test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

This Week's Cruiser Thread

124

Comments

  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I believe we call that a "healing nerf" so, which would lead to a dps loss as well as requiring stricter comps on teams. I prefer to fly whatever I feel like instead of it being mandated. I'm not back in WoW for a reason.

    Personally I call it a healing adjustment rather than a nerf and even so what I am proposing is fairly minor
    I think you have it backwards there, its often cruiser pilots that don't want to improve their builds or their playstyle that refuse to change. You see, I was one of those people that had a terrible build and played BADLY. Fortunately I was able to see the problem and change it myself without having to have it hammered into me like others. But I did change and so can you and every other player if they would only stop a moment to understand the basic mechanics of the game. You don't need to become an expert in the math behind things to get a rough idea of why things work as they do. Then you realize why some of the things you're holding on to so hard are actually wrong and will always be so.

    I have already moved to a template cruiser build with dual EPtW&S with a TT cycle, like I said, while I still have that ensign engineer I can't get any more from it
    You are. Nerfing healing on escorts would mean at best they have less uptime on targets, which is a net buff for cruisers if all you care about is comparing the two.

    No, as I said before it would be minor with no class actually suffering, for all we know an escort might lose 500 points of heal in that scenario where a cruiser would gain some and a science ship a little more but it would be enough to make the tank role more needed/desired and make the healer role more useful as well... an all round win for the cruiser and the science ship with a minor cost to the escort which from a different angle is a bonus as the other ships can do what they do and get noticed for it
    Oh, I got you confussed with someone else then. I try to keep track of who said what in my mind but there's so many cruiser pilots complaining. Some have valid complaints, most do not. Personally I keep the threat skill at rank 6 on my engi cruiser but I like to feel I got a more secure lock in agro.

    I wont complain about that, there are after all only so many people we can remember at any given time, all I ask is that you look at this from all angles and not forget the favourite saying among Vulcans "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and the one"
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • skyranger1414skyranger1414 Member Posts: 1,785 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    adamkafei wrote: »
    No, as I said before it would be minor with no class actually suffering, for all we know an escort might lose 500 points of heal in that scenario where a cruiser would gain some and a science ship a little more but it would be enough to make the tank role more needed/desired and make the healer role more useful as well... an all round win for the cruiser and the science ship with a minor cost to the escort which from a different angle is a bonus as the other ships can do what they do and get noticed for it

    I just don't understand how anyone can say they don't feel usefull in a cruiser. My Cruiser goes in, grabs agro and laughs at the cubes and gates. That's what it does.Its what it was clearly designed to do. If you DO hold agro and not die while putting out the best DPS you can how can anyone say they don't feel powerful and usefull? This is why I constantly question people's builds and playstyles if they do not feel their ships are good enough. I'm no cruiser expert but if I can get my engi cruiser to work surely dedicated cruiser pilots can do so as well?

    As far a small reduction in healing not affecting anything in a serious manner... I don't think you realize how tenuous and slim the healing margins are for escorts and non healing even sci vessels. I guess maybe if you fly a tanked out patrol escort with the right engi consoles its not as bad.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I run this at the moment and if I get lucky with the ISE tac cubes opening shots I can tank it with a little bit of good timing and I can shrug Donny off with no effort at all and though putting out 6k per volley while doing this she still feels quite underwhelming...
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • skyranger1414skyranger1414 Member Posts: 1,785 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    @adamkafei

    hmmm... I think there is only one piece of advice to give you. Make peace with the fact Fed cruisers just aren't designed to do what you really want to do and go fly cruisers on the KDF side. You NEVER hear them complain about their cruisers (well, except for the lack of new ones... but they almost universally adore their battlecruisers old and new, and there's something to be said for Cryptic not dumping new cash cows on them so often.... ).

    From everything I've heard a KDF battlecruiser is just what most of the Fed cruiser captains would really prefer to fly anyway.
  • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    @adamkafei

    hmmm... I think there is only one piece of advice to give you. Make peace with the fact Fed cruisers just aren't designed to do what you really want to do and go fly cruisers on the KDF side. You NEVER hear them complain about their cruisers (well, except for the lack of new ones... but they almost universally adore their battlecruisers old and new, and there's something to be said for Cryptic not dumping new cash cows on them so often.... ).

    From everything I've heard a KDF battlecruiser is just what most of the Fed cruiser captains would really prefer to fly anyway.

    i can see adamkafei flying around in his future breen cruiser with a big smile on his face:D

    what he has there is a solid build for the excelsior, although i would forget projectile weapons on that one and definately skill starship maneuvers, but thats my opinion only.
    The thing is, the excelsior has limits that some other cruiser just don't have. I think the way he playes, or wants to play, he is better off with the breen cruiser.
    Go pro or go home
  • smokeybacon90smokeybacon90 Member Posts: 2,252 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    For some people (including me), flying a cruiser, specifically a fed one, with beams (preferably phasers), is the only way to remind me that I am playing a Star Trek game. No amount of imbalance with escorts, or alien ships superseding me will change that.

    I'm only really interested in optimizing the ship I already use (Excelsior-retro, soon to be fleet). Even though I know that there are much more effective alternatives, like escorts or KDF cruisers, or even the Chel Grett, I know that I just wont enjoy playing those.
    EnYn9p9.jpg
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I will never understand why you guys like the excelsior that much... Just putting that out there.

    Anyways, I personally am very much looking forward to my chel'grett (albeit being 3 weeks away... -.-). But it will never measure up to my Odyssey in ability to soak up massive amounts of damage and shrug most of it off. But I see the chel'grett as a warship, not a cruiser. Another hybrid, like the chimera.

    But I will still enjoy flying it :D
    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. B)
  • smokeybacon90smokeybacon90 Member Posts: 2,252 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I will never understand why you guys like the excelsior that much... Just putting that out there.

    Aside from the Retrofit deflector bulge, which can be removed anyway, I think the ship is aesthetically very pleasing. It remains true to to the original connie design, but with a stretched out and sleek style that just reeks of speed. Perhaps one other thing that could do with changing is the nacelle pylons. They could be swept back like on the Connie Refit, and the 90 degree angle smoothed out a little.

    Plus, Excelsior was captained by Sulu, and George Takei is one of the coolest people in existence.
    EnYn9p9.jpg
  • shimmerlessshimmerless Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    If people complaining that their snoozer doesn't do enough damage could post their skill specs/bridge layout, it'd be much appreciated.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    vids and guides and stuff

    [9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
  • momawmomaw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    @adamkafei

    hmmm... I think there is only one piece of advice to give you. Make peace with the fact Fed cruisers just aren't designed to do what you really want to do and go fly cruisers on the KDF side. You NEVER hear them complain about their cruisers (well, except for the lack of new ones... but they almost universally adore their battlecruisers old and new, and there's something to be said for Cryptic not dumping new cash cows on them so often.... ).

    From everything I've heard a KDF battlecruiser is just what most of the Fed cruiser captains would really prefer to fly anyway.

    Biggest differences between a KDF battlecruiser and a Federation cruiser:
    1.) Negh'var turns 9 deg/sec, Vor'cha turns 10. It doesn't seem like a big thing until you realize that's a 30% improvement over Federation cruisers. It shows.
    2.) KDF runs Plasmonic Leech console. Some people have gone so far as to call this the "KDF tax". Leech is a minimum of +5 to all power levels... As much as +15 if you're really serious about your Flow Caps skill.

    I run two battlecruisers. On the KDF side, it's a Mirror Vor'cha (I prefer the extra science on the mirror variant, for extra survivability). Between my skills, the ship's basic power bonuses, Honor Guard set bonus, and the plasmonic leech, I'm running 125 power to weapons and over 60 to everything else even before I start using Emergency Power abiliies. There is simply no comparison to what that ship can do, and what its direct equivalent the Star Cruiser can do. It can maneuver, it can fight, it can survive. The star cruiser does not do anything that the Vor'cha doesn't do better. The significantly better handling is built in, and KDF's hardware is just plain superior when it comes to boosting your ship's power levels. More power = more performance, period.

    If cruisers in general did what a fully tricked out Vor'cha can do, then they'd be just fine. Make Fed cruisers turn 9 or 10 deg/second and give them another 5 to 10 power in all areas and THEN we'll start having meaningful conversations about how Federation cruisers are performing.

    You could argue that the Federation prioritizes survivability over firepower... But that isn't borne out in any meaningful way in the game. If a KDF cruiser can't survive an engagement, there's no way in hell a Federation cruiser will either.
  • baudlbaudl Member Posts: 4,060 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    the turnrate difference is really sucking the fun out of fed cruisers from time to time for me. (+ the inertia)
    I was soooo happy when i finally bought the oddy pack and had my tac cruiser with saucer sepperation. So much better...really don't mind the less HP.
    No cruiser should have less than 8 turn rate...a carrier like the vo'quf or the atrox maybe, but not even those.
    Go pro or go home
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    baudl wrote: »
    the turnrate difference is really sucking the fun out of fed cruisers from time to time for me. (+ the inertia)
    I was soooo happy when i finally bought the oddy pack and had my tac cruiser with saucer sepperation. So much better...really don't mind the less HP.
    No cruiser should have less than 8 turn rate...a carrier like the vo'quf or the atrox maybe, but not even those.

    The only shame here is that the Odyssey (any of them) is now officially out-classed by the fleet Excel. Which I call BS on, but that's just me. You get everything the oddy has (other than versatility), you get more HP, more tactical consoles, and a much better inertia.

    Overall, a muuuuch better ship. -.- Was kinda pissed when it came out, I saw it's stats, and realized this sad little fact. It can tank better, deal damage better, and move around better. The last one is to be expected, as is the second one (not so much though), but that first one really pissed me off.

    So the Odyssey of all ships... is now somewhat obsolete. Imagine that XD...
    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. B)
  • skyranger1414skyranger1414 Member Posts: 1,785 Arc User
    edited December 2012

    So the Odyssey of all ships... is now somewhat obsolete. Imagine that XD...

    Well... we kinda know Cryptic has a special fetish for the Excelsior. Somehow it seems to always be slightly ahead of more modern ships. Also, was anyone not expecting Cryptic to keep milking cruiser pilots? Escort-wise they already have the Bug to milk players with every now and then, but for cruisers they seem to prefer slight upgrades in existing models (Regent, Fleet Excelsior). Just today I got the Regent for its torpedo, it'll be a welcome addition to both my Cruiser Engi and my all torp Sci, but the ship itself is surprisingly well designed. If you double up on the StB and technician doffs you can get a LOT of mileage from the 4 tac powers it has. That said, I know the fleet Sovy, and Fleet Excel are better... not to mention whenever Cryptic releases the paid version of the Breen ship it'll probably outclass them all.

    Really, the way to go is find what ship you like best and get it, be it lockbox or fleet level while accepting that it will be outclassed by a new release sooner rather than later.
  • bareelbareel Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    The only shame here is that the Odyssey (any of them) is now officially out-classed by the fleet Excel. Which I call BS on, but that's just me. You get everything the oddy has (other than versatility), you get more HP, more tactical consoles, and a much better inertia.

    Overall, a muuuuch better ship. -.- Was kinda pissed when it came out, I saw it's stats, and realized this sad little fact. It can tank better, deal damage better, and move around better. The last one is to be expected, as is the second one (not so much though), but that first one really pissed me off.

    So the Odyssey of all ships... is now somewhat obsolete. Imagine that XD...

    Just to add insult to injury on that but it was already obsolete.

    By the Tholian ships when it came to best heal boat.
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Well... we kinda know Cryptic has a special fetish for the Excelsior. Somehow it seems to always be slightly ahead of more modern ships. Also, was anyone not expecting Cryptic to keep milking cruiser pilots? Escort-wise they already have the Bug to milk players with every now and then, but for cruisers they seem to prefer slight upgrades in existing models (Regent, Fleet Excelsior). Just today I got the Regent for its torpedo, it'll be a welcome addition to both my Cruiser Engi and my all torp Sci, but the ship itself is surprisingly well designed. If you double up on the StB and technician doffs you can get a LOT of mileage from the 4 tac powers it has. That said, I know the fleet Sovy, and Fleet Excel are better... not to mention whenever Cryptic releases the paid version of the Breen ship it'll probably outclass them all.

    Really, the way to go is find what ship you like best and get it, be it lockbox or fleet level while accepting that it will be outclassed by a new release sooner rather than later.

    I am was fully aware of this when I got the Odyssey 3 pack. But I wasn't expecting it to be out-done so soon, or so thoroughly. ESPECIALLY by the Excelsior. You know what really irks me? The Excelsior is tankier than an Odyssey. It has a better turn rate, and more firepower. WITH NO LOSS TO ITSELF. The Odyssey can become faster and more maneuverable than an Excelsior, but to do it, it must sacrifice 1 console slot, 10% hull, 15% shields, 10 Shield and 10 Aux power.

    But again, I knew the Oddy would be out-classed soon enough. But I was counting on the Imperial (or Fleet AC to any readers who don't know this ship) to be the one to do it, not the Excelsior. And when you compare the Imperial to the Fleet Excelsior? There is no comparison again. The Excelsior is better.
    bareel wrote: »
    Just to add insult to injury on that but it was already obsolete

    If we are talking about the Odyssey, then I beg to differ, it was still the top cruiser before the Fleet Excelsior came out. But if we are referring to the Excelsior (more specifically the part where that bloody ship is over 200 years old), then yes, I agree.

    Top of the line ship... made obsolete... by an already obsolete design...

    Bleh...
    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. B)
  • smokeybacon90smokeybacon90 Member Posts: 2,252 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Come on, does it really matter in the 25th century what shape a ship is? If we assume the FExcelsior is a complete retrofit (which it is), then we can deduce that all of its systems have been brought up to date. That includes warp core, weapons, shields, impulse, computer, sensors etc. What possible advantage would a nice curvy aerodynamic futuristic looking design (e.g., Odyssey or Chimera) have over a TOS-style one (Excelsior), if the internal systems are all equivalent technology?

    By extension there is no reason why the federation haven't just used a standardized design for the past 300 years. The only thing needed is the dual nacelle system to maintain a warp field, and the occasional up-scaling if that is required.
    EnYn9p9.jpg
  • skyranger1414skyranger1414 Member Posts: 1,785 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Come on, does it really matter in the 25th century what shape a ship is?

    By that reasoning we'd see a T5 Fleet Connie next (blergh!)

    Kidding aside, it does matter to those who prefer the newer ship models. I have similar issue with the BUG, that an enemy NPC ship is so ridiculously OP (basically it gets free turning... lots of it) is incredibly annoying to me and more or less emblematic of the poor way Cryptic handles balance issues.

    The sheer speed with which the Ody was replaced as top cruiser is very troublesome. But I wonder... does Cryptic see it that way? Remember they live by and balance ships by a spreadsheet method. Perhaps in their mind the Ody is at least equal to the Excell for some obscure feature we as players dismiss out of hand?
  • smokeybacon90smokeybacon90 Member Posts: 2,252 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I don't think there is any favouritism of the Excelsior. It is just the way things have progressed.

    Think about it, the Excelsior as the Adv Heavy Cruiser makes sense. A ship placed between the Connie and Galaxy, which is not the Cheyenne class (standard Heavy cruiser). There wasn't really any other canon ship they could have picked aside from the Ambassador.

    Next we have the Retrofit Adv Heavy Cruiser, released as an Excelsior (as opposed to say a Heavy Cruiser Retrofit in the form of the Cheyenne) presumably just so that VA players can take advantage of the transwarp.

    Finally we come to the fleet version. We already had a Fleet Galaxy, Cheyenne, Oddy and Star Cruiser. Fleet Assault Refit was already planned, hence all that was left was a fleet Excelsior. Would people (particularly Oddy owners) be as annoyed if instead of a Fleet Excelsior, we got say a Fleet Star Cruiser Refit with some wacky 25th century design inspired by the Regent, and exactly the same layout and stats?

    tl;dr, dont be hating on Excelsior. There will always be a place for the Oddy too.
    EnYn9p9.jpg
  • areikou#8990 areikou Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    The Odyssey is still a superior tank and superior all around cruiser compared to the excelsior, regardless of the version. Yes, the Excelsior is superior in firepower and hull total (4 tac slots and 900 more hull, really?). But in everything else, the Odyssey still comes out on top.

    In fact, the Excelsior is outmatched by the Fleet Regent.

    No redundant Ensign eng slot
    +5 more power to weapons
    LT universal boff slot

    The only things the Excelsior has on the Regent is the 1 turn rate, and somewhat better inertia, both of which are not really an issue.

    Same Hull
    Same console slots
    Same LTC Tactical
    Same Shield Mod

    So really, the Excelsior falls under the Regent in tactical power, under the Odyssey in tanking and all around abilities, and to top it all off. She's uglier then sin itself. So basically, an in between red headed step child that's in the Tier 3 ship yard and easier to get than the other two.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    [Unrepentant] Lapo@overlapo: the problem with space STF
    is that you can't properly teabag your defeated opponent

    Unrepentant: Home of the Rainbow Warrior and the Rainbow Brigade.
  • bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    momaw wrote: »

    If cruisers in general did what a fully tricked out Vor'cha can do, then they'd be just fine. Make Fed cruisers turn 9 or 10 deg/second and give them another 5 to 10 power in all areas and THEN we'll start having meaningful conversations about how Federation cruisers are performing.

    .

    As the Devils advocate, Why should the fed Cruiser get a power buff? Just becuase they do not have access to the Plasmonic Leech?

    Is that really the defense to base such a buff for Cruisers on, becuase " Feds don't have it."?

    How will you compensate those KDF players whom do not use it but are disadvantaged if the Cruiser get a buff to compensate for the KDF's use of the PL?

    Should we also give said buff to Battle Cruisers since they are the KDF form of a Cruiser? Why would it be only a fed thing? Do they have better Power sources over the KDF?

    I'm all for buffing the Cruisers turn rate and/or Inertia stats to give a better gameplay feel but only if its not a buff soley to them alone and a balance is maintained. Otherwise this is still a pointless debate as the "we need this " buff will quickly be turned by fan perceptions into a "we deserve this buff becuase we feel we do" buff.

    Or such is what I think the Devils Advocate would respond with in this situation.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • theonerussian762theonerussian762 Member Posts: 4 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    what if cruisers were able to carry a better hull/hull repair rate? while cruisers have the most crew, it still takes a long time for a cruiser to repair especially when that crew somehow gets blown up...
  • ericphailericphail Member Posts: 87 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    How about giving cruisers an inherent 10 - 20 degree boost to the fire arc of beams (and MAYBE torps) meaning broadsides are on target more often and creating a small arc where DBBs and aft arrays overlap (the super broadside sweet spot).

    Allows a bit more punch, reduces the pain of bad turn rate, (and offers a new concept 4DBB 4 Array sweet spot hunting)

    Or tweak BO and FAW to be a bit better than they currently are.
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    The Odyssey is still a superior tank and superior all around cruiser compared to the excelsior, regardless of the version. Yes, the Excelsior is superior in firepower and hull total (4 tac slots and 900 more hull, really?). But in everything else, the Odyssey still comes out on top.

    In fact, the Excelsior is outmatched by the Fleet Regent.

    No redundant Ensign eng slot
    +5 more power to weapons
    LT universal boff slot

    The only things the Excelsior has on the Regent is the 1 turn rate, and somewhat better inertia, both of which are not really an issue.

    Same Hull
    Same console slots
    Same LTC Tactical
    Same Shield Mod

    So really, the Excelsior falls under the Regent in tactical power, under the Odyssey in tanking and all around abilities, and to top it all off. She's uglier then sin itself. So basically, an in between red headed step child that's in the Tier 3 ship yard and easier to get than the other two.

    There is a NOTICABLE effective turn rate difference in the turn rate between the Excel' and the Regent. The ensign engie isnt redundant, it actually allows me to add lower defensive boff skills while keeping higher level abilities offensive. The Lt. is very useful in science both for offensive and defensive skills and most people will just use it for a sci boff anyways.

    For those who like DBB's, the Excel' can make more effective use of them then either the Odyssey or the Fleet Regent and have more control of what stays in single cannon and 180' torps arcs to boot.
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    The Odyssey is still a superior tank and superior all around cruiser compared to the excelsior, regardless of the version. Yes, the Excelsior is superior in firepower and hull total (4 tac slots and 900 more hull, really?). But in everything else, the Odyssey still comes out on top.

    In fact, the Excelsior is outmatched by the Fleet Regent.

    No redundant Ensign eng slot
    +5 more power to weapons
    LT universal boff slot

    The only things the Excelsior has on the Regent is the 1 turn rate, and somewhat better inertia, both of which are not really an issue.

    Same Hull
    Same console slots
    Same LTC Tactical
    Same Shield Mod

    So really, the Excelsior falls under the Regent in tactical power, under the Odyssey in tanking and all around abilities, and to top it all off. She's uglier then sin itself. So basically, an in between red headed step child that's in the Tier 3 ship yard and easier to get than the other two.

    Your post made me wince tbh... For starters, the Fleet Excelsior is actually a better tank than the Odyssey. A muuuch better tank, since she can actually move around. That added defense bonus from movement is very noticeable. Secondly, with her better turn rate, she can adjust which shield facing is on the enemy with far greater ease than the Odyssey.

    And tbh, the Imperial is a joke. It really is. If you look at it's stats, and compare them to the Fleet Excelsior, yeah, she looks stronger in the Tactical region. Also that Univeral BOff you are almost forced to put into science. But until someone actually gets one and flies it, I think we need to leave her out of discussions.

    The only thing the Odyssey has over the Excelsior (other than the arguable appearance factor) is versatility. The Excelsior is left in the dust when it comes to the ability to change roles from DD Cruiser, to pure tank cruiser, to healboat cruiser, all in the same battle. The Odyssey can do this because of her two universal BOff slots. But other than that, she's gotten left behind.
    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. B)
  • celillarnoncelillarnon Member Posts: 56 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    ericphail wrote: »
    How about giving cruisers an inherent 10 - 20 degree boost to the fire arc of beams (and MAYBE torps) meaning broadsides are on target more often and creating a small arc where DBBs and aft arrays overlap (the super broadside sweet spot).

    Allows a bit more punch, reduces the pain of bad turn rate, (and offers a new concept 4DBB 4 Array sweet spot hunting)

    Or tweak BO and FAW to be a bit better than they currently are.

    I like this idea. Honestly I think beams have more problems than cruisers, since nothing at all synergies with broadside firing.
  • adamkafeiadamkafei Member Posts: 6,539 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    ericphail wrote: »
    Or tweak BO and FAW to be a bit better than they currently are.

    I like this idea. Honestly I think beams have more problems than cruisers, since nothing at all synergies with broadside firing.

    The problem is more with beams than cruisers.

    As for no synergies with broadside firing there are two skills both engineer career skills (EPS Power transfer and Nadion inversion) those two allow a broadside cruiser to do a lot of damage however the lacking beam damage shafts anyone in their right mind playing anything that's not an engineer out of the cruiser ship range.

    With regard to beam buffs, if FAW used acc mods it would be fine EPtW and an EPS flow reg will support it and an AP:B on top will do some considerable damage and raise team DPS as a side effect.

    I do maintain that Beam overload needs a rethink though, since someone mentioned a bug with it in the past that made it affect all beams I have put forward an idea that was widely ignored, making it affect all beams for a given period of time (likely the same as CRF) costing an extra 50% power per beam for each beam to do 50% damage per hit with maybe a 25% reduction in firing rate for the power system to recover a little or make it good for 1 volley (likely a better option as a weapon battery will then have you back on your feet) with a 25% extra cooldown on each beam fired before you can fire a standard volley.

    Having done this make DHCs cost an extra 50% power to fire, they ARE heavy cannons after all, it would also give DCs an advantage, and then make CRF and CSV an extra power cost, this would help things a little as well as making escort damage more reasoned rather than "I have pew pew, let's add straight buffs with no draw back, now rather than pew I have boom", then on top of this make heals of all kinds finally percentage based (a suedo-code can be found in one of the cruiser threads), forcing escorts to move more and making the cruiser's extra hull and science higher aux power mean more.
    ZiOfChe.png?1
  • eatsmarteatsmart Member Posts: 134 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    The ship balance is fine. The issue really is about the nature of the end game challenges that we're put against. Almost universally the challenge is "kill this bunch of stuff quickly", which naturally favours the heavy dps of the escort. The game would be completely different if all boss-like entities had their hull and shields full healed every time a player ship died. Heck, compare elite space to elite ground. If you go down in ISE, you just hit respawn after a few seconds, and then fly back into the fight. In IGE, someone has to walk over to you to get you up again, and release-reenter means restarting the entire of the end boss fight.

    If you step into pvp, the relative balance is apparent. Put two good players of equal skill with one in a cruiser, one in an escort, its an even fight.

    Yeah, i'd like to see some variety in the end game space fights.
  • momawmomaw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    bitemepwe wrote: »
    As the Devils advocate, Why should the fed Cruiser get a power buff? Just becuase they do not have access to the Plasmonic Leech?

    The point was made that the KDF doesn't complain about their cruisers being useless. And I told you why. They turn better and they have, at minimum, +5 more power to everything. I didn't suggest anything beyond that.
  • momawmomaw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    adamkafei wrote: »
    The problem is more with beams than cruisers.


    I actually came here to underscore this point.

    Normally on my D'kora I was using 3 dual beams with FAW3 and a torpedo spread. Pretty effective. I recently read about how unbelievably abso-freakalutely amazing Auxiliary To Battery was, and I wanted to try something new on the ol' space crab so I went for 6 beam arrays in a classic broadside cruiser arrangement.

    Now let's consider:
    * Power level set to 100, and my actual power is at least 125
    * Switch to Battle Mode, +10 additional power
    * Use Emergency Power to Weapons, +22 additional power
    * Use Auxiliary to Battery, +17 additional power

    For those playing at home, this means my effective weapon power level should be at least 174... And this still wasn't enough power to fire off a Fire At Will 3 broadside without my power level dropping in the middle of the salvo. The only ways to use beam broadsiding at full power are to use either Nadion Inversion, or use Directed Energy Modulation with the doff that adds drain resist while DEM is active. Both of these have a stupidly long cooldown. There's batteries too I guess, and you know what? Stupidly long cooldown.

    Cruisers are typified as being all about the beam broadsides, and in reality, this mode of combat has so many limitations and support prerequisites just to reach any kind of parity with cannons that it's hard to justify it.

    :(
  • sonulinu2sonulinu2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I think Cruisers are underpowered in the following ways:
    1. Turn rate is abysmal
    2. Real DPS is too low (how can you maintain broadside when the 'scort or even sci has maneuvered away in 3 seconds)
    3. Miracle Worker isn't performing miracles since S5
    4. Engineer Capt Skills in general are one offs and not multiplicative (as Tac Cpt's are for dps, for example), in other words very little synergy with each other
    5. Give us more aggro/tanking skills; 'scorts still tank even with S7
    6. In a good PvP team we heal/support; in PvE everyone is out for themselves so it's almost impossible to be an effective healer/supporter
    7. Allow us to change BOFF officers/skills between tanking and support w/o TRIBBLE up our space skill trays.
Sign In or Register to comment.