basically there are some "core" loopholes in the current system that somehow became very obvious with the idea of that cannonkind-torpedo coming next.
i wont argue how this thing will work, its basically correct, BUT the underlying structure makes it OP. but another time.
basically something is wrong how energy and kinetic are devided and substructured in this game. and what they do against hull/shield!
lets start with whats basically wrong in this game:
torpedos suffer a severe reduce in dmg, when they hit shields, while energyweapons are equally effective against shields AND hull ... thats is wrong (unless you are a borg kinetic cutting through a hull!!!)
so: first part is this:
KIN vs HULL 100% (-armor kin) 1/10 against shields, bleedthrough at max cap is 10% (or 5% for resilient) and bleedthrough raises as capacity decreases to an amount of 30% (or 15% for resilient)
ENERGY vs SHIELDS (-shieldpowerresist% and energyresistconsoles, now called armor erg*)
also energy vs hull will result in 1/2 dmg (we wont cripple all erg builds no) (this will better for cannons/turrets at close range, and worse for cannons/turrets at high range, beams will always suffer 1/2 no matter distance)
*resist to specific energytypes will later reduce their procc effectivity, ill come to this
this should be the first basic rule.
the first rule now also will be, you EITHER raise KIN dmg // ERG dmg
only two consoles for raising dmg of those 2 basic types:
emitter array booster: raises dmg of energy weapons by 30% (for mk12 vr)
improved launch bay: raises dmg of kinetic weapons by 30% (for mk 12 vr)
why this? because basically all kinetic and all energyweapons derive their damage completely indifferent from their subtype. their damage is just dependant from their basic "operating" system. all kinetics get launched, and fly to targets and hit them with speed. their damage is determined by launcher and speed. while energy dmg is determined by powersource(wepaonpow lvl in this game) and the emitter array (how much energy can i direct through those without burning them)
____________________________________________
now lets come to how "types" so called subtypes will affect kin and energy:
lets start with basic assumption for both kin and erg:
subtypes will only deliver specific proccs and addition not more, not less.
cause those subtypes will determine lets say with what a torpedo is loaded, or "how" an energyweapon is focussed by a lens!
so we will have:
different loads for kinetic-types (photon, quantum, plasma*k, ...)
different lenses for energytypes (phaser, dis, plasma*e, ...)
those will just improve the addition/procc and only increase dmg by a smaller amount. (better would be even not having them raise dmg at all for "system"logic, but this would either OP proccs(to make a whole console valuable compared to 30% dmg it had to double or tripple procc so ...)
so a "phaser"/"dis"//// lens will improve the phasers/dis//// ability to procc or the effect of the procc by [insertreasonable-mathematical-number]% + 20%dmg
same goes for kinetic:
the torpedo detonation matrix will improve the torps specific explosion TYPE to deliver proccs more often, or more intense. so its %proc-chance/%procamount + 20% dmg
(again having solely proc consoles would over.do the proc importance just to make up for no dmg at all so a mixed one is better)
______
that would clear a lot of confusion:
now lets return to that damn antiproton-cannon-torpedo-hybrid-launcher-volley-wehateveritis!
this torpedo would basically EITHER be a torpedo tube thats loaded with AP energy matrix
in that case it would follow the kin rule: hull dmg, but shields stop it. it could then have a chance to do its full dmg on shields (because its matrix is released so close to the shield, that it can affect them like energyweapons do) - therefore its basic HULl impact MUST be lowered by lets say 30%, and due to the kind of "nondirected" energyrelease the impact on shields is 1/2 instead of 1/10
OR a cannon-volley thats so dense, it can have a kinetic impact, like a tube. in that case it would rather do full dmg on shields, and its hulldmg kin impact would be low, BUT raising with closeness to target, and deminishing with target distance.
i assume that its rather the first variant ... otherwise they would have named it kinetic cannon or sth.
so.
i think while its a lot to read, and im not a native speaker, my "system" is quite more logical and convincing than what we have currently, and whats now even more completely going madness with that new torpedo ...
I think the expose/exploit mechanic being adapted for space via reputation powers was a start but that space needs a proper expose/exploit, maybe baked into a bridge officer ability, preferably available at the ensign Tac level.
One that adds an expose upgrade to beams and turrets.
One that adds an exploit upgrade to torpedoes and cannons.
Second, I think specialization IS the problem. Weapon consoles should upgrade energy and projectiles. You want people using both.
Third, since weapon modifiers (ie. [Acc]) boost ALL weapons, I think torpedoes should receive an additional, special modifier (let's call it [AccTorp] -- Acc + CritD). [AccTorp] can only be stacked a certain number of times per ship (you aren't trying to encourage full turpedo boats here and I'd be all for each weapon type getting something similar to promote weapon diversity in any given build).
Finally, since we'd be talking about making expose/exploit more widespread, I'd look at some kind of mechanic like bonus experience being issued on kills of exposed targets. Rather than just receiving XP for kills, receiving XP based on HOW you play could add lots of layers to gameplay.
Maybe going forward, slow kills could generate XP, sustaining damage could generate XP, maintaining high throttle in combat could generate XP, healing friendly targets below 20% health could generate XP, etc.
uuuhm thats going into a balance discussion. im not talking about outside balance, but about inner logic of how these weapons actually harm different parts of defense systems in this game.
basically torpedos only affect ONE defense system full, while nergy harm both. thats wrong. at least in terms how much they do it. (energy in this case)
on the other hand, the whole console/buff logic is just ... wrong.
i even relaised that my approach wasnt even fully correct.
a kinetic projectiles dmg basically should be devided into TWO parts.
kinetic impact dmg (for all projectiles)
and detonation matrix dmg (typespecific, a plasma torp is releasing plasma on the hull, the photon boosts a kinetic explosion after/while impacting)
so basically the torp tooltip should look like this:
plasma projectile
deals 5000 kin dmg
+ 2000 plasmadmg over 10 seconds
now: slotting a launcher booster would only buff kin
slotting a detonationmatrix would buff the plasmadot
slotting a console that buffs both should now never ever result in INCREASED dmg in both parts but in half % for both parts ...
and theres the imbalance in the first hand.
i can only say, the whole system is ****ed, not because of its "dmg outcome balance" but because of its logical, physical and scientific justification for buff mechanics. and the new torpedo is quite revealing that.
you can balance everything, but one reason why this game is so ultracomplex and hard to understand is: its just plain WRONG and "MADE UP" (theres a difference between fiction and made-up ...)
and this games mechanics are more on the madeup side, than on the fiction side.
the new torepdo shall be a energy volley thats launched by a projectile launch mechanism.
every tried firing a ball of fire out of a magnum? it wont work. a launcher can only "press" hard things out of the tube. not energy. its just not "possible" its not fiction its made-up
(fiction follows rules, in scifi it follows prior rules established - while made-up is breaking all prior rules)
The core idiocy in this is that the term "kinetic damage" for torpedoes is just so wrong, i cringe every time i see it.
The torpedos in star trek do not deal kinetic damage.. they CARRY WARHEADS!
USUALLY Am/M warheads. Those produce massive ENERGY RELEASES THAT TEAR **** UP!
Its high time cryptic reworks its torpedo system from the ground up because it is TRIBBLE. It makes no canonical sense and the gamepaly reason they gave, a hundred years ago, NEVER actually made sense.
They said they wanted to have energy weapons to batter down shields and torpedoes top wreck hulls.
They never even properly implemented that, since heavy cannons always were more than capable to wreck hulls.
Combined with the massive fckup that is shields having high inhate resist versus torpedoes and the fact that a slight sliver of shield bar basically devalues the best High yield volley it conspired to make torpedoes a questionable tool from day one.
And there was no point to it!
It is high time all torpedoes get a overhaul in the basic mechanic of how they work.
Honestly, i think its time to break down the artificial barrier between torpedoes and energy weapons.
Remove the artificial damage resistance and diversify the damages dealt by torpedoes.
An Am/M warhead will produce radiation, heat, rest antimatter will react with hull materials, flash vaporized materails will deal more damage to the surrounding hull, shrapnel from those vaporizations will deal a bit of kinetic damage...
Players should have the option to employ heavy torpedo builds if they so chose and not be punished by artificial limiters.
I think instead of writing huge texts, the simple gist should be:
If torpedoes deal less damage against shields than against hull, energy weapons should deal less damage against hull than against shields.
How much less needs to be, I leave to the devs to figure out. But that single chance could make a notable difference in torpedo usage.
Combined with the massive fckup that is shields having high inhate resist versus torpedoes and the fact that a slight sliver of shield bar basically devalues the best High yield volley it conspired to make torpedoes a questionable tool from day one.
That's actually not how it works. The damage reduction from the shields is calculated out of the final damage that goes to hull. Basically if it you deal 100 damage, the shields would take 25. But if the shields only have 20 hit poitns remaining, that would mean only 80 % of your damage was absorbed by the shield, the remainig 20 still hit for full damage, instead of 5 damage that you might assume. And thus it works pretty much "fair".
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Definitely not looking good for the Photons here, eh? What if folks ran the PWO DOFFs to get that Photon down to 1.5?
Photon: 1352 / 1.5 = 901
But neither the DHC nor DBB required DOFFs.
Now, one could compare a HY3 Quantum to a BO3 DBB...see that even without Tac consoles, the HY3 will hit harder than the BO3 with Tac consoles.
But that's a very limited view of everything going on, yeah?
But wait, that DHC/DBB damage was with fudged 125 Weapon Power...what if it was just an average of 100 instead? Okay then, just looking at the last example there...
So we can see that Weapon Power plays a pretty big roll there, yeah? So let's consider what's happened over the years, eh? Remember when they nerfed +Pwr consoles because they didn't want people to have too much power? Lol, we've come a long way since then, right? With discussions on overcapping, capping multiple systems, stuff like AMP and all the rest...we're oozing power these days.
So if Projectiles were "balanced" at one point based on anything to do with Weapon Power being at anything less than pretty much 125; then imho they'd woefully be out of balance in today's game.
Course, that's still not going to do anything for state of buffs. Imagine if HY or TS was a 10-15s duration buff that applied to all torps fired during that time instead of just the first torp and that was it, eh?
Actually, if you go by Star Trek lore, torpedoes have *always* hit hardest against exposed hull. Check any episodes and movies. Torps just glance shields ... but when the shields go down, everything goes slow mo, the villain realizes it's over, and everyone stands there staring at the torpedo heading their way and leading to their inevitable demise.
I'm not sure you realize how much burst damage a high yield volley of torps can do. You can knock off half of a ship's hull in one pass, which is something you cannot do with energy weapons. They are designed as burst weapons, not constant damage (some exceptions withstanding)
Plus they don't use weapons energy. If they did as much damage to shields as they do to hull, no one would ever use energy weapons. They could just dump all their energy into shields and engines.
If torpedoes deal less damage against shields than against hull, energy weapons should deal less damage against hull than against shields.
From my perspective, that's kind of already there. It's just how you look at it.
So torp does 1 damage to shield, or 4 damage to hull. Torps, from that perspective, do 4 times as much damage to hull (in reality it's that they do 75% less to shields, but the result supports either perspective).
Then my energy weapon does 2 damage to shields or 2 damage to hull. If my perspective is that torps do more damage to hulls, energy weapons, by comparison, are a worse weapon to hit hull with, because they don't get that 4x multiplier vs hull.
And, while for dps purposes, energy weapons come out on top for general dps, I've never seen weapon one-hits come anywhere near the torp one-hits I've seen, even with SS3 crits from a crtdx4 ap weapon.
So, when comparing energy weapons and torps, that mechanic is basically already in place. It's just about perspective.
SCM - Crystal C. (S) - [00:12] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 8.63M(713.16K) - Fed Sci
Comments
I think the expose/exploit mechanic being adapted for space via reputation powers was a start but that space needs a proper expose/exploit, maybe baked into a bridge officer ability, preferably available at the ensign Tac level.
One that adds an expose upgrade to beams and turrets.
One that adds an exploit upgrade to torpedoes and cannons.
Second, I think specialization IS the problem. Weapon consoles should upgrade energy and projectiles. You want people using both.
Third, since weapon modifiers (ie. [Acc]) boost ALL weapons, I think torpedoes should receive an additional, special modifier (let's call it [AccTorp] -- Acc + CritD). [AccTorp] can only be stacked a certain number of times per ship (you aren't trying to encourage full turpedo boats here and I'd be all for each weapon type getting something similar to promote weapon diversity in any given build).
Finally, since we'd be talking about making expose/exploit more widespread, I'd look at some kind of mechanic like bonus experience being issued on kills of exposed targets. Rather than just receiving XP for kills, receiving XP based on HOW you play could add lots of layers to gameplay.
Maybe going forward, slow kills could generate XP, sustaining damage could generate XP, maintaining high throttle in combat could generate XP, healing friendly targets below 20% health could generate XP, etc.
basically torpedos only affect ONE defense system full, while nergy harm both. thats wrong. at least in terms how much they do it. (energy in this case)
on the other hand, the whole console/buff logic is just ... wrong.
i even relaised that my approach wasnt even fully correct.
a kinetic projectiles dmg basically should be devided into TWO parts.
kinetic impact dmg (for all projectiles)
and detonation matrix dmg (typespecific, a plasma torp is releasing plasma on the hull, the photon boosts a kinetic explosion after/while impacting)
so basically the torp tooltip should look like this:
plasma projectile
deals 5000 kin dmg
+ 2000 plasmadmg over 10 seconds
now: slotting a launcher booster would only buff kin
slotting a detonationmatrix would buff the plasmadot
slotting a console that buffs both should now never ever result in INCREASED dmg in both parts but in half % for both parts ...
and theres the imbalance in the first hand.
i can only say, the whole system is ****ed, not because of its "dmg outcome balance" but because of its logical, physical and scientific justification for buff mechanics. and the new torpedo is quite revealing that.
you can balance everything, but one reason why this game is so ultracomplex and hard to understand is: its just plain WRONG and "MADE UP" (theres a difference between fiction and made-up ...)
and this games mechanics are more on the madeup side, than on the fiction side.
the new torepdo shall be a energy volley thats launched by a projectile launch mechanism.
every tried firing a ball of fire out of a magnum? it wont work. a launcher can only "press" hard things out of the tube. not energy. its just not "possible" its not fiction its made-up
(fiction follows rules, in scifi it follows prior rules established - while made-up is breaking all prior rules)
The torpedos in star trek do not deal kinetic damage.. they CARRY WARHEADS!
USUALLY Am/M warheads. Those produce massive ENERGY RELEASES THAT TEAR **** UP!
Its high time cryptic reworks its torpedo system from the ground up because it is TRIBBLE. It makes no canonical sense and the gamepaly reason they gave, a hundred years ago, NEVER actually made sense.
They said they wanted to have energy weapons to batter down shields and torpedoes top wreck hulls.
They never even properly implemented that, since heavy cannons always were more than capable to wreck hulls.
Combined with the massive fckup that is shields having high inhate resist versus torpedoes and the fact that a slight sliver of shield bar basically devalues the best High yield volley it conspired to make torpedoes a questionable tool from day one.
And there was no point to it!
It is high time all torpedoes get a overhaul in the basic mechanic of how they work.
Honestly, i think its time to break down the artificial barrier between torpedoes and energy weapons.
Remove the artificial damage resistance and diversify the damages dealt by torpedoes.
An Am/M warhead will produce radiation, heat, rest antimatter will react with hull materials, flash vaporized materails will deal more damage to the surrounding hull, shrapnel from those vaporizations will deal a bit of kinetic damage...
Players should have the option to employ heavy torpedo builds if they so chose and not be punished by artificial limiters.
If torpedoes deal less damage against shields than against hull, energy weapons should deal less damage against hull than against shields.
How much less needs to be, I leave to the devs to figure out. But that single chance could make a notable difference in torpedo usage.
That's actually not how it works. The damage reduction from the shields is calculated out of the final damage that goes to hull. Basically if it you deal 100 damage, the shields would take 25. But if the shields only have 20 hit poitns remaining, that would mean only 80 % of your damage was absorbed by the shield, the remainig 20 still hit for full damage, instead of 5 damage that you might assume. And thus it works pretty much "fair".
That's as far as I read.
"I'm making a claim, but I'm not going to support that claim in any fashion."
/facepalm
Here's something to think about...
4x DHCs at 125 Weapon Power vs. 4x Photons.
174 * 4 * 2.5 = 1740 * 2 = 3480 / 3.5 = 994
1352 / 1.5 = 901
4x DBBs at 125 Weapon Power vs. 4x Photons
130 * 4 * 2.5 = 1300 *4 = 5200 / 5.5 = 945
1352 / 1.5 = 901
Hrmm, do we have a point where they all might meet up?
3.5 / 7.0 / 10.5
5.5 / 11.0
1.5 / 3.0 / 4.5 / 6.0 / 7.5 / 9.0 / 10.5
DHCs: 1740 * 2 * 3 = 10440 / 10.5 = 994
DBBs: 1300 * 4 * 2 = 10400 / 10.5 = 990 (not going to count the 0.5s where nothing happened anyway)
Photons: 1352 / 1.5 = 901 (the torp is consistent, one every 1.5s)
So the argument, imho, could definitely be made that there is a DPS issue. And Hell, that's before getting into CRF/CSV/FAW...
What about DPS from a single weapon?
DHC: 174 * 2.5 * 2 / 3.5 = 248.6
DBB: 130 * 2.5 * 4 / 5.5 = 236.4
Photon: 1352 / 6.5 = 208
Definitely not looking good for the Photons here, eh? What if folks ran the PWO DOFFs to get that Photon down to 1.5?
Photon: 1352 / 1.5 = 901
But neither the DHC nor DBB required DOFFs.
Now, one could compare a HY3 Quantum to a BO3 DBB...see that even without Tac consoles, the HY3 will hit harder than the BO3 with Tac consoles.
But that's a very limited view of everything going on, yeah?
But wait, that DHC/DBB damage was with fudged 125 Weapon Power...what if it was just an average of 100 instead? Okay then, just looking at the last example there...
DHC: 174 * 2 * 2 / 3.5 = 198.9
DBB: 130 * 2 * 4 / 5.5 = 189.1
Photon: 1352 / 6.5 = 208
What if Weapon Power was just an average of 75, eh?
DHC: 174 * 1.5 * 2 / 3.5 = 149.1
DBB: 130 * 1.5 * 4 / 5.5 = 141.8
Photon: 1352 / 6.5 = 208
If you were to go back the 4x...
DHC: 174 * 1.5 * 2 / 3.5 = 149.1 * 4 = 596.4
DBB: 130 * 1.5 * 4 / 5.5 = 141.8 * 4 = 567.2
Photon: 1352 / 1.5 = 901
So we can see that Weapon Power plays a pretty big roll there, yeah? So let's consider what's happened over the years, eh? Remember when they nerfed +Pwr consoles because they didn't want people to have too much power? Lol, we've come a long way since then, right? With discussions on overcapping, capping multiple systems, stuff like AMP and all the rest...we're oozing power these days.
So if Projectiles were "balanced" at one point based on anything to do with Weapon Power being at anything less than pretty much 125; then imho they'd woefully be out of balance in today's game.
Course, that's still not going to do anything for state of buffs. Imagine if HY or TS was a 10-15s duration buff that applied to all torps fired during that time instead of just the first torp and that was it, eh?
Oh well, enough of this...must DOFF.
I'm not sure you realize how much burst damage a high yield volley of torps can do. You can knock off half of a ship's hull in one pass, which is something you cannot do with energy weapons. They are designed as burst weapons, not constant damage (some exceptions withstanding)
Plus they don't use weapons energy. If they did as much damage to shields as they do to hull, no one would ever use energy weapons. They could just dump all their energy into shields and engines.
That's game balance for you.
From my perspective, that's kind of already there. It's just how you look at it.
So torp does 1 damage to shield, or 4 damage to hull. Torps, from that perspective, do 4 times as much damage to hull (in reality it's that they do 75% less to shields, but the result supports either perspective).
Then my energy weapon does 2 damage to shields or 2 damage to hull. If my perspective is that torps do more damage to hulls, energy weapons, by comparison, are a worse weapon to hit hull with, because they don't get that 4x multiplier vs hull.
And, while for dps purposes, energy weapons come out on top for general dps, I've never seen weapon one-hits come anywhere near the torp one-hits I've seen, even with SS3 crits from a crtdx4 ap weapon.
So, when comparing energy weapons and torps, that mechanic is basically already in place. It's just about perspective.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!