test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Purpose of Engineering console on Escorts?
jestersage
Member Posts: 8 Arc User
One thing I noticed is that most of the powerful escorts have a more eng console slot in comparison to sci console slot (usually is a 3-2-4 configuration). Now, currently I am putting hull armor in there (and 1x RCS), but I am wondering if I should put something else instead.
In terms of PvP, what would best be in there? Should I even bother with hull armor, or should I just put all the universal in there instead?
In terms of PvP, what would best be in there? Should I even bother with hull armor, or should I just put all the universal in there instead?
Post edited by jestersage on
0
Comments
the sci console slots are full with shield boosts or embassy consoles...so 3 places are already needed for the assimilated, zero point and tachokynetic...so in the last remaining slot i put a armor console, or for PVE the point defense turret.
still remaining: plasmonic leech, or some other console...
honestly i find armor consoles a waste of console space for 99% of the pve content on any setup...since absolutely nothing should get through your shields, and in PVP if your shields drop you are dead anyway in an escort.
armor consoles do close to nothing for you while your shields are up, and they should never get down, period.
on a related subject: i think it would be nice to have diminishing returns on tac consoles (weapon type consoles) aswell...probably not very popular with many, but still a way to bring the tactical capabilitys of all ship classes closer together.
Highly agree, and I have suggested that in the past. Needless to say it did not take long for the rabid horde of escort and bop jockeys to come and vent their spleens at me. :rolleyes:
I hate diminishing returns, and I want them taken out from the whole game.
Also, tactical consoles do have diminishing returns too.
It really does increase your survivability in a noticeable way.
Without diminishing returns, you could easily have 100% resistance to do damage...
I doubt that.
Any 5 engi slot crusier/BC could do it easy with 5 armors in, just 4 slots would put you at around 90 without counting boff skills.
Engineers at one point could do this too shields, which is why they hard capped shield res, 100% perfect shields, and just ignore things.
and I'm pretty sure tac consoles arnt subject to diminishing returns, though I'm also fairly sure they only ever amplify the base weapon damage, not the current buffed damage, but id have to do some digging or in game checking to be absolutely sure.
The whole reason diminishing returns went in for armor consoles though was that resistances were getting too high between the consoles and boff skills.
Now I will say that I don't like the fact that they are triggered by anything that adds res, so skills, consoles, boff abilities, doesn't matter the source.
(100) base damage at 50 power +30% for 1 cons
(100) base damage at 50 power +60% for 2 cons
And so on
Armor works like in eve the higher it gets the more points it takes to get it up a %
Tactical consoles do not have diminishing returns. They add a percentage of the base damage. They stack additively, not multiplicatively. Consider a simplified example. If your base damage is 100 and you equip two consoles that give 20% bonus to damage, then your resulting damage will be 100*(0.2 + 0.2) = 140, not 100*1.2*1.2 = 144. (This example does not take into account weapon power, skills, and tactical buffs.) The stacking of tactical consoles is actually well designed, because multiplicative stacking can quickly get out of hand.
Armor consoles do have diminishing returns. The damage resistance ratings are summed and then used to compute the damage resistance percentage using a non-linear curve. See the link below for reference.
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Damage_resistance
Damage resistance percentages should not stack linearly, because stacking 4 consoles that each reduce damage by 25% will make you immune to damage. However, I do not like the damage resistance curve in this game, because it is awkward and penalizes you at the high end of the curve. I would have designed armor consoles differently: instead of reducing a percentage of your incoming damage, they would add a percentage of your base hitpoints. That way, diminishing returns are not necessary.
They did have a little one a few months ago when I tested it. Mind, the reduce in damage bonus was very minor, like 5% per each console added.
Wonder if they'll have diminishing returns on the new kinetic damage bonuses from all the new sets coming.
Are you expecting tactical consoles to stack multiplicatively? My guess is that you are doing the following:
1. Equip one tactical console. Look at the tooltip to see the current damage X of your weapon.
2. Equip a second tactical console. Suppose this one gives 20% bonus to damage. Now, look at the tooltip again to see the new damage Y of your weapon.
You expect to see Y = 1.2 * X. But tactical consoles do not stack that way; that does not mean they have diminishing returns. Part of the problem is that the term "diminishing returns" is imprecise. This is how I see most people use the term in threads that go into the mathematics of the game mechanics:
1. If the output depends linearly on the input, then there are no diminishing returns.
2. If the output depends sublinearly on the input, then there are diminishing returns.
3. If the output depends superlinearly on the input, then the term "diminishing returns" is not used at all.
Tactical consoles belong to category 1 above. If tactical consoles stacked multiplicatively instead of additively, then they would belong to category 3. Consoles that increase damage by a percentage should not stack multiplicatively. The reason is that each additional console would increase damage by more than previous.
First one added like +50 damage, the second +47 or so, and so on.
I just checked in game. Damage varies linearly with the number of tactical consoles.
Skills and equipment
Starship Weapons Training: 129
Starship Energy Weapon Training: 99
Phaser Beam Array Mk XI [Acc]x3
Up to 3 blue Mk XI phaser relays
The damage of the beam array varies with the number of phaser relays as follows:
0 phaser relays: 818.2 damage (654.6 DPS)
1 phaser relay: 882.6 damage (706.1 DPS)
2 phaser relays: 947 damage (757.6 DPS)
3 phaser relays: 1011.3 damage (809.1 DPS)
As far as I know, tactical consoles have always stacked additively.
I wouldn't equate it to eve, their scale works backwards, your getting % of the rest you don't have, not of the res you have, thus the higher you are, the less you get.
Im not sure why they went that rout other then it self regulates to a degree. nthough not enough that they didn't also add a diminishing returns system.
The ones that'll whine will be the Fleet Tac Escort Retro and Kumari pilots, with their 5 tac slots.