types irrelevant. They are the fastest, most manuverable, most powerful, and most defended ship type in the game. Not only are their defense rating is off the scale, so half of your weapons actually touch them, but they are allowed to shield tank better than science ships. They Borg console setup with MACO shield makes it possible. The only cruiser that is good at shield tanking is the Odyssey, but you will be stuck with second slowest turn rate, and you won't be able to outrun your attacker, so eventually he will wear you down and destroy you. To add salt to the wound, they created escort carriers. Why does the fastest, most powerful ship need fighters to help it destroy its target or hold them in place so it can catch it? I have a good idea why they came up with them because regular carriers can't escape the Borg's firepower in the STF's like an escort can, so you combine the two types and now you can deal damage to the Borg while its destracted with your fighters.


    All this shows is the devs bais for escorts. There is no other reason you can explain this type of imbalance. Nevermind the escort players that will defend their ship to the end by trying to make you feel less of a person, focus on the Devs. They are the reason why the game is imbalaced.

    Beams dont drop in damage until farther out from target and drop less so per km. Cannons drop off at 2km and at almost double the rate per km afterwards.

    All your anti escort cruisers suck badly oh woe is the cruiser plater rhetoric is way off target.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    adamkafei wrote: »
    lets focus on the devs that don't bother reading these...

    I love your plan but regrettably all we can do is dream in that respect

    i think they read this, they just reflect on what people claim and compare it with actual statistics and numbers and those numbers do not support all those claims made here.
    Fact is that there are some capable cruiser captains around that do not share the general sentiment that cruisers are underpowered and escort drastically overpowered. Sure some cruisers are total TRIBBLE and need adjustment to be competitive again, but not all together.

    escort actually only have about 16% more def...at max speed, compared to cruisers. But it is rather stupid to run around with full speed in an escort, since you will lose a lot of time on your target, which means less overall dmg. A cruiser, in general, broadsides it's target at full speed...which actually will result in a higher def rating compared to the escort. and to be honest, broadsides of capable cruisers are rather devestating as it is.
    Go pro or go home
  • veraticusveraticus Member Posts: 250 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    baudl wrote: »
    @veraticus. even my turrets (mk xii borg) on my cruiser that runs 116 weapon power are at 550 dps unbuffed with only 2 mark XI blue consoles. a beam array on a half decently build cruiser should be atleast above 700dps. Therefore 6 beams should be able to generate atleast 4200dps broadsideing.i guess you use MK XI or X gear for that numbers. Anyway...how many beams are you actually using in that calculation? 5 or 6...if 600 dps is one beam that would make 3600 dps with 6 amd 3000 dps with 5...but never 2800.

    those numbers do not seem to be an adequat representation of what actually is on a cruiser or escort.
    MKXII 3 DHC+3 turrets all borg reach 5700 dps on my fleet patrol with 124 weapon power. no buffs but 18% bonus accuracy, 3.4% crit chance 56% crit severity.
    on the same ship a beam array MKXII borg has about 858dps with the same weapon power (some cruiser can actually reach that without buffs)
    lowering that weapon power to 114 (which is a normal value for cruisers that max weapon power) the beam still was at 789 dps. this would mean a cruiser can broadside 6 beams at 4740dps...no buffs. thats nearly 2000 more than would you had and only 1000 less than the escort with 10 more weapon power. guess what, the escort with 114 weapon power only had around 5200dps thats only 400 more than the cruiser.

    so, i think your numbers are completely manufactured and do not represent the reality in any way.
    although i have to admit that was all with 4 mk xi consoles, but there are cruisers that also have 4 tac consoles.
    i took 2 out anyway and was still at 694dps with only 114 weapon power. with 3 it was 741 dps. all numbers still well above yours.

    I just ran The Cure on Normal. Here are my numbers.

    Raw Damage:
    Min: 0
    Max: 35,840
    AVG: 742
    DPS: 3,708 (4,083 peak)

    Net Damage:
    Min: 0
    Max: 10,132
    AVG: 461
    DPS: 2,403 (2,668 peak)


    I run with 123 to weapons.
    Have 6 arrays(2MkXII 4MkXI) and 2 dual beam banks.(both MkXI)
    +78.6 to phaser power from consoles.
    The Assimilated Module.
    Power Transfer Rate of 239% or 11.9/sec.

    Run with AP:B(Rank I) FAW(Rank I) and BO(RankI) for my Tactical slots.
    DEM(RankI) and FP(RankI)
    Plus a Lance.

    When running DPS numbers you have to account for the power drain too.
    Sometimes that number can drop as low as 43 due to things like BO/Lance or from FAW and multiple targets.
  • mrtsheadmrtshead Member Posts: 487 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    Escort are they only type of ship that makes all other types irrelevant. They are the fastest, most manuverable, most powerful, and most defended ship type in the game. Not only are their defense rating is off the scale, so half of your weapons actually touch them, but they are allowed to shield tank better than science ships. They Borg console setup with MACO shield makes it possible. The only cruiser that is good at shield tanking is the Odyssey, but you will be stuck with second slowest turn rate, and you won't be able to outrun your attacker, so eventually he will wear you down and destroy you.

    So, other people have pointed out some of the factual inaccuracies in the rest of this post, but I thought this was worth a special mention. See, what you are doing here is asserting that equipment that ANY ship can carry is somehow making escorts BETTER at shield tanking than the alternatives. This makes no sense. At a base level, any cruiser or Science vessel has a higher potential for tanking than an escort. If you equip both ships with the same kind of gear, then the gear should cancel, and the relative tankiness of the ships will remain the same.

    I suspect that what is happening behind the scenes is you are comparing escorts with tanking gear (Shield dis. Doffs, MACO shields, Borg set, etc) to ships WITHOUT that gear, which is obviously nonsense. Same thing with the 'Odyssey is the only cruiser good at shield tanking' comment. How is that? Tanking slots are generally understood to be either engineering or sci slots. Cruisers as a whole have the SAME sci consoles and powers that escorts do as a whole, and more Eng slots. If sci powers are what matters, then if escorts are good at shield tanking, cruiser should be at least the same, and if eng powers matter as well, then all cruisers should be BETTER at shield tanking than an escort (and escorts are, in your world, already too good).

    If your argument was that the tanking gear in this game is too good, that would be one thing, but that's NOT a problem with escorts, nor is it a reason to (as you keep suggesting) nerf escort damage. If you feel like escorts are able to tank so well that it makes the heals from cruiser obsolete, I disagree, but at least that argument makes some sense - the solution, however, is NOT to reduce escort damage. The solution is to reduce the effectiveness of heals, so that the ships that have more heals have a larger relative advantage.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    bitemepwe wrote: »
    Beams dont drop in damage until farther out from target and drop less so per km. Cannons drop off at 2km and at almost double the rate per km afterwards.

    I hate to say it but in my experience my escorts still out damage cruisers that are sat at 5km while I am at 10km.

    My engineers cruiser makes 200 damage per hit at 10km with EPTW and TT in place, my tacticals escort does the same at 10km with no buffs.

    My tacticals cruiser (of the exact same build) does at 10km unbuffed what my engineers cruiser does at 10km with EPTW and TT in place

    I think it's something about tacticals>engineers
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • flekhflekh Member Posts: 233 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    veraticus wrote: »
    I just ran The Cure on Normal. Here are my numbers.

    Raw Damage:
    Min: 0
    Max: 35,840
    AVG: 742
    DPS: 3,708 (4,083 peak)

    Net Damage:
    Min: 0
    Max: 10,132
    AVG: 461
    DPS: 2,403 (2,668 peak)


    I run with 123 to weapons.
    Have 6 arrays(2MkXII 4MkXI) and 2 dual beam banks.(both MkXI)
    +78.6 to phaser power from consoles.
    The Assimilated Module.
    Power Transfer Rate of 239% or 11.9/sec.

    Run with AP:B(Rank I) FAW(Rank I) and BO(RankI) for my Tactical slots.
    DEM(RankI) and FP(RankI)
    Plus a Lance.

    When running DPS numbers you have to account for the power drain too.
    Sometimes that number can drop as low as 43 due to things like BO/Lance or from FAW and multiple targets.

    So, you're running 8 beams at 123 power.
    That's ... not ideal.
    The 8th beam's extra potential is totally neutralized by the extra power drain, you get no extra damage at all (okay, technically: 0.05%).
    Even the 7th beam at that low power is pretty useless, and only adds 3.75% extra damage - a torpedo launcher, even if used only once a year, would still be a better choice.

    Your main issue though: Y U NO EPtW????
    EPtW, even a lowly EPtW1, even at only 6 beams and 123 base power, would be a damage increase of 23.9%. And it'd make 7 beams at least somewhat viable, and 8 at least not totally useless - in fact, with the same setup you have now, the increase in dps would be 31%.

    ... and you're wondering why cruisers suck?
    Because their captains don't know what they're doing!

    P.S.: Not to mention that you're using a Dreadnought with beams (L2 DHC/Turret + Aux2Damp!), or that you're using Feedback Pulse in your valuable Sci slots ...... ARGHH

    Edit @adamkafel: You're just as bad. Weapon Power to 1xx/100, or you're wasting EPtW - you're making the same stupid mistake.

    Cruisers are sucking power like mad, with all their weapons slots, and you really need to set power to max AND run EPtW to buffer all that drain, or your damage will inevitably suck.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    mrtshead wrote: »
    Tanking slots are generally understood to be either engineering or sci slots. Cruisers as a whole have the SAME sci consoles and powers that escorts do as a whole, and more Eng slots. If sci powers are what matters, then if escorts are good at shield tanking, cruiser should be at least the same, and if eng powers matter as well, then all cruisers should be BETTER at shield tanking than an escort (and escorts are, in your world, already too good).

    in all fairness any ship can only hold out for a limited amount of time provided you are able to lay down sufficient damage which, due to the cruisers severely lacking damage potential in casual player builds (such as mine, I want to have fun playing the game not feel like its a chore), gives escorts a tanking advantage as they don't need to hold out for as long .

    Allow me to take you back in time to the day before season 6 went live (already been here 3 times before but you haven't read that as evidenced by your comment) I was able to tank almost anything the game could throw at me in my engi/cruiser because I had a nice amount of tank skills and was still pumping out a good 500-800 unbuffed damage per hit with 6 beams and could push that to a maximum of 2.5k per hit so I was a dmage sponge come support ship with some bite to my bark, the day after I was producing half that damage (ish, maxing at 1800 per hit) so I'd lost my bite and had a little hull boost, a couple of weeks later I lost that and had nothing to show for my lost damage (except a lot more deaths on my record).

    so while my cruiser may be better at shield tanking, it's overall tank ability is less than that of an escort. Lets all remember that while in real life a tank has a lot of armour it also packs a damn nasty punch... something you lot seem to, conveniently or over-wise, forget.

    P.S. For those of you who want to pick fault with everything I say about MY OWN ship performance here is some information you will want about how I got my damage stats
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    Cannon arc does nothing but cripple are cruiser that tries to use them because it can't turn on a dime like an escort. Cruisers have to use weapons 90 degrees or higher to compensate for lack in turn rate. If the most powerful weapons are mounted on the quickest turning ship, then firing acs are irrelevant. Thats not even a legitmate argument, when it comes to balance of the game.

    If you think distance affects cannons that much to make a difference, check your combat log. You will see that beams' damage drops off alot faster with distance than cannons do. Besides, distance don't matter when it comes to an escort being the fastest ship in the game. If you're in a cruiser, you can't outrun an escort, if you tried. He will be all in your "cheese" with ease, until you are destroyed, so the argument about distance is irrelevant because escorts can easily close it.

    Escort are they only type of ship that makes all other types irrelevant. They are the fastest, most manuverable, most powerful, and most defended ship type in the game. Not only are their defense rating is off the scale, so half of your weapons actually touch them, but they are allowed to shield tank better than science ships. They Borg console setup with MACO shield makes it possible. The only cruiser that is good at shield tanking is the Odyssey, but you will be stuck with second slowest turn rate, and you won't be able to outrun your attacker, so eventually he will wear you down and destroy you. To add salt to the wound, they created escort carriers. Why does the fastest, most powerful ship need fighters to help it destroy its target or hold them in place so it can catch it? I have a good idea why they came up with them because regular carriers can't escape the Borg's firepower in the STF's like an escort can, so you combine the two types and now you can deal damage to the Borg while its destracted with your fighters.


    All this shows is the devs bais for escorts. There is no other reason you can explain this type of imbalance. Nevermind the escort players that will defend their ship to the end by trying to make you feel less of a person, focus on the Devs. They are the reason why the game is imbalaced.
    100% true.
    Escort lobbyist will always want to think to be in disadvantage because they like to see themselves that way. where is the fun if everyone knows they are just destroying big target practices in PvP. But they will never admit that, of course.


    bitemepwe wrote: »
    Beams dont drop in damage until farther out from target and drop less so per km. Cannons drop off at 2km and at almost double the rate per km afterwards.

    All your anti escort cruisers suck badly oh woe is the cruiser plater rhetoric is way off target.
    I am sorry to say that but, you should at least be honest enough to admit that escorts have far more advantages than crusiers.
    If you would, you would try to do PvP in a Slow, boring and toothless Federation Crusier in Ker'rat system, without any friends or any other help. See how it is to be just a target practice of other players, with their ships having almost all advantages on their side. Do that day, after day, after day. Do that for a year and honestly tell me that things are allright as they are.

    I just sick of people not wanting to see how things really are and i don't want to discuss that anymore because you guys don want to discuss anything, you just to be right.

    You have the devs on your side, what else do you want? The game fits perfectly to your needs, Escorts rule more than any other ship in this Game, why do you even bother?
    Do you really expect us to agree with you even if we see the injustice every time we try to PvP?

    Sorry, but i don't want to waste my time on things like that anymore.
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • veraticusveraticus Member Posts: 250 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    flekh wrote: »
    So, you're running 8 beams at 123 power.
    That's ... not ideal.
    The 8th beam's extra potential is totally neutralized by the extra power drain, you get no extra damage at all (okay, technically: 0.05%).
    Even the 7th beam at that low power is pretty useless, and only adds 3.75% extra damage - a torpedo launcher, even if used only once a year, would still be a better choice.

    Your main issue though: Y U NO EPtW????
    EPtW, even a lowly EPtW1, even at only 6 beams and 123 base power, would be a damage increase of 23.9%. And it'd make 7 beams at least somewhat viable, and 8 at least not totally useless - in fact, with the same setup you have now, the increase in dps would be 31%.

    ... and you're wondering why cruisers suck?
    Because their captains don't know what they're doing!

    P.S.: Not to mention that you're using a Dreadnought with beams (L2 DHC/Turret + Aux2Damp!), or that you're using Feedback Pulse in your valuable Sci slots ...... ARGHH

    Edit @adamkafel: You're just as bad. Weapon Power to 1xx/100, or you're wasting EPtW - you're making the same stupid mistake.

    Cruisers are suck power like mad, with all their weapons slots, and you really need to set power to max AND run EPtW to buffer all that drain, or your damage will inevitably suck.

    Lol.
    Its 6 Arrays 2 Dual Beam Banks. I'm aware that 8 Arrays without constant rotating of EPtW is a dud.

    As for my current lack of any EPtW being used he wasn't equipped at the time of the parse.

    Concerning my lack of DHC's.
    Its more viable and not as situational to use arrays.
  • flekhflekh Member Posts: 233 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    veraticus wrote: »
    Lol.
    Its 6 Arrays 2 Dual Beam Banks. I'm aware that 8 Arrays without constant rotating of EPtW is a dud.

    As for my current lack of any EPtW being used he wasn't equipped at the time of the parse.

    Concerning my lack of DHC's.
    Its more viable and not as situational to use arrays.

    ...
    Using FAW, 'guess what your frontal DBBs will be doing?
    Yes: shoot at stuff, drain power.
    And I gave you two sets of numbers, even with only broadsides you're losing massive dps lacking EPtW.
    Also: there's no, really NO reason at all to not "equip" EPtW on a cruiser, at any time. It's the engineering section's single most effective dps buff, and actually one of the best in the game (EPtW3 gives nearly the same increase in dps as CRF3).

    "more viable and not as situational" ........
    Really, L2P! Unless you're in PvP, Aux2Damp is more than enough. 'Gives you a low 20'ish turnrate on the dreadnought, with Impulse Thrusters skill at 6 points and an RCS console or two - same turnrate as a Vor'cha, actually, and ... guess what a Vor'cha is running: Cannons! (okay, the Vor'cha doesn't need Aux2Damp, but ... that's the price for flying a Fed Battle Cruiser(!)).

    To make sure you understand: Run cannons, run EPtW, max power - and you will deal more than 5k dps, effectively. That's more than DOUBLE(!) what you got in your parse, and very much up to what most Escorts can deliver.
    It really IS an L2P problem, not a "Cruisers suck"-problem.
  • veraticusveraticus Member Posts: 250 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    flekh wrote: »
    ...
    Using FAW, 'guess what your frontal DBBs will be doing?
    Yes: shoot at stuff, drain power.
    And I gave you two sets of numbers, even with only broadsides you're losing massive dps lacking EPtW.
    Also: there's no, really NO reason at all to not "equip" EPtW on a cruiser, at any time. It's the engineering section's single most effective dps buff, and actually one of the best in the game (EPtW3 gives nearly the same increase in dps as CRF3).

    "more viable and not as situational" ........
    Really, L2P! Unless you're in PvP, Aux2Damp is more than enough. 'Gives you a low 20'ish turnrate on the dreadnought, with Impulse Thrusters skill at 6 points and an RCS console or two - same turnrate as a Vor'cha, actually, and ... guess what a Vor'cha is running: Cannons! (okay, the Vor'cha doesn't need Aux2Damp, but ... that's the price for flying a Fed Battle Cruiser(!)).

    They lack the same arc so when broadsiding, the only time all 8 beams would be firing anyways, they are not.

    Using EPtW II saw a roughly 400 dps increase. The Net DPS figure goes up to 2,980.
    Which does equal your 23.9% increase figure. Using your 31% figure it would put me at roughly 3,148 dps. And overall increase of about 745. Not bad.

    Running DHC's in the Dread also means giving up AP:B for one, just one, of the cannon abilities. This may very well be worth it to do too. But until I have cannons of even remotely comparable grade I can't really test that can I.

    But if what you say is true, and I've no reason to doubt it, then why are their not more Dreads in PvP? Wouldn't they be the Fed Cruiser of choice?
    Heck! Wouldn't they be the Fed ship of choice for PvP and possibly even PvE?

    P.S. Have you found equipping RCS consoles instead of other universals or damage reduction consoles to be of a larger benefit? Equipping two RCS means that on the Gal X you only have two slots for Engineering, Science will taken up with Field Emitters, Tactical with Tactical slots.
  • flekhflekh Member Posts: 233 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    veraticus wrote: »
    They lack the same arc so when broadsiding, the only time all 8 beams would be firing anyways, they are not.
    True, if you're very careful that there's nothing in your front arc when triggering FAW. Don't get me wrong, I understand the purpose of the two DBB up front, to build up additional damage/threat while approaching a target, and it's not totally wrong. A Torp + TS does a better job at it though, and with less risk of accidently lowering your dps output on your intended broadside target.
    That part is pretty harmelss, the EPtW part isn't. ;)
    veraticus wrote: »
    Using EPtW II saw a roughly 400 dps increase. The Net DPS figure goes up to 2,980.
    Which does equal your 23.9% increase figure. Using your 31% figure it would put me at roughly 3,148 dps. And overall increase of about 745. Not bad.

    Running DHC's in the Dread also means giving up AP:B for one, just one, of the cannon abilities. This may very well be worth it to do too. But until I have cannons of even remotely comparable grade I can't really test that can I.

    But if what you say is true, and I've no reason to doubt it, then why are their not more Dreads in PvP? Wouldn't they be the Fed Cruiser of choice?
    Heck! Wouldn't they be the Fed ship of choice for PvP and possibly even PvE?

    P.S. Have you found equipping RCS consoles instead of other universals or damage reduction consoles to be of a larger benefit? Equipping two RCS means that on the Gal X you only have two slots for Engineering, Science will taken up with Field Emitters, Tactical with Tactical slots.

    Acutally, I'd keep AP:B, since it helps the entire team and has a higher effective uptime, it's not a bad choice.

    Suggested dread-build (PvE):
    Lt Tac: TT1, AP:B1 (or CSV)
    Ens Tac: TT1 (or TS1)
    Cmdr Eng: EPtS1, Aux2Damp1, EPtW3, Aux2SIF3
    LCdr Eng: EPtS1, Aux2Damp1, EPtW3
    Lt Sci: HE1, HE2

    Weapons Fore: 3xDHC, torp (Quantum if going for TS, else: Photon)
    Weapons Aft: 4xturret

    Consoles Tac: phaser damage x3
    Consoles Eng: 2x Neutronium, Borg, 1x your choice
    Consoles Sci: Field Generator x2

    (if you're Eng or Sci - if you're Tac, switch EPtS and EPtW. 'Might need to drop one aft turret in that case. DOffs: Shield Distri, TT-Conn, Warp Core as needed).
    The only thing that build lacks compare to other Cruisers and Battle Cruiser is utility. You get DPS instead. Aux2Damp locks out Aux2SIF though, so you need to think a bit ahead and go brick-mode when you're in need of heals. HE will take care of bleedthrough, plus whatever the Borg tend to throw at you all the time.

    RCS: actually, with Aux2Damp, using RCS is pretty much a waste, but ... it doesn't hurt. Higher turnrate always means more time on target, always means lower turn-radius, leading to closer distance -> more damage ... and it makes flying more fun. I can not recommend using it, but I can defend it. Usually it's more optimal to replace if with an armor console.

    As for PvP: In PvP, even at 20'ish turn, the Dread is too slow to win turnfights against Escort'ish ships, especially since it also has very low inertia. In addition, in organized PvP Cruisers are indeed healers (Note: Healers ONLY make sense in organized PvP, in any other part of the game they're a liability), and the dread is outperformed in that role.
    That being said, with Subspace jumper console and cloak the dreadnought can actually be quite effective in PvP: jump in behind the target, nuke it with all tac cooldowns popped, then run away to cloak again. Most people prefer a Defiant for that job though.
  • mrtsheadmrtshead Member Posts: 487 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    adamkafei wrote: »
    in all fairness any ship can only hold out for a limited amount of time provided you are able to lay down sufficient damage which, due to the cruisers severely lacking damage potential in casual player builds (such as mine, I want to have fun playing the game not feel like its a chore), gives escorts a tanking advantage as they don't need to hold out for as long .

    Two things. First, I've seen ships hold out against 5 or 6 ships indefinitely. Proper rotation of healing powers can let you ensure your resistance spikes match the incoming damage spikes, and then you can use your backup powers to maintain through the lower damage cycles. Now, granted, eventually any coordinated 5 man team will ALWAYS beat a single player, but that just shows that 5 ships is better than one ship, provide the 5 ship team works together. If they don't, then it is entirely possible to see a ship soak up fire for an entire match and never die. Besides, just because all ships will eventually explode doesn't mean that the tanking difference isn't evident, or important.

    Second, you are right that damage can make a difference in terms of tanking, "the best defense" and all that jazz. However, I am puzzled by the assertion that a 'casual player' can't make up for the lack of damage in a cruiser by using the superior healing powers from the eng. slots. I assume here, you are using the qualifier of 'casual player' in an attempt to invalidate the easy to find, well researched, and proven-effective guides to ship building on these forums as somehow onerous to the player experience. I'll be honest, this may just be an intractable difference between us. I don't view testing powers, experimenting with builds, and getting feedback/advice as some chore separate from the game, I view it as an integral part of it. If you don't like that part of it, and are only interested in slapping some beams that look cool on a cruiser and using some flashy powers, that is a TOTALLY VALID way to play, but it will NEVER result in the same kind of performance that the optimized builds get, and the more you try to buff casual play, the easier you make it for the optimizers to really, really break things.

    As for your cute time travel reference (I see what you did there) you are right, I ignored your assertion about your subjective personal experience in the game in a post that was quoting and replying to a different player. Clearly I must not have read the thread.

    Also, let me take you on my own journey through time.
    Here are the Season 6 patch notes that 'broke' your cruiser. Please point to the note that indicates what changed - I admit I read them pretty casually, but I didn't see anything about reducing damage of beam weapons, or re-balancing tactical consoles, or anything else that would reduce your ships damage output. If I missed something, I'm sure you'll find it for me, unless that's too much of a chore.

    Of course, it's entirely reasonable and proper to assert that there must have been some kind of undocumented change that the devs snuck in, either through incompetence or deliberate malice, and that in the intervening months it was un-noticed by anyone but you, or even that it WAS noticed, but the pro-escort PVP crowd quashed any mention of it, and the devs silence any player who mentions it. Or, you know, maybe your experience just doesn't match what other people experience. Either way.
  • veraticusveraticus Member Posts: 250 Arc User
    edited September 2012
    flekh wrote: »
    True, if you're very careful that there's nothing in your front arc when triggering FAW. Don't get me wrong, I understand the purpose of the two DBB up front, to build up additional damage/threat while approaching a target, and it's not totally wrong. A Torp + TS does a better job at it though, and with less risk of accidently lowering your dps output on your intended broadside target.
    That part is pretty harmelss, the EPtW part isn't. ;)

    Thought about it.
    And the idea of getting to use something than a wasted BO for a torp is much more entertaining. So long as the Aux2Damp is being used.
    Lol, agreed on the EPtW part.
    flekh wrote:
    ]Acutally, I'd keep AP:B, since it helps the entire team and has a higher effective uptime, it's not a bad choice.

    Suggested dread-build (PvE):
    Lt Tac: TT1, AP:B1 (or CSV)
    Ens Tac: TT1 (or TS1)
    Cmdr Eng: EPtS1, Aux2Damp1, EPtW3, Aux2SIF3
    LCdr Eng: EPtS1, Aux2Damp1, EPtW3
    Lt Sci: HE1, HE2

    Weapons Fore: 3xDHC, torp (Quantum if going for TS, else: Photon)
    Weapons Aft: 4xturret

    Consoles Tac: phaser damage x3
    Consoles Eng: 2x Neutronium, Borg, 1x your choice
    Consoles Sci: Field Generator x2

    I actually just ran a match with that type of build, minus the torp.
    Turrets were total TRIBBLE but I did have MkX and MkXI DHC up front.

    Change wasn't as impressive as I would have liked, and you are spot on when it comes to limiting yourself to just DPS.

    Raw Damage
    Min: 0
    Max: 26,571
    AVG: 602
    DPS: 4,059 (4,723 peak)

    Net Damage
    Min: 0
    Max: 7,671
    AVG: 448
    DPS: 3,023 (3,545 peak)

    Raw Damage is fairly comparable but the Net is where you see the Difference.

    I would also like to point out that it seems you get a much larger benefit from Rapid Fire than an Array gets from FAW.

    In that last parse the DHC accounted for 38.7% of the damage dealt.
    DHC when Rapid Fire is active accounted for 22.9% of the damage dealt.
    Whereas in the first parse the Phaser Arrays accounted for 60.3% of the damage dealt.
    And FAW accounted for just 6.3%...
    Dual Phaser Banks accounted for 16.2% and FAW with the DBB accounted for 4%
  • alexindcobraalexindcobra Member Posts: 608
    edited September 2012
    mrtshead wrote: »
    So, other people have pointed out some of the factual inaccuracies in the rest of this post, but I thought this was worth a special mention. See, what you are doing here is asserting that equipment that ANY ship can carry is somehow making escorts BETTER at shield tanking than the alternatives. This makes no sense. At a base level, any cruiser or Science vessel has a higher potential for tanking than an escort. If you equip both ships with the same kind of gear, then the gear should cancel, and the relative tankiness of the ships will remain the same.

    I suspect that what is happening behind the scenes is you are comparing escorts with tanking gear (Shield dis. Doffs, MACO shields, Borg set, etc) to ships WITHOUT that gear, which is obviously nonsense. Same thing with the 'Odyssey is the only cruiser good at shield tanking' comment. How is that? Tanking slots are generally understood to be either engineering or sci slots. Cruisers as a whole have the SAME sci consoles and powers that escorts do as a whole, and more Eng slots. If sci powers are what matters, then if escorts are good at shield tanking, cruiser should be at least the same, and if eng powers matter as well, then all cruisers should be BETTER at shield tanking than an escort (and escorts are, in your world, already too good).

    If your argument was that the tanking gear in this game is too good, that would be one thing, but that's NOT a problem with escorts, nor is it a reason to (as you keep suggesting) nerf escort damage. If you feel like escorts are able to tank so well that it makes the heals from cruiser obsolete, I disagree, but at least that argument makes some sense - the solution, however, is NOT to reduce escort damage. The solution is to reduce the effectiveness of heals, so that the ships that have more heals have a larger relative advantage.

    This thread is about offense and firepower. Before you shoot down my statement, did you actually test putting a borg console/ Maco shield setup on an escort and one on a cruiser like the Galaxy? I think you didn't. When I put that settup on my Galaxy Dreadnought in comparison to my current setup, my weapon power drops from 125 to 123, and my turn rate goes down from 9.1 to 8.9. May not seem much to you but every decimal point makes a big difference in DPS. I don't want to fly around as a useless brick. I want to deal damage in STF's and PVP as well. Escorts don't give up DPS for defence using the Borg consoles because it comes with a natural weapon power modifiers and damage multipliers. Plus you gain the autonimus healing which brings up your overal healing as fast as a cruiser. Since you are so smart, how come you don't know that consoles have different stats based on the type of ship you apply them to? Every ship type have their natural modifiers. Also, cruisers suffer from lack in defense rating because the ship moves so slow, so most the damage dealt is recieved without missing.

    I have two Galaxy type ships, one X and one R. My X is armed with a combination of 2 DHC's, 2 single cannons, and all beams in the rear. My damage stats are: Phaser array-- 1,027 phaser damage(821.6 DPS), DHC--1,796.9 phaser damge(1,197.9DPS), Phaser Cannon--739.4 phaser damage(985.9DPS). I average about 12 kills and maybe 1 or two deaths per match with 5 solo kills. My Galaxy-R is all beams, and I average 5 kills, 4 deaths a match with 0 solo kills. You see those cannons make a big difference in damage dealing and getting you kills. Beams just cause agro and get you killed.

    Leave it to some escort players to try to turn this thread into something about their ships and how much cruiser players suck. Not one of them have brought any stats comparing the same setups on the escorts and cruisers, making their argument seem childish: "No, its not, yes it is, my ship is better than yours, your are stupid." Base stats don't lie, it has nothing to do with the player but everything to do with the game mechanics. This thread is about firepower and how it needs to be balanced, either bring DPS down from cannons or bring up DPS for beams. This will make ships like the cruiser competitive with an escort minus the speed.
  • veraticusveraticus Member Posts: 250 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    So while you can boost its damage output when in a Galaxy X, I can't say it applies to other Cruisers Fed side.

    Take away the DHC and I'm not sure how any Fed Cruiser can really compete in a meaningful way. Not taking the top spot, while I think that is how it should be it isn't what I am after, but being within a reasonable margin of the Escorts.

    It also serves to highlight some of the issues with the Cruiser. In my own opinion.
  • flekhflekh Member Posts: 233 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    veraticus wrote: »
    So while you can boost its damage output when in a Galaxy X, I can't say it applies to other Cruisers Fed side.

    Take away the DHC and I'm not sure how any Fed Cruiser can really compete in a meaningful way. Not taking the top spot, while I think that is how it should be it isn't what I am after, but being within a reasonable margin of the Escorts.

    It also serves to highlight some of the issues with the Cruiser. In my own opinion.

    Can you turn every Cruiser into a Battle Cruiser that can keep up with Escorts? Of course not.
    Can you make every Cruiser push decent dps and be able to kill things? Yes, with the proper build, and knowing how to use it.
    Is there a hirachy in Fed Cruisers? You sure bet there is, and it's very much a question of Pay-to-Win: Free T5 Cruisers are worse than a 20$ Cruiser which is worse than a 25$ Cruiser which gets owned by the 50$ brick. The Dreadnough is the only exception to that rule, and pretty much a "bargain".
    I've posted a comparison in the Galaxy-joke thread.
    Is that working as intended? You bet it is!
    Does the same P2W mechanic apply to escorts? ..... oh, such a surprise, it does.

    But the general "Cruisers suck"-whining is really bull. Even a lowly Star Cruiser deals enough damage for all current content and can solo at acceptable killing speeds. What sucks are many captains, especially Cruiser-captains.
    Why do Cruiser-captains suck proportionally more often? Because even the most sucky Cruiser can still complete solo-content. A sucky Sci-ship will die too often, and a sucky Escort will die all the time. Cruisers are noob-friendly.
    When those noob-Cruisers suddenly have to compare themselves to other players though ... yeah, then it gets ugly, we get threads like this one (and dozens more) - because ... it's really impossible that the captains are the problem! It can't! It mustn't! It has to be ... the ships! The combat mechanics! The Illuminati! *sigh*
  • veraticusveraticus Member Posts: 250 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    flekh wrote: »
    Can you turn every Cruiser into a Battle Cruiser that can keep up with Escorts? Of course not.
    Can you make every Cruiser push decent dps and be able to kill things? Yes, with the proper build, and knowing how to use it.
    Is there a hirachy in Fed Cruisers? You sure bet there is, and it's very much a question of Pay-to-Win: Free T5 Cruisers are worse than a 20$ Cruiser which is worse than a 25$ Cruiser which gets owned by the 50$ brick. The Dreadnough is the only exception to that rule, and pretty much a "bargain".
    I've posted a comparison in the Galaxy-joke thread.
    Is that working as intended? You bet it is!
    Does the same P2W mechanic apply to escorts? ..... oh, such a surprise, it does.

    But the general "Cruisers suck"-whining is really bull. Even a lowly Star Cruiser deals enough damage for all current content and can solo at acceptable killing speeds. What sucks are many captains, especially Cruiser-captains.
    Why do Cruiser-captains suck proportionally more often? Because even the most sucky Cruiser can still complete solo-content. A sucky Sci-ship will die too often, and a sucky Escort will die all the time. Cruisers are noob-friendly.
    When those noob-Cruisers suddenly have to compare themselves to other players though ... yeah, then it gets ugly, we get threads like this one (and dozens more) - because ... it's really impossible that the captains are the problem! It can't! It mustn't! It has to be ... the ships! The combat mechanics! The Illuminati! *sigh*

    Lol, loved the Illuminati comment.

    I do still believe that there are imbalances between BOff layouts between various cruisers and their escort counterparts. And access to powers.

    As for the P2W comment. Its nice to see someone else agrees that the P2W does indeed exist. I really wish they would ditch that system, balance all ships and implement a new income mechanic. Charging for ships is bull.
  • bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    yreodred wrote: »
    100% true.
    Escort lobbyist will always want to think to be in disadvantage because they like to see themselves that way. where is the fun if everyone knows they are just destroying big target practices in PvP. But they will never admit that, of course.




    I am sorry to say that but, you should at least be honest enough to admit that escorts have far more advantages than crusiers.
    If you would, you would try to do PvP in a Slow, boring and toothless Federation Crusier in Ker'rat system, without any friends or any other help. See how it is to be just a target practice of other players, with their ships having almost all advantages on their side. Do that day, after day, after day. Do that for a year and honestly tell me that things are allright as they are.

    I just sick of people not wanting to see how things really are and i don't want to discuss that anymore because you guys don want to discuss anything, you just to be right.

    You have the devs on your side, what else do you want? The game fits perfectly to your needs, Escorts rule more than any other ship in this Game, why do you even bother?
    Do you really expect us to agree with you even if we see the injustice every time we try to PvP?

    Sorry, but i don't want to waste my time on things like that anymore.
    Ive played extensively in the Bortas, BortasQu, voQ and dabbled in the Orion maurauder for several months in PvP. I had the idea of making a working KDF DpV cruisersupport healer.
    Does that count?
    I currently run a Raptor to try out the escort of the KDF and recently upgraded to the Somraw. Been playing them for weeks now. So to label me a just an escort player would be untrue.

    Ive been in many PvP fights. I claim no mastery of PvP but I can tell yiu I have fought many escorts that folded like paper, some that seemed indetructible, Cruiser that killed effeciently, others that where as hard as anvils and many that folded also like paper.

    If you or anyone os having trouble doing pvp in a cruiser then I still feel the error lies in the design being attempted because too many others have achieved what many in this thread have claimed are insurmountle shortcomming of the class.

    But to be succint my oringal post was to the other posters statement on the differences in decreasing damage over range between beams and cannons. His infi is wrong unless a change was inacted during a patch that changed the rules.

    As to the advantages of thescort class. I have to admit nothing, thier vessel design advantages are well known. As are thier weaknesses, which the really good player compensate for in play

    I honestly think the cruiser complaint about not being deadlier is mainly ego driven and also driven by inability to accept the psuedo-role desiged by the Devs.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    mrtshead wrote: »
    Also, let me take you on my own journey through time.
    Here are the Season 6 patch notes that 'broke' your cruiser. Please point to the note that indicates what changed - I admit I read them pretty casually, but I didn't see anything about reducing damage of beam weapons, or re-balancing tactical consoles, or anything else that would reduce your ships damage output. If I missed something, I'm sure you'll find it for me, unless that's too much of a chore.

    Of course, it's entirely reasonable and proper to assert that there must have been some kind of undocumented change that the devs snuck in, either through incompetence or deliberate malice, and that in the intervening months it was un-noticed by anyone but you, or even that it WAS noticed, but the pro-escort PVP crowd quashed any mention of it, and the devs silence any player who mentions it. Or, you know, maybe your experience just doesn't match what other people experience. Either way.

    I have read over the season 6 release notes and didn't find any balance changes HOWEVER before you jump in with the old "I told you so" you said yourself that there may have been an undocumented change (I'm not saying for certain there was) which my experience points to. on top of this I have noticed in multiple threads people talking about resistance boosts with season 5 so I went hunting and found a copy of the release notes here (there wasn't one in the forums, something about it being too large) I didn't find anything in there about defence boosts (except for high yield torps).

    With regard to the optimised builds which I did experiment with shortly after season 6 and my DPS drop, they just weren't fun nine times out of ten when I needed a shield heal I couldn't have one because it was on CD so I went boom (yes I do use tac team, a lot) and the dual EPtWs messed everything up for me as I tried cycling everything but when I came back to the tray as dictated in the usage guides I found everything was still recovering from a full CD so I went back to my old build that I had tried, tested, modified, optimised, etc and fits my play style perfectly, it would simply be nice if it had a little more kick like it used to
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • kattarnkattarn Member Posts: 105 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    bitemepwe wrote: »
    Ive played extensively in the Bortas, BortasQu, voQ and dabbled in the Orion maurauder for several months in PvP. I had the idea of making a working KDF DpV cruisersupport healer.
    Does that count?
    I currently run a Raptor to try out the escort of the KDF and recently upgraded to the Somraw. Been playing them for weeks now. So to label me a just an escort player would be untrue.

    Ive been in many PvP fights. I claim no mastery of PvP but I can tell yiu I have fought many escorts that folded like paper, some that seemed indetructible, Cruiser that killed effeciently, others that where as hard as anvils and many that folded also like paper.

    If you or anyone os having trouble doing pvp in a cruiser then I still feel the error lies in the design being attempted because too many others have achieved what many in this thread have claimed are insurmountle shortcomming of the class.

    But to be succint my oringal post was to the other posters statement on the differences in decreasing damage over range between beams and cannons. His infi is wrong unless a change was inacted during a patch that changed the rules.

    As to the advantages of thescort class. I have to admit nothing, thier vessel design advantages are well known. As are thier weaknesses, which the really good player compensate for in play

    I honestly think the cruiser complaint about not being deadlier is mainly ego driven and also driven by inability to accept the psuedo-role desiged by the Devs.




    So you come here and tell us that you have played bortas, bortasqu orion marauder and Voq, Bortas 4 tactical consoles, Bortasqu (bet the tact one) 5 tact consoles, Voq (hope not with siphone drones) so we are talking of lack of damage in cruisers like star, recon, dread, ody, you are talking about cruisers that actually dont need a touch because are DD, so your argument while can be usefull for those that dont know how this kind of ships performs is not valid here because wea are talking about the mayority of cruisers (not carriers) and those you mention are way out of need, and don?t get me wrong i love the Bortas and Bortasqu have both my self, but thats exactly how a cruiser should hit, pretty hard.


    And about escorts, having a shield modifier ratio basically the same as cruisers, just follow the rate between science vessels and cruisers and aply the same ratio from cruisers to escorts and you will notice something wrong, and if thats not enough also add them their innate defense to see one of their strenght points.


    Then we go to a practice enviroment and lets say 5 escorts performing amazingly in infected, while 5 cruisers in the same spot will have the time always in their necks and can be done, but with great effort and good team play something that otherwhise is not needed.

    So to finish, is clear that this game is drifting towards DD class ships and favoring tactical officers in every aspect because even a tac in a science vessel will get most of science powers than a science officer and that is something that jepardizes people interest in other kind of ships, builds, proffesions of the game, and we all know what that means.



    PS: 75% of my fleet are tactical officers the rest are mostly engineers and some science officers.
  • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    kattarn wrote: »
    So you come here and tell us that you have played bortas, bortasqu orion marauder and Voq, Bortas 4 tactical consoles, Bortasqu (bet the tact one) 5 tact consoles, Voq (hope not with siphone drones) so we are talking of lack of damage in cruisers like star, recon, dread, ody, you are talking about cruisers that actually dont need a touch because are DD, so your argument while can be usefull for those that dont know how this kind of ships performs is not valid here because wea are talking about the mayority of cruisers (not carriers) and those you mention are way out of need, and don?t get me wrong i love the Bortas and Bortasqu have both my self, but thats exactly how a cruiser should hit, pretty hard.


    And about escorts, having a shield modifier ratio basically the same as cruisers, just follow the rate between science vessels and cruisers and aply the same ratio from cruisers to escorts and you will notice something wrong, and if thats not enough also add them their innate defense to see one of their strenght points.


    Then we go to a practice enviroment and lets say 5 escorts performing amazingly in infected, while 5 cruisers in the same spot will have the time always in their necks and can be done, but with great effort and good team play something that otherwhise is not needed.

    So to finish, is clear that this game is drifting towards DD class ships and favoring tactical officers in every aspect because even a tac in a science vessel will get most of science powers than a science officer and that is something that jepardizes people interest in other kind of ships, builds, proffesions of the game, and we all know what that means.



    PS: 75% of my fleet are tactical officers the rest are mostly engineers and some science officers.

    this would actually be a problem, if you couldn't switch ships as often as you like. There is a ship for each aspect of the game (nearly) those cruisers you list are not made for this specific aspect of the game.
    the solution is there...pick up a cruiser that has more dps potential or pick up an escort.
    and thats intentional...you need to buy different ships at endgame level, meaning cryptic can make business.
    If you feel the need to do pure dmg encounter with your tank ship, thats completely your decission. Nobody foces you to be in that one ship for all missions.
    and cryptic is actually developing towards other game aspects that favour other ships. fleet base blockade is one for instance. Either you tank heal the transporter, or CC the grp. to destroy them before they destroy the transport is the hardest solution to this fleet action.

    the idea to have one captain that uses one ship, is not the intention of the developers. For dmg encounters pick an escort...if you need CC or support pick a cruiser or sci vessel.
    and if it is an encounter where you get hit alot, take a tank cruiser. I understand that there aren't so many missions that support a less dmg oriented gameplay...but that doesn't mean cruisers in general need a dmg buff.

    If anything is poorly design then it is the encounters. The respawn timer in elite stfs clearly shifted the emphasis of dmg in this mission to a more sturdier setup or cruisers. But everybody cried about it, without the will to understand the reason behind it.
    Go pro or go home
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    baudl wrote: »
    If anything is poorly design then it is the encounters. The respawn timer in elite stfs clearly shifted the emphasis of dmg in this mission to a more sturdier setup or cruisers. But everybody cried about it, without the will to understand the reason behind it.

    Wanna take an engineer into one of these with a 6 beam Excelsior?

    I'd love to do so, in fact it would be fun with a little more kick, but the sad fact is that I'm sat doing my 300 damage per hit and trying to keep escorts alive because they're the only things doing any noticeable damage.. sucks dunnit

    Please can my cruiser have a little more kick? (Viable suggestions have been made by people that wouldn't be game breaking EVEN on optimised buids)
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    adamkafei wrote: »
    Wanna take an engineer into one of these with a 6 beam Excelsior?

    I'd love to do so, in fact it would be fun with a little more kick, but the sad fact is that I'm sat doing my 300 damage per hit and trying to keep escorts alive because they're the only things doing any noticeable damage.. sucks dunnit

    Please can my cruiser have a little more kick? (Viable suggestions have been made by people that wouldn't be game breaking EVEN on optimised buids)

    sry, but myself i have a oddy starcruiser with an engi captain, though i use cannons...i really do fine dmg wise and do not experiance any disadvantage you experiance. especially with 2 photon tubes and torp spread i can keep up with escorts that use a less adequat setup for stfs.
    And what you call viable, i call unnecessary since those are based on wrong or exagurated assumptions.
    It may be, that the galaxy class is over specialized and needs a refit...again, but that is not the case for the majority of cruisers. The excelsior however lost it's appeal due to the introduction of the regent. But that could be fixed with a little turnrate buff.
    Go pro or go home
  • bareelbareel Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    So it is by design that all of my capt. types have the best performance in the Endgame PvE content (STFs) in an escort and/or DPS focus ship? And thats a good thing?

    I disagree completely. You can have different but equal and in a game with a Queue system like this one it is borderline required. This is how I would see it.

    Escort
    Damage: Burst
    Tank: Avoidance
    Utility: Damage buffs/debuffs (attack patterns)

    Cruiser
    Damage: Sustained
    Tank: Mitigation
    Utility: Survival (heals/debuffs/etc)

    Sci
    Damage: Rising (longer the fight > the damage)
    Tank: Buffer
    Utility: CC

    That is what the design lends itself too. Not some moronic holy trinity that has no place in a star trek space game, or any space game for that matter.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    bareel wrote: »
    Cruiser
    Damage: Sustained
    Tank: Mitigation
    Utility: Survival (heals/debuffs/etc)

    I have sustained damage, sustained low damage when not buffed and even EPTW only brings that up to 500 damage per hit. using the same criteria so what are your damage figures?
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    Yes.

    Thats the downside of a game designed to kill foes as quickly as possible instead of reliably or creatively as possible.
    Escorts are all direct damage attacks. I expect a kill team to do a better job of killing than Engineers or Scientists.
    Cruisers have to be more creative and use both direct damage and indirect damage to be as effective as those escorts and frankly the game does not support such intelligent playstyle in PvE.

    In PvP I find the Engineer and Scientist toons to be just fine as a part of the team effort. On thier own they may suffer when fighting against an Tactical Toon but that does not display any weakness in thier design just the differences between the classes.
    One expects the Tactical to be the best at killing. period.

    The perception of the Escort being to easy to make a tank is a false one. It takes particular builds to make a escort tanky, using particular powers and DOffs.
    As well the difference in Bonus Defense for movement speed between a Cruiser and a Escort is only 10%.

    Most of the PvE perception of the cruiser being subpar lies in players false expectations and bad gameplay design for combat and mission completion.
    For PvP, I have no idea what players are thinking as I see Cruiser do very well all the time when run by a competant player.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
    edited October 2012
    adamkafei wrote: »
    I have sustained damage, sustained low damage when not buffed and even EPTW only brings that up to 500 damage per hit. using the same criteria so what are your damage figures?

    can't you use the dps values that is presented on the fireing tray, when you mouse over the beam weapon?
    If that value is infact 500, you are doing something wrong or it is broken. it should atleast be above 750dps if your skills and power levels are aimed at dealing dmg. meaning 120+ unbuffed or with a EPtW rotation that allows you to run it continuously with 125 weapon power.
    and with that value and 3 tac consoles it should be around 800dps for each beam.

    also, weapons with multiple [dmg] mods may blur this since they affect dps numbers highly but are generally inferior to critH or critD or acc. the best thing is to test it with borg MK XII weapons.
    Go pro or go home
Sign In or Register to comment.