I am not disagreeing. It is evident that the Escort can learn to tank very well. Though that tanking is not done by a method that can't be replicated by the Cruiser and none of it is against the rules.
The real issue is that the escort can tank well and dish out damage. The Cruiser not so well.
The Escort suffers when removes that speed bonus, so when one is sitting still about to unleash the Spike (we all know thats what he is doing), prep for the spike and hit him while his bonus defense is near zero.
Possibly that is the a nod to the flipside of speed based bonus defense? The Escort gets a bonus buff of 10% for being a fast mover so possibly the Cruiser/Science and hybrids need a similiar bonus for not being fast moving?
How about the idea that Cruiser do not suffer as much loss of defense for moving slower to help represent thier much larger mass?
I was thinking they could just change ApO and drop the two defense buffs for a single Bonus defense buff of say +5% or something but you would still see speed tanking escorts with scores close to 95% defense.
And I do fly escorts and battlecruisers because from a PvE standpoint they are optimal. However I have exhausted my build options in them and would like to use other hulls for variety sake but their current underpowered state annoys me. As does the concept of the holy trinity being used in a star trek MMO while in space.
I dispute them being underpowered. I like how they have different strengths than escorts and play radically different. As far it being a trinity.... have you actually played a hard trinity game like WoW? I have, for several years. What we have in STO is NOT a trinity. It gives people the option to fit into broadly defined archetypes but does not require it, I would even say it penalizes you if you try to fit into it a trinity like set up too much.
Incorrect, with a dedicated healer the escort is a stronger tank because they can both hit resistance caps, get the same numeric amount of healing, but the escort avoids more raw damage and can better position themselves.
With a healer any ship can tank almost indefinitely. Sadly,that means you're dooming someone to play what is an almost universally despised role. There are some exceptions of course, but by and large most players do NOT want to play healers. Besides, if your theoretical escort can have a healing buddy my tanky cruiser can have an escort buddy and overall a tanky cruiser with an escort buddy will do more damage than your escort and their healing buddy. So in this case I believe you are "Incorrect".
I believe they do, just not on the important factor. Tac Team skill bonus gets lower the more of your crew that die off it just does not effect the shield transfer rate last I checked.
Thats why I was arguing it should affect the abilities as a whole, otherwise having large crews has a minimal impact.
Moving the subject away from claims that cruisers are underpowered (which are hard to take seriously given so few seem to understand how to build their ship) and onto the issue with beam arrays is more productive, I think.
As I see it, the problem is two-fold:
a) Cryptic cannot seem to balance the Fed cruiser's main damage ability, FAW. It was once (intentionally? Unintentionally?) too strong so it's been nerfed to the point where it's too weak.
b) This is more a personal opinion coming from someone who likes fast or agile ships, but the Fed snoozer is penalized too hard through beam damage dropoff due to distance from their target(s). Ships that struggle to turn shouldn't be punished so hard, it's a kind of double-dipping.
Have you ever driven an Excelsior? It is far from a "snoozer". It can keep up with Klingon cruisers maneuverability and give up a little to KDF Cruisers without the use of DC/DHC, but they can make good use of DBB, Torps (especially if you bought a Regent and too its torp') and Single cannons, especially if you use turrets in the aft and are an engie that makes use of their innate energy boosting abilities.
I have a tac/escort and an engie/cruiser and I run STF elite daily with them both. When there isn't a hardened cruiser dominating the aggro I see escorts, sci ships, and dps cruisers popping like sizzling oil in a pan.
Season 7 has made escort tanking a dinosuar. Defense and agility make no difference verse Gates and Tac Cubes. The only thing that can survive that brutal a beating is a cruiser running the right boffs and skilled for maximum survival.
The only times I see little to no popping in pugs I run is when I am playing my engineer/tac odyssey. And occasionally, when I do get popped, usually a couple more die before I can respawn and return. With my cruiser I am making a big difference in STF's because my tenacity equals more consistant dps from the rest of the team.
a) Cryptic cannot seem to balance the Fed cruiser's main damage ability, FAW. It was once (intentionally? Unintentionally?) too strong so it's been nerfed to the point where it's too weak.
I agree. FAW could use some help but I also like the idea of a Beam based version of Cannon rapid fire, which could help the Cruiser be a better DD without buff the cruiser directly.
b) This is more a personal opinion coming from someone who likes fast or agile ships, but the Fed snoozer is penalized too hard through beam damage dropoff due to distance from their target(s). Ships that struggle to turn shouldn't be punished so hard, it's a kind of double-dipping.
Note: Testing Method
All the test results detailed below were achieved by finding stationary, unshielded targets in missions (defence turrets, mining facilities and the like), firing on them multiple times with a single weapon at a given range, averaging the results, then moving to a new range and repeating the process. A few things to bear in mind:
The average damage listed is ?per strike? ? for example, a beam array ?strikes? four times each time it?s fired
All weapons used were common (white) versions, with no special bonuses
Within each test, weapon power settings and captain skills were kept constant ? the only thing that changed was the range
Each attack was followed by a pause of a few seconds to make sure that the current weapon power level was at maximum before firing again
As I don?t have a log analyser or anything similar, the sample sizes were not very large. As such, the average damage has been rounded to the nearest integer, and all results should be treated as approximate
Beam Weapons
Average damage of a phaser beam array at different ranges:
Range (km)
Damage
0
144
1
144
2
140
3
135
4
128
5
121
6
115
7
109
8
104
9
98
10 9
3
Allowing for a margin of error in the data, then, it appears that beam weapons do maximum damage up to 1km, and then start to drop by around 4% damage per km, down to about 65% damage at 10km.
I haven?t yet done extensive testing with dual beams or other damage types, but some quick comparisons of damage at 10km and 1km with a variety suggests that all beam weapons are affected by range in a similar fashion.
Cannon Weapons
Average damage of a dual phaser cannon at different ranges:
Range (km)
Damage
0
175
1
175
2
175
3
157
4
146
5
128
6
120
7
102
8
92
9
75
10
66
Once again allowing for a margin of error in the data, it appears that cannon weapons do maximum damage up to 2km then start to drop by around 8% damage per km, down to about 35% damage at 10km.
I haven?t yet done extensive testing with cannons, dual heavy cannons, or other damage types, but some quick comparisons of damage at 1km, 2km and 10km with a variety suggests that all cannon weapons are affected by range in a similar fashion.
I agree. FAW could use some help but I also like the idea of a Beam based version of Cannon rapid fire, which could help the Cruiser be a better DD without buff the cruiser directly.
If they altered fire at will so it does both:
- if you have a target seleted you focus your shots in one area (30 degree cone?)
- if you have no target selectred you do the disco ball
then beam weapons would become more attactive. This matched up with 360 beam arrays might make beams something for escort builds too.
No he's proven something that I'm ashamed it's taken me almost a full year to realize. This game penalizes you for using beams instead of cannons.
If you want to have any kind of appreciable damage output you must use cannons because they draw less power, have more chances to proc, have no penalties applied to their attack upgrades, and have better synergy the more of them are in use as opposed to beams which are the complete opposite.
This is the real reason cruisers are underpowered, they can't use dual cannons to make up for the fact that they only have one tactical slot that can be used to upgrade cannon attacks. Science ships make up for it with their ability strip shields and/or bypass them without the use of weapons.
No he's proven something that I'm ashamed it's taken me almost a full year to realize. This game penalizes you for using beams instead of cannons.
If you want to have any kind of appreciable damage output you must use cannons because they draw less power, have more chances to proc, have no penalties applied to their attack upgrades, and have better synergy the more of them are in use as opposed to beams which are the complete opposite.
This is the real reason cruisers are underpowered, they can't use dual cannons to make up for the fact that they only have one tactical slot that can be used to upgrade cannon attacks. Science ships make up for it with their ability strip shields and/or bypass them without the use of weapons.
This is EXACTLY why I have been arguing to improve the single cannons (not to the level of DHC/Dc but better than they are), they have made cruisers much more palatable, albeit still behind other combinations.
This is EXACTLY why I have been arguing to improve the single cannons (not to the level of DHC/Dc but better than they are), they have made cruisers much more palatable, albeit still behind other combinations.
When I said the game was penalizing you for using beams instead of cannons I was including single cannons and turrets in that argument as well. So congratulations, you completely missed the point! Have a cookie.
First time posting in this thread, but I agree with the above about beams being a poor second cousin to any kind of cannon or turret. And while I agree that FAW needs to have the bugs worked out of it so that it matches CSV more, and that some sort of rapid beam fire would be nice, I think at the base level, the issue between beams and cannons damage needs to be balanced first, and I can see two ways to do this.
First method, pick some period of time, and normalize damage of all weapons across it so that in that period of time, given the same power settings and skills, all weapons will do the same amount of damage. What would differ between the weapons would be the amount of spike damage. So cannons would have a lot of damage up front, but a long cooldown, while beams would not do as much damage up front, but would keep the level of damage more constant. This might mean that things like single cannons and turrets would be left behind a bit. However, it would also allow beams to make the mose sense on cruisers, since cruisers should be more tankier, and therefore be able ot be around long enough to put out the full amount of damage, while escorts and the like can zip in and out, putting out a ton of damage in a short burst, but then having to run and hide if that burst didn't kill the target, because now they would be on cooldown.
Second method, change the damage reduction range severly on cannons so that beams will outdamage cannons for a more equal period. Maybe anything inside 4KM is cannon bait, while anything outside that range is beam bait. This would probably have less coding cost, but since all ships in STO have a 10 KM weapons range, and it doesn't take much to cross that for an escort, I don't know how much use this would be. In PvE, everyone closes anyway, so this won't help there, and in PvP any escort can plow through 10KM in nothing flat, or cloak in the case of the KDF. Now, if the tangetting range was extended to be two or three times that, and cannon damage ended at 10KM, but beam damage could be noticable all the way to the max, then that might make some difference, but that would require recoding the entire game.
All in all, I'd probably go for the first method, it would probably work better. Anyway, my two dilithium.
First method, pick some period of time, and normalize damage of all weapons across it so that in that period of time, given the same power settings and skills, all weapons will do the same amount of damage. What would differ between the weapons would be the amount of spike damage. So cannons would have a lot of damage up front, but a long cooldown, while beams would not do as much damage up front, but would keep the level of damage more constant. This might mean that things like single cannons and turrets would be left behind a bit. However, it would also allow beams to make the mose sense on cruisers, since cruisers should be more tankier, and therefore be able ot be around long enough to put out the full amount of damage, while escorts and the like can zip in and out, putting out a ton of damage in a short burst, but then having to run and hide if that burst didn't kill the target, because now they would be on cooldown.
As great as this idea would be, all the escort players would complain about "Cruisers online"... So yeah... go science :P
And what you've just proven is that until 7Km cannons outperform beams...
He tests a single beam array and a dual canon and recorded the average damage for each (rounded up)
The beam starts dropping at 1km at a rate of 4% per km moving out to a maximum of 10km. Beams will reach the flip point at 4km because the beams start to drop earlier. Cannons reach that point at 5km dropping at a rate of 8% per km. Thats twice the rate of a beam.
Its an aproximation based on average damage but it does show that beams have the long range advantage while cannons have the short range advantage meaning beams do not drop off more than cannons at range.
Though they do start 1km earlier.
I have tested this myself in the updated game since this article was written (2010) and it still holds true.
If you doubt it still holds true then run the tests using a mark 10 white Beam array without any buffs versus a mark 10 single cannon (to get a versus comparison of two single style weapons becuase the author used Single versus Dual becuase the base damage was the same) and see if the beams drop-off of around 4% damage per km, down to about 65% damage at 10km.
No he's proven something that I'm ashamed it's taken me almost a full year to realize. This game penalizes you for using beams instead of cannons.
I place you to the same challenge as Adam since that article is 2 years old.
Test its results unbuffed in the modern game with a white mark X Beam array versus a white mark X cannon and see what results you get.
You should find that while the article is old its % of drop for beams versus cannons is correct at 4% versus 8%.
Which shows that beams do not drop as much as cannon over range, the whole point of my dredging up the article because unless they Devs have changed it those % drop-off numbers still hold true.
I find that damage really is "ok" kinda sorta, beams need a lil love. Either lower beam drain or give cruisers a passive weapon drain resist. The biggest problem is the escorts ability to soak up damage as well as any other ship. I myself have switched from cruiser to escort, it improves all aspecets of the game, except parking and pew pewing.
I go slpat in stfs just as often in my cruiser as i do in an escort, and almost everytime its from a 150k crit. Mind you this is using the escort's tried and true, "forward pew pew pew, reverse throttle pew pew pew forard throttle pew pew pew...." So escorts need some kind of resist reduction, healing reduction or hull/shield hp reduction.
Or come up with some mechanic which gives a benifit to crew size.... Faster torpedo reloads, better shield distribution, increased hull heals (with boff abilities), something.
Which shows that beams do not drop as much as cannon over range, the whole point of my dredging up the article because unless they Devs have changed it those % drop-off numbers still hold true.
The thing is I (like others) have noticed that power is now drained more by firing weapons, be this by design or otherwise
Just nerf the Tactical Team ability. Make people redistribute shields manually.
Escorts have high turn values for a reason - they can face the enemy with different shield facings. When one drops you just turn your ship around. TT however lets escorts keep a target lock for too long.
The thing is I (like others) have noticed that power is now drained more by firing weapons, be this by design or otherwise
Then now is a grand time to work off Big Bears old example and rerun the tests after two years and see if beams have beam nerfed or not in damage over range.
Test and see if the numbers hold of 100% damage at 1km and 65% damage 10km for a single mk10 white weapon.
If its lower then yes beams have been ninja'ed and need to be fixed.
When the ques allow, I'll gladly leave my Peg and jump in a Battlecruiser and be target.
Invite your friends, seriuosly. We can get a TS or vent or skype channel going and have a good time while testing.
I would like to Know now without a doubt. See it with my own eyes you may say.
Last time I did any test was months ago following BBs example of shooting non-moving destructible PvE targets.
I figure of km in PvE is the same as in PvP.*
adendum: I actually suddenly like this idea so much I think I may run it past Korrath and see if he likes the idea of doing a cross test with Priority One , so no one can call foul on the data, nd put these and others long standing gripes to rest so they can be addressed if needed.
I will gladly invite you and others known on the forums for thier knowledge of game mechanics if they take up the idea.
If not I'm still open for the testing on my own.
Have you ever driven an Excelsior? It is far from a "snoozer". It can keep up with Klingon cruisers maneuverability and give up a little to KDF Cruisers without the use of DC/DHC, but they can make good use of DBB, Torps (especially if you bought a Regent and too its torp') and Single cannons, especially if you use turrets in the aft and are an engie that makes use of their innate energy boosting abilities.
The Excel was actually my first ship and while I'm not going to pretend to be some kind of authority, I do think that few have flown her as often as I have or know her as well as I do, lol.
You're completely right, of course, but the cannoncelsior works basically because of its god-like (for Fed snoozers) turn and its positively sublime inertia (this is the ship function that determines how fast you can accelerate and decelerate). This is why I'm all ears when people ask for reasonable QoL buffs, like an across-the-board snoozer turn rate buff for the Feds.
Incorrect, with a dedicated healer the escort is a stronger tank because they can both hit resistance caps, get the same numeric amount of healing, but the escort avoids more raw damage and can better position themselves.
If you'd like to explain how a dedicated healer and an escort can "get the same numeric amount of healing" as a healer and a snoozer, I'm all ears. (Not kidding)
can you honestly tell me you can't solo a cube with an escort
Of course i can. I can also do it in a Cruiser or SV. While taking less risk.
Actually, in the Cruiser, I can attract the Cube's attention and then fire at a priority target (say KASE Probes) before going back to the Cube; can't do that with an Escort.
That's because an Escort isn't a tank, a Cruiser is.
Though I wonder, where the hell did you get the idea that a cruiser can manage ~60-75% of an escorts damage output from? Because as far as I could tell this thread was about Federation cruisers, not Klingon Battle cruisers.
Parses, mostly in ISE (because everyone is always in parse range, unlike KASE and CSE):
Usual (good) Escort DPS: ~6k
Usual (good) Cruiser DPS: ~3.5k-~4.5k
That's 60%-75%. Of course, the average "7 injuries rainbodyssey" won't do reach those numbers; but that's hardly a failing of the Ship.
When I said the game was penalizing you for using beams instead of cannons I was including single cannons and turrets in that argument as well. So congratulations, you completely missed the point! Have a cookie.
First off, no need to be snarky and rude. Werent you the one who said:
This is the real reason cruisers are underpowered, they can't use dual cannons to make up for the fact that they only have one tactical slot that can be used to upgrade cannon attacks. Science ships make up for it with their ability strip shields and/or bypass them without the use of weapons.
I was referring to your statement about cruisers not being able to use DHC/DC. As far as not enough tactical BOFF abilities, both the Excel' and the Regent can make use of TWO upgraded cannon attacks and the Odyssey can have even more if it makes its LT. CMDR. BOFF a Tac'.
A little improvement in single cannons, tied in with use of turrets would be a very viable solution for cruisers. Also, DBB/Torp/Turret combos for cruisers can work very well too, they also manage energy consumption better than the 8 beam broadside.
Also, to put another fly in the ointment, Neb's can have two cannon Boff abilities in addition to its normal shield stripping/bypassing abilities.
The Excel was actually my first ship and while I'm not going to pretend to be some kind of authority, I do think that few have flown her as often as I have or know her as well as I do, lol.
You're completely right, of course, but the cannoncelsior works basically because of its god-like (for Fed snoozers) turn and its positively sublime inertia (this is the ship function that determines how fast you can accelerate and decelerate). This is why I'm all ears when people ask for reasonable QoL buffs, like an across-the-board snoozer turn rate buff for the Feds.
The Excel' is one of the best ships in the game, if you don't mind driving it like you stole it. I seemed to have been tethered to my Excel's captain chair and cant spend too much STO time away from it before I get snapped in it again
With an optimal arc of 180', even the Regent/Sovy' and Gal' R can use cannon/turrets to good effect, especially with the new 180' torp from the Regent. The Excel (and Gal R in stardrive mode) just make even better use of it.
Here's a novel idea; if you want to do more DPS fly an escort, if you want to sustain more damage fly a cruiser, if you want to have loads of awesome abilities fly a Sci ship, if you want to do a little of a everything there are even ships that do that too! What would really suck is if the devs listened to all the moaning and made cruisers faster and capable of dishing out more DPS as that would totally remove the reason for having any other ship class in the game.
One of the best thjings in my opinion about STO is that you are not limited as to what ships you're allowed to use based on your character class, add to that the fact that we've been told we should be soon able to take multiple ships with us (with the other vessels piloted by Boffs) then you have even less of a gripe because you could then have your Boffs flying escorts to deal damage while your cruiser soaks up the damage/heals/etc.
Also for you cruiser types out there, can I suggest trying a couple of tetryon beam arrays (the 10% proc one from New Link) to obliterate opponent's shields (with a much better field of fire than cannons) matched up with a couple of cutting beams (360 degree firing arc) to decimate enemy hulls once the tetryon arrays have done their job.
What I'm trying to say (and although I may be fed up with this whole 'Cruisers are UP' topic cropping up every other hour, I am genuinely trying to be helpful and NOT a snide bugger) is that there are ways and means to change your role in STO without having to beg the devs to give you a leg-up. Cruisers are still a viable ship class as they stand with just a little imagination.
***The above ramblings are, as always, my own opinion. Based on my experiences and interpreted by my mind, they by no means reflect the universal truth (unless coincidentally). Peace.***
Comments
R.I.P
I dispute them being underpowered. I like how they have different strengths than escorts and play radically different. As far it being a trinity.... have you actually played a hard trinity game like WoW? I have, for several years. What we have in STO is NOT a trinity. It gives people the option to fit into broadly defined archetypes but does not require it, I would even say it penalizes you if you try to fit into it a trinity like set up too much.
With a healer any ship can tank almost indefinitely. Sadly,that means you're dooming someone to play what is an almost universally despised role. There are some exceptions of course, but by and large most players do NOT want to play healers. Besides, if your theoretical escort can have a healing buddy my tanky cruiser can have an escort buddy and overall a tanky cruiser with an escort buddy will do more damage than your escort and their healing buddy. So in this case I believe you are "Incorrect".
Thats why I was arguing it should affect the abilities as a whole, otherwise having large crews has a minimal impact.
Have you ever driven an Excelsior? It is far from a "snoozer". It can keep up with Klingon cruisers maneuverability and give up a little to KDF Cruisers without the use of DC/DHC, but they can make good use of DBB, Torps (especially if you bought a Regent and too its torp') and Single cannons, especially if you use turrets in the aft and are an engie that makes use of their innate energy boosting abilities.
Season 7 has made escort tanking a dinosuar. Defense and agility make no difference verse Gates and Tac Cubes. The only thing that can survive that brutal a beating is a cruiser running the right boffs and skilled for maximum survival.
The only times I see little to no popping in pugs I run is when I am playing my engineer/tac odyssey. And occasionally, when I do get popped, usually a couple more die before I can respawn and return. With my cruiser I am making a big difference in STF's because my tenacity equals more consistant dps from the rest of the team.
R.I.P
If you want to have any kind of appreciable damage output you must use cannons because they draw less power, have more chances to proc, have no penalties applied to their attack upgrades, and have better synergy the more of them are in use as opposed to beams which are the complete opposite.
This is the real reason cruisers are underpowered, they can't use dual cannons to make up for the fact that they only have one tactical slot that can be used to upgrade cannon attacks. Science ships make up for it with their ability strip shields and/or bypass them without the use of weapons.
This is EXACTLY why I have been arguing to improve the single cannons (not to the level of DHC/Dc but better than they are), they have made cruisers much more palatable, albeit still behind other combinations.
When I said the game was penalizing you for using beams instead of cannons I was including single cannons and turrets in that argument as well. So congratulations, you completely missed the point! Have a cookie.
First method, pick some period of time, and normalize damage of all weapons across it so that in that period of time, given the same power settings and skills, all weapons will do the same amount of damage. What would differ between the weapons would be the amount of spike damage. So cannons would have a lot of damage up front, but a long cooldown, while beams would not do as much damage up front, but would keep the level of damage more constant. This might mean that things like single cannons and turrets would be left behind a bit. However, it would also allow beams to make the mose sense on cruisers, since cruisers should be more tankier, and therefore be able ot be around long enough to put out the full amount of damage, while escorts and the like can zip in and out, putting out a ton of damage in a short burst, but then having to run and hide if that burst didn't kill the target, because now they would be on cooldown.
Second method, change the damage reduction range severly on cannons so that beams will outdamage cannons for a more equal period. Maybe anything inside 4KM is cannon bait, while anything outside that range is beam bait. This would probably have less coding cost, but since all ships in STO have a 10 KM weapons range, and it doesn't take much to cross that for an escort, I don't know how much use this would be. In PvE, everyone closes anyway, so this won't help there, and in PvP any escort can plow through 10KM in nothing flat, or cloak in the case of the KDF. Now, if the tangetting range was extended to be two or three times that, and cannon damage ended at 10KM, but beam damage could be noticable all the way to the max, then that might make some difference, but that would require recoding the entire game.
All in all, I'd probably go for the first method, it would probably work better. Anyway, my two dilithium.
Nouveau riche LTS member
As great as this idea would be, all the escort players would complain about "Cruisers online"... So yeah... go science :P
He tests a single beam array and a dual canon and recorded the average damage for each (rounded up)
The beam starts dropping at 1km at a rate of 4% per km moving out to a maximum of 10km. Beams will reach the flip point at 4km because the beams start to drop earlier. Cannons reach that point at 5km dropping at a rate of 8% per km. Thats twice the rate of a beam.
Its an aproximation based on average damage but it does show that beams have the long range advantage while cannons have the short range advantage meaning beams do not drop off more than cannons at range.
Though they do start 1km earlier.
I have tested this myself in the updated game since this article was written (2010) and it still holds true.
If you doubt it still holds true then run the tests using a mark 10 white Beam array without any buffs versus a mark 10 single cannon (to get a versus comparison of two single style weapons becuase the author used Single versus Dual becuase the base damage was the same) and see if the beams drop-off of around 4% damage per km, down to about 65% damage at 10km.
R.I.P
I place you to the same challenge as Adam since that article is 2 years old.
Test its results unbuffed in the modern game with a white mark X Beam array versus a white mark X cannon and see what results you get.
You should find that while the article is old its % of drop for beams versus cannons is correct at 4% versus 8%.
Which shows that beams do not drop as much as cannon over range, the whole point of my dredging up the article because unless they Devs have changed it those % drop-off numbers still hold true.
R.I.P
I go slpat in stfs just as often in my cruiser as i do in an escort, and almost everytime its from a 150k crit. Mind you this is using the escort's tried and true, "forward pew pew pew, reverse throttle pew pew pew forard throttle pew pew pew...." So escorts need some kind of resist reduction, healing reduction or hull/shield hp reduction.
Or come up with some mechanic which gives a benifit to crew size.... Faster torpedo reloads, better shield distribution, increased hull heals (with boff abilities), something.
The thing is I (like others) have noticed that power is now drained more by firing weapons, be this by design or otherwise
Escorts have high turn values for a reason - they can face the enemy with different shield facings. When one drops you just turn your ship around. TT however lets escorts keep a target lock for too long.
Then now is a grand time to work off Big Bears old example and rerun the tests after two years and see if beams have beam nerfed or not in damage over range.
Test and see if the numbers hold of 100% damage at 1km and 65% damage 10km for a single mk10 white weapon.
If its lower then yes beams have been ninja'ed and need to be fixed.
When the ques allow, I'll gladly leave my Peg and jump in a Battlecruiser and be target.
Invite your friends, seriuosly. We can get a TS or vent or skype channel going and have a good time while testing.
I would like to Know now without a doubt. See it with my own eyes you may say.
Last time I did any test was months ago following BBs example of shooting non-moving destructible PvE targets.
I figure of km in PvE is the same as in PvP.*
adendum: I actually suddenly like this idea so much I think I may run it past Korrath and see if he likes the idea of doing a cross test with Priority One , so no one can call foul on the data, nd put these and others long standing gripes to rest so they can be addressed if needed.
I will gladly invite you and others known on the forums for thier knowledge of game mechanics if they take up the idea.
If not I'm still open for the testing on my own.
R.I.P
You haven't met the USS Ninja yet... that needs to happen soon :cool:
The Excel was actually my first ship and while I'm not going to pretend to be some kind of authority, I do think that few have flown her as often as I have or know her as well as I do, lol.
You're completely right, of course, but the cannoncelsior works basically because of its god-like (for Fed snoozers) turn and its positively sublime inertia (this is the ship function that determines how fast you can accelerate and decelerate). This is why I'm all ears when people ask for reasonable QoL buffs, like an across-the-board snoozer turn rate buff for the Feds.
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
If you'd like to explain how a dedicated healer and an escort can "get the same numeric amount of healing" as a healer and a snoozer, I'm all ears. (Not kidding)
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
Actually, in the Cruiser, I can attract the Cube's attention and then fire at a priority target (say KASE Probes) before going back to the Cube; can't do that with an Escort.
That's because an Escort isn't a tank, a Cruiser is.
Parses, mostly in ISE (because everyone is always in parse range, unlike KASE and CSE):
Usual (good) Escort DPS: ~6k
Usual (good) Cruiser DPS: ~3.5k-~4.5k
That's 60%-75%. Of course, the average "7 injuries rainbodyssey" won't do reach those numbers; but that's hardly a failing of the Ship.
Denouncing straw men!=personal attacks.
First off, no need to be snarky and rude. Werent you the one who said:
second I took your point and looked at it from a different solution angle than what you wanted to hear. Third, if its a toffee cookie, thank you.
I was actually answering to this:
I was referring to your statement about cruisers not being able to use DHC/DC. As far as not enough tactical BOFF abilities, both the Excel' and the Regent can make use of TWO upgraded cannon attacks and the Odyssey can have even more if it makes its LT. CMDR. BOFF a Tac'.
A little improvement in single cannons, tied in with use of turrets would be a very viable solution for cruisers. Also, DBB/Torp/Turret combos for cruisers can work very well too, they also manage energy consumption better than the 8 beam broadside.
Also, to put another fly in the ointment, Neb's can have two cannon Boff abilities in addition to its normal shield stripping/bypassing abilities.
The Excel' is one of the best ships in the game, if you don't mind driving it like you stole it. I seemed to have been tethered to my Excel's captain chair and cant spend too much STO time away from it before I get snapped in it again
With an optimal arc of 180', even the Regent/Sovy' and Gal' R can use cannon/turrets to good effect, especially with the new 180' torp from the Regent. The Excel (and Gal R in stardrive mode) just make even better use of it.
/facepalm.
Escorts aren't glass cannons and cruisers aren't toothless bricks.
One of the best thjings in my opinion about STO is that you are not limited as to what ships you're allowed to use based on your character class, add to that the fact that we've been told we should be soon able to take multiple ships with us (with the other vessels piloted by Boffs) then you have even less of a gripe because you could then have your Boffs flying escorts to deal damage while your cruiser soaks up the damage/heals/etc.
Also for you cruiser types out there, can I suggest trying a couple of tetryon beam arrays (the 10% proc one from New Link) to obliterate opponent's shields (with a much better field of fire than cannons) matched up with a couple of cutting beams (360 degree firing arc) to decimate enemy hulls once the tetryon arrays have done their job.
What I'm trying to say (and although I may be fed up with this whole 'Cruisers are UP' topic cropping up every other hour, I am genuinely trying to be helpful and NOT a snide bugger) is that there are ways and means to change your role in STO without having to beg the devs to give you a leg-up. Cruisers are still a viable ship class as they stand with just a little imagination.