I like the idea of the consoles... instead of worrying about how to pair Phasers and Photons and DIsruptors and Quantums ect ect....
I think the easiest way to do it would be to...
Remove the General consoles... the warhead yield / geometry / Distribution manifold / prefire chamber.
Replace them with ONE console that Boosts Energy/Kinetic... with the exact same numbers those consoles have now.
I agree this would probably be the simplest way to add more variety to builds without a series of nerfs and buffs and severe mechanic changes. Not the end all be all but a good start. The risk of nearly doubling damage output might be mitigated by the fact to take advantage of this you have to reduce the number of phasers/cannons on your build.
I like the idea of the consoles... instead of worrying about how to pair Phasers and Photons and DIsruptors and Quantums ect ect....
I think the easiest way to do it would be to...
Remove the General consoles... the warhead yield / geometry / Distribution manifold / prefire chamber.
Replace them with ONE console that Boosts Energy/Kinetic... with the exact same numbers those consoles have now.
I agree this would probably be the simplest way to add more variety to builds without a series of nerfs and buffs and severe mechanic changes. Not the end all be all but a good start. The risk of nearly doubling damage output might be mitigated by the fact to take advantage of this you have to reduce the number of phasers/cannons on your build.
The only builds that could be looking at a dmg increase would be the ones everyone says are woefully substandard now. There is still no way that a ship using a setup with a "dual" warhead/beam console would out dmg a min max ship running all of either. It would just bring them up to a closer number. (dmg type consoles still buff more). It would just make the RP builds not completely terrible. Putting one torpedo on a ship running energy dmg consoles right now is seen as dumb because well it is. IMO a console that buffed everything and anything, just a little bit less would allow people to make those combo builds and not be laughed at, as they would be more then good enough if still not 100% optimal.
I believe optimal piloting and optimal build should be the comparison. Piloting regardless of weapons platforms affects most of your DPS. That is why the issue for this has always been the player. However, since certain players in the STO forum are ego sensitive and will keep denying the problem is them and would rather blame mechanics, you get threads like these.
snipped
I am sorry but I laugh hysterically at the use of the word 'piloting' to describe BFaW 100k+ DPS runs in ISA. Because what that actually means is a well timed 6-10 button power use sequence and 4 parking spots for your $200 boat.
I am intersted to hear you say that the top of the DPS charts are all hyrbid builds because I have NEVER seen that. I use the STO combat meter, and the highest performing ISA scores this month are all using APBs. The only noticeable change in the stats is that kemocite has begun to feature strongly in the scores.
Nonetheless, this is moving very far away from the intention of the thread. I was hoping to generate interest in restoring star trek style hyrbid builds to STO, and unless that is made either mandatory, or optimal then it wont happen.
For me, it comes down to the fact that torpedoes are too great an investment of virtually everything (skill points, console slots, weapon slots, Boff abilities, set pieces, Doff bonuses, etc.) at the expense of my ability to maximize my energy damage. The trade-off simply isn't worth it. I have to purposefully and severely gimp myself in one area for inadequate gains in a distinctly less beneficial area. It's nonsensical. The game is basically forcing me to choose, so I choose to forgo torpedoes.
I'd love to be able to include torpedoes into my builds. But right now, doing so is far too demanding to be practically viable.
I am sorry but I laugh hysterically at the use of the word 'piloting' to describe BFaW 100k+ DPS runs in ISA. Because what that actually means is a well timed 6-10 button power use sequence and 4 parking spots for your $200 boat.
Since you discount piloting from beams, Please show me thousands of noobs doing 100k+ DPS with pure Beams. Besides the same group of players doing pure Beam before are doing hybrid builds now. But in no way the same whiner bfaw haters in this thread are near their dps. So yes, piloting is one of the problem. Most like yours as well.
I am intersted to hear you say that the top of the DPS charts are all hyrbid builds because I have NEVER seen that. I use the STO combat meter, and the highest performing ISA scores this month are all using APBs. The only noticeable change in the stats is that kemocite has begun to feature strongly in the scores.
It seems this is one of the common denominators of players who complain like yourself. Lazy to research but has time keep posting and complaining at Forums.
In order for you to understand let me get this straight, you have an SCM, you wont know if the top dpsers has kemo unless you looked at the parse. That means you would see the weapons including the torps. Let us check #1 Eternal, using beams and neutronic torp, #2 SoB, well what do you know torps and beams, #3 Nike, same thing. I can keep going on and on. But dont want to spoonfeed you. It is the same problem I had with one of the same players posting in this thread with the same attitude as you, kept insisting on another thread that Beams are superior in CCA even though you got the top dpsers at CCA as pure torps. Too lazy to research the correct information but has no problem posting the incorrect information or posting misinformation.
Nonetheless, this is moving very far away from the intention of the thread. I was hoping to generate interest in restoring star trek style hyrbid builds to STO, and unless that is made either mandatory, or optimal then it wont happen.
Forcing others to play a certain type of build. Killing diversity. I am against this.
I would have pointed you to the right direction had your OP had been asking for an optimal hybrid build instead of your OP.
That has been the issue I have been pointing out in this thread. The problem is marketing/information not the weapons platforms themselves. Pure Beam builds are cookie-cutter builds meaning guides, videos have been mass produced by the players. It is easy to be spoonfed with information from pure beams because they are now available. Your ignorance of the top dpsers using hybrid builds show that information/marketing is one of the problems rather than mechanics themselves. If it is the weapons platforms/mechanics that are the problem, then the Top dpser/s wont be parsing hybrids as top dps.
^The main reason why we don't use them is because they are not mandatory on every ship that is supposed to have them. Only VERY LOW level science ships are not supposed to have torpedoes. All Cryptic has to do is add a slot or two, based on the type of ship, for torpedoes and/or mines. All ships will have a torpedo slot, but some will have an extra one in the rear or a mine slot in the rear. This is how the show was and it should be how the game is also.
The problem is, this doesn't address the core issues that mines and torpedoes have. Having slots for a torp/mine only doesn't guarantee either use or effectiveness. Maybe it might get more people to see what's wrong with them in the current game environment, though.
^It does guarantee use because no one will leave a slot empty, but yes a massive shield reduction for torpedoes and boost fvs. Hull would be nice too. But, making all these torpedo only ships also throws off cannon and usefullness. Personally, the game really needs to be thought out more in terms of the show, and find a way to make it fun, with options without push DPS.
Having one slotted doesn't constitute use. Unless it is properly contributing to your build, then it is nothing but a wasted weapon.
@paxdawn I think Kemocite contributed well enough to make it worth for the top 3 SCM chart players to run torps in their build. Not only does Kemocite add direct damage, it also adds a resistance debuff. It basically replaced the plasma explosions for them. Not to mention it is currently broken (double-proc).
Kemocite isn't a skill that is widely available to the general player base. If it were, then more "canon" builds would be more popular.
I am sorry but I laugh hysterically at the use of the word 'piloting' to describe BFaW 100k+ DPS runs in ISA. Because what that actually means is a well timed 6-10 button power use sequence and 4 parking spots for your $200 boat.
I am intersted to hear you say that the top of the DPS charts are all hyrbid builds because I have NEVER seen that. I use the STO combat meter, and the highest performing ISA scores this month are all using APBs. The only noticeable change in the stats is that kemocite has begun to feature strongly in the scores.
Nonetheless, this is moving very far away from the intention of the thread. I was hoping to generate interest in restoring star trek style hyrbid builds to STO, and unless that is made either mandatory, or optimal then it wont happen.
He will personally attack you and your "skillz" (he'll call it "piloting") when you say things like that. He's convinced there's no balance problem and it's all about the player and that people aren't advertising builds for other damage types, as if advertising DHC builds would make them on-par with BFAW APB builds. I won't even respond to him anymore. It's not worth the frustration.
I fear star trek style builds will never be optimal. That doesn't mean I won't use them. I hate the idea of not carrying at least a single foreward torpedo on a star trek ship. Doesn't have to be photon or quantum but there has to be at least one foreward torpedo. More than one foreward torpedo is starting to get weird (it may be canon but it reduces available energy weapons which isn't), and all torps is non-canon even if it's optimal for certain content, so it can be fun to use at times but shouldn't be a go-to build for everything.
I like the idea of diversity in a game like this but I don't like how the devs game never got the balance correct. It's always all-or-nothing when it comes to weapon types. It used to be DHC, now it's beams, and occasionally a specialized torp boat excels. You always had to stack the same weapon type with the proper consoles for best effect.
Part of that problem is the consoles themselves and the way they stack, or should I say the fact there's no diminishing returns for tactical consoles (and to counter that, adding diminishing returns might just push people toward rainbow boats so I'm not advocating for that). The problem is deeper than that though. You have to consider things like torpedoes vs shields, energy beams vs bare hull, overcapping weapons power, BFAW etc.
I'm fully convinced by the way that torpedoes were nerfed like they were because they're an infinite resource. That's not to say making them finite and increasing their damage will fix them, but they're in this state because someone decided players would have an infinite supply of them and therefore they couldn't do the damage we saw in the show and movies.
^The main reason why we don't use them is because they are not mandatory on every ship that is supposed to have them. Only VERY LOW level science ships are not supposed to have torpedoes. All Cryptic has to do is add a slot or two, based on the type of ship, for torpedoes and/or mines. All ships will have a torpedo slot, but some will have an extra one in the rear or a mine slot in the rear. This is how the show was and it should be how the game is also.
The problem is, this doesn't address the core issues that mines and torpedoes have. Having slots for a torp/mine only doesn't guarantee either use or effectiveness. Maybe it might get more people to see what's wrong with them in the current game environment, though.
^It does guarantee use because no one will leave a slot empty, but yes a massive shield reduction for torpedoes and boost fvs. Hull would be nice too. But, making all these torpedo only ships also throws off cannon and usefullness. Personally, the game really needs to be thought out more in terms of the show, and find a way to make it fun, with options without push DPS.
Having one slotted doesn't constitute use. Unless it is properly contributing to your build, then it is nothing but a wasted weapon.
@paxdawn I think Kemocite contributed well enough to make it worth for the top 3 SCM chart players to run torps in their build. Not only does Kemocite add direct damage, it also adds a resistance debuff. It basically replaced the plasma explosions for them. Not to mention it is currently broken (double-proc).
Kemocite isn't a skill that is widely available to the general player base. If it were, then more "canon" builds would be more popular.
The problem with kemocite is not everyone can afford it
Having one slotted doesn't constitute use. Unless it is properly contributing to your build, then it is nothing but a wasted weapon.
When is a build Hybrid build? When you say so? Lets check Eternals parse. total DPS front is around 65k DPS. Scimitar so 4 Beams which would mean 16k DPS per beam. Neutronic Spread is 25k DPS. I havent even counted the Kemo yet. Wasted weapon huh?
Kemocite isn't a skill that is widely available to the general player base.
Why do we have to limit ourselves with a certain particular build by restricting ourselves with power because players cannot afford it? Does this mean we also restrict ourselves by not using Epic weapons? Because they are just as expensive as the kemocite. And more expensive collectively. Does this mean you are also not allowed to use your epic weapons, epic sets, epic stuff for your torp build? Or is your logic just for kemo?
The problem with kemocite is not everyone can afford it
And what is the problem of not having kemocite? The debuff is replaceable with nanny debuffs. While you still can use Focused assault as a replacement. Besides what is losing 27k from 194k DPS?
Unless you are all within their range of competition, meaning your piloting skills as good as they are, I see no sense of debating this.
If we are talking about common pilot quality, then that pilot needs to improve piloting more than change mechanics.
Since you discount piloting from beams, Please show me thousands of noobs doing 100k+ DPS with pure Beams. Besides the same group of players doing pure Beam before are doing hybrid builds now. But in no way the same whiner bfaw haters in this thread are near their dps. So yes, piloting is one of the problem. Most like yours as well.
Snipped
Okay so you got me there, which is super annoying because I had looked through those top 10 scores and had seen the Neutronic featuring, but only once. What I had not done was appreciate the plasma damage was from torpedoes, as there was just a single entry in the parse I thought that was a secondary effect rather than a torpedo, which I would have expected to be named. If you are certain this is a torpedo in each case rather than something form a console or something else then this is indeed excellent progress.
The whole system needs a complete overhaul from the ground up, because it's not only that energy weapons are superior to torps, but the gap is getting larger and larger. More and more items/abilities/traits are getting released that heavily benefit energy weapons. So even if we buff the damage up, give it a few months and we'll have the same problem we do now.
When we discussed the Strategic Secondary Deflectors [+Energy Dmg] on reddit and asked why there's no [+Kinetic Dmg] mod availableon borticus stated:
That sounds to me like the underlying system (on a code basis) is the root problem, and not only how it's balanced against energy weapons.
Kemocite is pretty much the only thing released in the last months that can be really good for torpedoes, but as a lockbox trait it is stupidly expensive to the point where not even more advanced players can afford it (This really should have been more readily available and it's a slap in the face for the average torp user!). And it also benefits energy weapons...
That sounds to me like the underlying system (on a code basis) is the root problem, and not only how it's balanced against energy weapons.
i doubt code has anything to do with it. its just code, something as simple as saying base damage=3000 or 300000. It sounds more like the problem is how to monitor and control exploitable mechanics of a strong weapon. But then, if torpedoes were one shotting players in beta and they were nerfed (more like swept under the rug until a solution could be devised) then why let energy weapons get to the same point now?
It reminds me of the phaser proc. the only weapon with a mandatory immunity virtually negating its 2.5% chance to proc. From what I've read on the forums the phaser proc used to have players disabled left and right before the immunity was added. It would seem the original idea was to make the weapons resemble their effectiveness from the shows and players complained and instead of coming up with a more thoughtful solution they just got castrated them and they have since remained so.
[
Okay so you got me there, which is super annoying because I had looked through those top 10 scores and had seen the Neutronic featuring, but only once. What I had not done was appreciate the plasma damage was from torpedoes, as there was just a single entry in the parse I thought that was a secondary effect rather than a torpedo, which I would have expected to be named. If you are certain this is a torpedo in each case rather than something form a console or something else then this is indeed excellent progress.
How far back though does that go though? Neutronic with TS3 was recently changed to damage 10 targets max. Up to March it was OP with bugged damage values.
Kemocite is bugged too, as well as a lot of torpedoes with TS:
Neutronic is a great torpedo. I think neutronic, gravimetric and particle emission might be the only ones worth using, but that doesn't mean torpedoes are OK.
Neutronic with TS3 was recently changed to damage 10 targets max. Up to March it was OP with bugged damage values.
I asked Borticus what the 10 maximum target limit actually meant and he said it was a 10-target limit per explosion. That won't make a difference at all on an ISA run.
You are right though. Only a select few torpedoes are really desirable due to their secondary effects.
I asked Borticus what the 10 maximum target limit actually meant and he said it was a 10-target limit per explosion. That won't make a difference at all on an ISA run.
You are right though. Only a select few torpedoes are really desirable due to their secondary effects.
Lol then that change barely affects anything. It will never be noticed.
There are a lot of weird problems with torpedoes though. Neutronic damage was bugged but that's only one of many problems they need to fix.
What I really want them to do is fix the Omega torpedo. A very slow-moving targetable torpedo based on the technology behind the unimatrix one-shot plasma bolt, and shares the digitizing/vaporizing effect of the V'ger mega plasma bolt, should be pretty damned devastating wouldn't you think?
The mechanic that has torps injurying or killing off crew is one of the problems with torps. Dead crew lowers tact team dmg bonus and combat hull repair. No one dose anything to preserve crew. No one needs too. That said, I've pvp'ed against fleet pre mades with torp ships that would make John Paul Jones totally skid mark his boxers.
In general this game has the goldielocks problem; that is finding a balance that is neither too hot(Feedback pulse death so fast you couldn't blink quicker)or too cold(the Borg Sphere with 1800 mega-giga-lol-yawn-hit point pool).
Neutronic with TS3 was recently changed to damage 10 targets max. Up to March it was OP with bugged damage values.
I asked Borticus what the 10 maximum target limit actually meant and he said it was a 10-target limit per explosion. That won't make a difference at all on an ISA run.
You are right though. Only a select few torpedoes are really desirable due to their secondary effects.
The same can be said of beams. However I don't see it as diserability I see it as Diversity. You can't have everything doing the same thing with the same strength or weaknesses. For example neutronic has an aoe but the cd of undine torp is better, the crystalline AP torp is easier to build if you got AP weapons, etc, etc. it comes down how a player leverages the build and piloting which was my point right at the beginning. people with the wrong build, information/marketing, with bad piloting always end up with these threads and whining at forums.
Otherwise your rationailty is the same as those complaints on phaser vs antiproton. Players wanting +20 crtd of antiproton without actually considering how one player leverages build with phasers. E.g. Instead of an ap scimitar, you would have an fper phaser which would leverage the strength of phasers instead of forcing phasers in the scimitar and compare it with ap scimitars.
With regards to kemo proc, I haven't seen the devs admit if it is wai or not, all I am seeing are players asking to nerf kemocite. If so, the problem would be just nerf rage by players.
The same can be said of beams. However I don't see it as diserability I see it as Diversity. You can't have everything doing the same thing with the same strength or weaknesses. For example neutronic has an aoe but the cd of undine torp is better, the crystalline AP torp is easier to build if you got AP weapons, etc, etc. it comes down how a player leverages the build and piloting which was my point right at the beginning. people with the wrong build, information/marketing, with bad piloting always end up with these threads and whining at forums.
Otherwise your rationailty is the same as those complaints on phaser vs antiproton. Players wanting +20 crtd of antiproton without actually considering how one player leverages build with phasers. E.g. Instead of an ap scimitar, you would have an fper phaser which would leverage the strength of phasers instead of forcing phasers in the scimitar and compare it with ap scimitars.
The problem though is that there are torpedoes that are broken (tricobalts without working mods for example). I think fixing the broken mechanics (especially when upgrading torps in rarity) need to be addressed. Fixing those will really create diversity. Right now, you really don't have diversity.
With regards to kemo proc, I haven't seen the devs admit if it is wai or not, all I am seeing are players asking to nerf kemocite. If so, the problem would be just nerf rage by players.
It's not really a nerf it is a fix isn't it? And mind you, the people asking for it to be fixed are also those who will be hit by such a fix such as @darkknightucf (and to a certain extent, me). I would gladly lose the kemocite double-proc if they'd start fixing the bugs plaguing torpedoes.
I always have at least a forward torpedo on my ships. Partially because I prefer "proper Trek" loadouts (most of my ships are near canon builds mostly for story/normal queue PvE use), partially because I still find them useful even in my "serious" builds (typically for some secondary effect or at least set bonus) which do more than enough damage to compete in Advanced PvE. I've little interest in chasing DPS beyond that. Game's not fun when you can just FAWspam everything in seconds with your $200 copypasta keybind warrior snoozeboat IMO
That said, I do agree that torpedoes do need a bit of a rework to make them a bit more effective outside of speciality builds. More in line with what we see on-screen (bar DS9, where "this week's bad guys" seemed to forget to turn their shields on most of the time ).
You've got several Command Spec buffs helping, but I'd like to see something like the Exploit mechanic from there becoming "built in" (and buffed a bit so it fires off more reliably). It's at least soft canon anyway (see the "Dimpling" comment above ref. the TNG Tech Manual). Either that or reduce shields raw kinetic resist, canonically torpedoes aren't that effective against shielded targets but they shouldn't be near useless.
More consoles like the recent FE's combined Disruptor/Transphasic damage (20/20) would be nice for those that want to run hybrids in any case, preferably in more common combinations (canon at worst, craftable "pick your own" at best ?).
The same can be said of beams. However I don't see it as diserability I see it as Diversity. You can't have everything doing the same thing with the same strength or weaknesses. For example neutronic has an aoe but the cd of undine torp is better, the crystalline AP torp is easier to build if you got AP weapons, etc, etc. it comes down how a player leverages the build and piloting which was my point right at the beginning. people with the wrong build, information/marketing, with bad piloting always end up with these threads and whining at forums.
Otherwise your rationailty is the same as those complaints on phaser vs antiproton. Players wanting +20 crtd of antiproton without actually considering how one player leverages build with phasers. E.g. Instead of an ap scimitar, you would have an fper phaser which would leverage the strength of phasers instead of forcing phasers in the scimitar and compare it with ap scimitars.
The problem though is that there are torpedoes that are broken (tricobalts without working mods for example). I think fixing the broken mechanics (especially when upgrading torps in rarity) need to be addressed. Fixing those will really create diversity. Right now, you really don't have diversity.
What your saying is not about diversity but adding/fixing stuff. Diversity means players have multiple options, which we currently have. Problem is compounded if you restrict yourself to one weapon type or you have personal restrictions of what to play. So if you are restrictive to playing kinetics you are options become smaller because of personal restriction.
It's not really a nerf it is a fix isn't it? And mind you, the people asking for it to be fixed are also those who will be hit by such a fix such as @darkknightucf (and to a certain extent, me). I would gladly lose the kemocite double-proc if they'd start fixing the bugs plaguing torpedoes.
It becomes a fix if the devs admit it's not wai. If it is WAi on the current stage regardless if players don't like its WAI stage, then you are asking for a nerf.
Whilst I would loved hybrid consoles (like 3 years ago), I'm not sure they would change much in todays STO.
"Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
Heres a thought - Why not simply do away with that atrocious torp gcd rather than tweak everything else? Its been proven the gcd is removable, so why not go all the way and release all torps from that yoke?
We don't use torpedoes? since when? I'm confused now. I've always used torpedoes, at least one tube on every ship and never plan on changing that.
"He shall be my finest warrior, this generic man who was forced upon me.
Like a badass I shall make him look, and in the furnace of war I shall forge him.
he shall be of iron will and steely sinew.
In great armour I shall clad him and with the mightiest weapons he shall be armed.
He will be untouched by plague or disease; no sickness shall blight him.
He shall have such tactics, strategies and machines that no foe will best him in battle.
He is my answer to cryptic logic, he is the Defender of my Romulan Crew.
He is Tovan Khev... and he shall know no fear."
[
Okay so you got me there, which is super annoying because I had looked through those top 10 scores and had seen the Neutronic featuring, but only once. What I had not done was appreciate the plasma damage was from torpedoes, as there was just a single entry in the parse I thought that was a secondary effect rather than a torpedo, which I would have expected to be named. If you are certain this is a torpedo in each case rather than something form a console or something else then this is indeed excellent progress.
How far back though does that go though? Neutronic with TS3 was recently changed to damage 10 targets max. Up to March it was OP with bugged damage values.
Kemocite is bugged too, as well as a lot of torpedoes with TS:
Neutronic is a great torpedo. I think neutronic, gravimetric and particle emission might be the only ones worth using, but that doesn't mean torpedoes are OK.
I cannot believe I am about to say this after calling it the worst torpedo in the game but the advanced Radiant Quantum torpedo can be well worth using.
I cannot believe I am about to say this after calling it the worst torpedo in the game but the advanced Radiant Quantum torpedo can be well worth using.
That one doesn't seem too bad. The chain proc looks useful and has a pretty high chance considering the normal proc rate of other weapons.
Yesterday I got my new mk XII particle emission torpedo to HY3 crit for 137k damage (and my heavy plasma lance to crit for even higher by the way). Absolutely crazy amount of damage and it's not upgraded. I've had similar high spikes with the enhanced bio torp. They're not common and rely on RNG but they do occur.
The HY3 PEP is very slow and can be destroyed which does help balance it. I've had more HY PEPs shot down than hit so it requires timing to make it work. I use TS3 more often as well.
I like the idea of the consoles... instead of worrying about how to pair Phasers and Photons and DIsruptors and Quantums ect ect....
I think the easiest way to do it would be to...
Remove the General consoles... the warhead yield / geometry / Distribution manifold / prefire chamber.
Replace them with ONE console that Boosts Energy/Kinetic... with the exact same numbers those consoles have now.
I agree this would probably be the simplest way to add more variety to builds without a series of nerfs and buffs and severe mechanic changes. Not the end all be all but a good start. The risk of nearly doubling damage output might be mitigated by the fact to take advantage of this you have to reduce the number of phasers/cannons on your build.
The only builds that could be looking at a dmg increase would be the ones everyone says are woefully substandard now. There is still no way that a ship using a setup with a "dual" warhead/beam console would out dmg a min max ship running all of either. It would just bring them up to a closer number. (dmg type consoles still buff more). It would just make the RP builds not completely terrible. Putting one torpedo on a ship running energy dmg consoles right now is seen as dumb because well it is. IMO a console that buffed everything and anything, just a little bit less would allow people to make those combo builds and not be laughed at, as they would be more then good enough if still not 100% optimal.
is it? there are sets and consoles that significantly boost torpedoes, like the adapted MACO 2 pc that bumps torp damage 25% if you use the gravimetric torp and console thats a gravimetric torp bumped by 5%. which is why i ask the question, on a ship with that setup, would the gravimetric be superior to a neutronic torp?
I like the idea of the consoles... instead of worrying about how to pair Phasers and Photons and DIsruptors and Quantums ect ect....
I think the easiest way to do it would be to...
Remove the General consoles... the warhead yield / geometry / Distribution manifold / prefire chamber.
Replace them with ONE console that Boosts Energy/Kinetic... with the exact same numbers those consoles have now.
I agree this would probably be the simplest way to add more variety to builds without a series of nerfs and buffs and severe mechanic changes. Not the end all be all but a good start. The risk of nearly doubling damage output might be mitigated by the fact to take advantage of this you have to reduce the number of phasers/cannons on your build.
The only builds that could be looking at a dmg increase would be the ones everyone says are woefully substandard now. There is still no way that a ship using a setup with a "dual" warhead/beam console would out dmg a min max ship running all of either. It would just bring them up to a closer number. (dmg type consoles still buff more). It would just make the RP builds not completely terrible. Putting one torpedo on a ship running energy dmg consoles right now is seen as dumb because well it is. IMO a console that buffed everything and anything, just a little bit less would allow people to make those combo builds and not be laughed at, as they would be more then good enough if still not 100% optimal.
is it? there are sets and consoles that significantly boost torpedoes, like the adapted MACO 2 pc that bumps torp damage 25% if you use the gravimetric torp and console thats a gravimetric torp bumped by 5%. which is why i ask the question, on a ship with that setup, would the gravimetric be superior to a neutronic torp?
If you really really wanted to run just one torp on a ship... then yes photon makes more sense and then you are looking at the Bio_enhanced... or the Grave Torp. As you point out both have boosts that don't eat tac console space. The bio Photon set is nice in that the tac console boosts both and the 2 piece is = to a console. So you can run that torp + disruptors or phasers and not loose anything energy wise. (however you are still giving up a weapon hard point for a torpedo with dmg boosts only = to 1-2 consoles at most)... so I would say that although its LESS of a drop it is still a drop over just running all energy.
The only build I have found myself to be semi viable as a mix.... is running both. Bio-enhanced + set bonus, as well as Grave photon with the set. That means you are running 2 torps though... but the advantage there anyway is torpedo doffs start to make a difference. (2 torps proc the doffs a lot faster and those 2 torps with 3 doffs can be a constant stream of torps). Although I found on that build the DPS was better still if you dumped all the energy consoles and just ran Torpedo consoles.
Still full energy or full torp was more dps unless I missed some other way to boost that build. Still it was a 30k build... so not unviable. The idea of removing all the Boost all consoles like the warheads and manifolds and replacing them with one genaric that boosted ALL kinetic and Energy... would just open that possible build up for anyone that wants to run it with anything... It wouldn't be a perfect fix. It would mean that the best energy can bust 100k DPS the best torp can bust 80k DPS... and at least people insisting on running more canon setups can still hope to hit 40-50k and be viable at least.
I like the idea of the consoles... instead of worrying about how to pair Phasers and Photons and DIsruptors and Quantums ect ect....
I think the easiest way to do it would be to...
Remove the General consoles... the warhead yield / geometry / Distribution manifold / prefire chamber.
Replace them with ONE console that Boosts Energy/Kinetic... with the exact same numbers those consoles have now.
I agree this would probably be the simplest way to add more variety to builds without a series of nerfs and buffs and severe mechanic changes. Not the end all be all but a good start. The risk of nearly doubling damage output might be mitigated by the fact to take advantage of this you have to reduce the number of phasers/cannons on your build.
The only builds that could be looking at a dmg increase would be the ones everyone says are woefully substandard now. There is still no way that a ship using a setup with a "dual" warhead/beam console would out dmg a min max ship running all of either. It would just bring them up to a closer number. (dmg type consoles still buff more). It would just make the RP builds not completely terrible. Putting one torpedo on a ship running energy dmg consoles right now is seen as dumb because well it is. IMO a console that buffed everything and anything, just a little bit less would allow people to make those combo builds and not be laughed at, as they would be more then good enough if still not 100% optimal.
is it? there are sets and consoles that significantly boost torpedoes, like the adapted MACO 2 pc that bumps torp damage 25% if you use the gravimetric torp and console thats a gravimetric torp bumped by 5%. which is why i ask the question, on a ship with that setup, would the gravimetric be superior to a neutronic torp?
If you really really wanted to run just one torp on a ship... then yes photon makes more sense and then you are looking at the Bio_enhanced... or the Grave Torp. As you point out both have boosts that don't eat tac console space. The bio Photon set is nice in that the tac console boosts both and the 2 piece is = to a console. So you can run that torp + disruptors or phasers and not loose anything energy wise. (however you are still giving up a weapon hard point for a torpedo with dmg boosts only = to 1-2 consoles at most)... so I would say that although its LESS of a drop it is still a drop over just running all energy.
The only build I have found myself to be semi viable as a mix.... is running both. Bio-enhanced + set bonus, as well as Grave photon with the set. That means you are running 2 torps though... but the advantage there anyway is torpedo doffs start to make a difference. (2 torps proc the doffs a lot faster and those 2 torps with 3 doffs can be a constant stream of torps). Although I found on that build the DPS was better still if you dumped all the energy consoles and just ran Torpedo consoles.
Still full energy or full torp was more dps unless I missed some other way to boost that build. Still it was a 30k build... so not unviable. The idea of removing all the Boost all consoles like the warheads and manifolds and replacing them with one genaric that boosted ALL kinetic and Energy... would just open that possible build up for anyone that wants to run it with anything... It wouldn't be a perfect fix. It would mean that the best energy can bust 100k DPS the best torp can bust 80k DPS... and at least people insisting on running more canon setups can still hope to hit 40-50k and be viable at least.
I actually do run two torps on a cruiser one fore and one aft, been running the gravimetric and bio. been playing around with putting the hyper on as well against the vaadwaur and iconians. with the other three back slots filled with the two ap 360s and the KCB, as long as i can keep the target withing the front 270* i have 5 beams on target and the torps hammering away. only when they get behind me do i run into problems, and TS3 is a way to keep them honest
I actually do run two torps on a cruiser one fore and one aft, been running the gravimetric and bio. been playing around with putting the hyper on as well against the vaadwaur and iconians. with the other three back slots filled with the two ap 360s and the KCB, as long as i can keep the target withing the front 270* i have 5 beams on target and the torps hammering away. only when they get behind me do i run into problems, and TS3 is a way to keep them honest
Try putting both torps up front and run at least 2, and 3 if you can torp doffs. the 360s +KCB in the back are fine... just throw another beam in the back.
By having both torps in the front you can focus on keeping them firing (with the doffs). By splitting them one fore and aft you really loose that torp shotgun effect that you want if your going to bother with kinetic at all.
Comments
I agree this would probably be the simplest way to add more variety to builds without a series of nerfs and buffs and severe mechanic changes. Not the end all be all but a good start. The risk of nearly doubling damage output might be mitigated by the fact to take advantage of this you have to reduce the number of phasers/cannons on your build.
The only builds that could be looking at a dmg increase would be the ones everyone says are woefully substandard now. There is still no way that a ship using a setup with a "dual" warhead/beam console would out dmg a min max ship running all of either. It would just bring them up to a closer number. (dmg type consoles still buff more). It would just make the RP builds not completely terrible. Putting one torpedo on a ship running energy dmg consoles right now is seen as dumb because well it is.
I am sorry but I laugh hysterically at the use of the word 'piloting' to describe BFaW 100k+ DPS runs in ISA. Because what that actually means is a well timed 6-10 button power use sequence and 4 parking spots for your $200 boat.
I am intersted to hear you say that the top of the DPS charts are all hyrbid builds because I have NEVER seen that. I use the STO combat meter, and the highest performing ISA scores this month are all using APBs. The only noticeable change in the stats is that kemocite has begun to feature strongly in the scores.
Nonetheless, this is moving very far away from the intention of the thread. I was hoping to generate interest in restoring star trek style hyrbid builds to STO, and unless that is made either mandatory, or optimal then it wont happen.
I'd love to be able to include torpedoes into my builds. But right now, doing so is far too demanding to be practically viable.
Since you discount piloting from beams, Please show me thousands of noobs doing 100k+ DPS with pure Beams. Besides the same group of players doing pure Beam before are doing hybrid builds now. But in no way the same whiner bfaw haters in this thread are near their dps. So yes, piloting is one of the problem. Most like yours as well.
It seems this is one of the common denominators of players who complain like yourself. Lazy to research but has time keep posting and complaining at Forums.
In order for you to understand let me get this straight, you have an SCM, you wont know if the top dpsers has kemo unless you looked at the parse. That means you would see the weapons including the torps. Let us check #1 Eternal, using beams and neutronic torp, #2 SoB, well what do you know torps and beams, #3 Nike, same thing. I can keep going on and on. But dont want to spoonfeed you. It is the same problem I had with one of the same players posting in this thread with the same attitude as you, kept insisting on another thread that Beams are superior in CCA even though you got the top dpsers at CCA as pure torps. Too lazy to research the correct information but has no problem posting the incorrect information or posting misinformation.
Forcing others to play a certain type of build. Killing diversity. I am against this.
I would have pointed you to the right direction had your OP had been asking for an optimal hybrid build instead of your OP.
That has been the issue I have been pointing out in this thread. The problem is marketing/information not the weapons platforms themselves. Pure Beam builds are cookie-cutter builds meaning guides, videos have been mass produced by the players. It is easy to be spoonfed with information from pure beams because they are now available. Your ignorance of the top dpsers using hybrid builds show that information/marketing is one of the problems rather than mechanics themselves. If it is the weapons platforms/mechanics that are the problem, then the Top dpser/s wont be parsing hybrids as top dps.
Having one slotted doesn't constitute use. Unless it is properly contributing to your build, then it is nothing but a wasted weapon.
@paxdawn I think Kemocite contributed well enough to make it worth for the top 3 SCM chart players to run torps in their build. Not only does Kemocite add direct damage, it also adds a resistance debuff. It basically replaced the plasma explosions for them. Not to mention it is currently broken (double-proc).
Kemocite isn't a skill that is widely available to the general player base. If it were, then more "canon" builds would be more popular.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
He will personally attack you and your "skillz" (he'll call it "piloting") when you say things like that. He's convinced there's no balance problem and it's all about the player and that people aren't advertising builds for other damage types, as if advertising DHC builds would make them on-par with BFAW APB builds. I won't even respond to him anymore. It's not worth the frustration.
I fear star trek style builds will never be optimal. That doesn't mean I won't use them. I hate the idea of not carrying at least a single foreward torpedo on a star trek ship. Doesn't have to be photon or quantum but there has to be at least one foreward torpedo. More than one foreward torpedo is starting to get weird (it may be canon but it reduces available energy weapons which isn't), and all torps is non-canon even if it's optimal for certain content, so it can be fun to use at times but shouldn't be a go-to build for everything.
I like the idea of diversity in a game like this but I don't like how the devs game never got the balance correct. It's always all-or-nothing when it comes to weapon types. It used to be DHC, now it's beams, and occasionally a specialized torp boat excels. You always had to stack the same weapon type with the proper consoles for best effect.
Part of that problem is the consoles themselves and the way they stack, or should I say the fact there's no diminishing returns for tactical consoles (and to counter that, adding diminishing returns might just push people toward rainbow boats so I'm not advocating for that). The problem is deeper than that though. You have to consider things like torpedoes vs shields, energy beams vs bare hull, overcapping weapons power, BFAW etc.
I'm fully convinced by the way that torpedoes were nerfed like they were because they're an infinite resource. That's not to say making them finite and increasing their damage will fix them, but they're in this state because someone decided players would have an infinite supply of them and therefore they couldn't do the damage we saw in the show and movies.
The problem with kemocite is not everyone can afford it
When is a build Hybrid build? When you say so? Lets check Eternals parse. total DPS front is around 65k DPS. Scimitar so 4 Beams which would mean 16k DPS per beam. Neutronic Spread is 25k DPS. I havent even counted the Kemo yet. Wasted weapon huh?
Why do we have to limit ourselves with a certain particular build by restricting ourselves with power because players cannot afford it? Does this mean we also restrict ourselves by not using Epic weapons? Because they are just as expensive as the kemocite. And more expensive collectively. Does this mean you are also not allowed to use your epic weapons, epic sets, epic stuff for your torp build? Or is your logic just for kemo?
And what is the problem of not having kemocite? The debuff is replaceable with nanny debuffs. While you still can use Focused assault as a replacement. Besides what is losing 27k from 194k DPS?
Unless you are all within their range of competition, meaning your piloting skills as good as they are, I see no sense of debating this.
If we are talking about common pilot quality, then that pilot needs to improve piloting more than change mechanics.
Okay so you got me there, which is super annoying because I had looked through those top 10 scores and had seen the Neutronic featuring, but only once. What I had not done was appreciate the plasma damage was from torpedoes, as there was just a single entry in the parse I thought that was a secondary effect rather than a torpedo, which I would have expected to be named. If you are certain this is a torpedo in each case rather than something form a console or something else then this is indeed excellent progress.
When we discussed the Strategic Secondary Deflectors [+Energy Dmg] on reddit and asked why there's no [+Kinetic Dmg] mod availableon borticus stated:
"The short answer: Torpedoes and Mines make problems that are difficult and time-consuming to solve."
That sounds to me like the underlying system (on a code basis) is the root problem, and not only how it's balanced against energy weapons.
Kemocite is pretty much the only thing released in the last months that can be really good for torpedoes, but as a lockbox trait it is stupidly expensive to the point where not even more advanced players can afford it (This really should have been more readily available and it's a slap in the face for the average torp user!). And it also benefits energy weapons...
i doubt code has anything to do with it. its just code, something as simple as saying base damage=3000 or 300000. It sounds more like the problem is how to monitor and control exploitable mechanics of a strong weapon. But then, if torpedoes were one shotting players in beta and they were nerfed (more like swept under the rug until a solution could be devised) then why let energy weapons get to the same point now?
It reminds me of the phaser proc. the only weapon with a mandatory immunity virtually negating its 2.5% chance to proc. From what I've read on the forums the phaser proc used to have players disabled left and right before the immunity was added. It would seem the original idea was to make the weapons resemble their effectiveness from the shows and players complained and instead of coming up with a more thoughtful solution they just got castrated them and they have since remained so.
How far back though does that go though? Neutronic with TS3 was recently changed to damage 10 targets max. Up to March it was OP with bugged damage values.
Kemocite is bugged too, as well as a lot of torpedoes with TS:
Neutronic is a great torpedo. I think neutronic, gravimetric and particle emission might be the only ones worth using, but that doesn't mean torpedoes are OK.
I asked Borticus what the 10 maximum target limit actually meant and he said it was a 10-target limit per explosion. That won't make a difference at all on an ISA run.
You are right though. Only a select few torpedoes are really desirable due to their secondary effects.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Lol then that change barely affects anything. It will never be noticed.
There are a lot of weird problems with torpedoes though. Neutronic damage was bugged but that's only one of many problems they need to fix.
What I really want them to do is fix the Omega torpedo. A very slow-moving targetable torpedo based on the technology behind the unimatrix one-shot plasma bolt, and shares the digitizing/vaporizing effect of the V'ger mega plasma bolt, should be pretty damned devastating wouldn't you think?
In general this game has the goldielocks problem; that is finding a balance that is neither too hot(Feedback pulse death so fast you couldn't blink quicker)or too cold(the Borg Sphere with 1800 mega-giga-lol-yawn-hit point pool).
The same can be said of beams. However I don't see it as diserability I see it as Diversity. You can't have everything doing the same thing with the same strength or weaknesses. For example neutronic has an aoe but the cd of undine torp is better, the crystalline AP torp is easier to build if you got AP weapons, etc, etc. it comes down how a player leverages the build and piloting which was my point right at the beginning. people with the wrong build, information/marketing, with bad piloting always end up with these threads and whining at forums.
Otherwise your rationailty is the same as those complaints on phaser vs antiproton. Players wanting +20 crtd of antiproton without actually considering how one player leverages build with phasers. E.g. Instead of an ap scimitar, you would have an fper phaser which would leverage the strength of phasers instead of forcing phasers in the scimitar and compare it with ap scimitars.
With regards to kemo proc, I haven't seen the devs admit if it is wai or not, all I am seeing are players asking to nerf kemocite. If so, the problem would be just nerf rage by players.
The problem though is that there are torpedoes that are broken (tricobalts without working mods for example). I think fixing the broken mechanics (especially when upgrading torps in rarity) need to be addressed. Fixing those will really create diversity. Right now, you really don't have diversity.
It's not really a nerf it is a fix isn't it? And mind you, the people asking for it to be fixed are also those who will be hit by such a fix such as @darkknightucf (and to a certain extent, me). I would gladly lose the kemocite double-proc if they'd start fixing the bugs plaguing torpedoes.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
That said, I do agree that torpedoes do need a bit of a rework to make them a bit more effective outside of speciality builds. More in line with what we see on-screen (bar DS9, where "this week's bad guys" seemed to forget to turn their shields on most of the time
You've got several Command Spec buffs helping, but I'd like to see something like the Exploit mechanic from there becoming "built in" (and buffed a bit so it fires off more reliably). It's at least soft canon anyway (see the "Dimpling" comment above ref. the TNG Tech Manual). Either that or reduce shields raw kinetic resist, canonically torpedoes aren't that effective against shielded targets but they shouldn't be near useless.
More consoles like the recent FE's combined Disruptor/Transphasic damage (20/20) would be nice for those that want to run hybrids in any case, preferably in more common combinations (canon at worst, craftable "pick your own" at best ?).
What your saying is not about diversity but adding/fixing stuff. Diversity means players have multiple options, which we currently have. Problem is compounded if you restrict yourself to one weapon type or you have personal restrictions of what to play. So if you are restrictive to playing kinetics you are options become smaller because of personal restriction.
It becomes a fix if the devs admit it's not wai. If it is WAi on the current stage regardless if players don't like its WAI stage, then you are asking for a nerf.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
"He shall be my finest warrior, this generic man who was forced upon me.
Like a badass I shall make him look, and in the furnace of war I shall forge him.
he shall be of iron will and steely sinew.
In great armour I shall clad him and with the mightiest weapons he shall be armed.
He will be untouched by plague or disease; no sickness shall blight him.
He shall have such tactics, strategies and machines that no foe will best him in battle.
He is my answer to cryptic logic, he is the Defender of my Romulan Crew.
He is Tovan Khev... and he shall know no fear."
That one doesn't seem too bad. The chain proc looks useful and has a pretty high chance considering the normal proc rate of other weapons.
Yesterday I got my new mk XII particle emission torpedo to HY3 crit for 137k damage (and my heavy plasma lance to crit for even higher by the way). Absolutely crazy amount of damage and it's not upgraded. I've had similar high spikes with the enhanced bio torp. They're not common and rely on RNG but they do occur.
The HY3 PEP is very slow and can be destroyed which does help balance it. I've had more HY PEPs shot down than hit so it requires timing to make it work. I use TS3 more often as well.
is it? there are sets and consoles that significantly boost torpedoes, like the adapted MACO 2 pc that bumps torp damage 25% if you use the gravimetric torp and console thats a gravimetric torp bumped by 5%. which is why i ask the question, on a ship with that setup, would the gravimetric be superior to a neutronic torp?
If you really really wanted to run just one torp on a ship... then yes photon makes more sense and then you are looking at the Bio_enhanced... or the Grave Torp. As you point out both have boosts that don't eat tac console space. The bio Photon set is nice in that the tac console boosts both and the 2 piece is = to a console. So you can run that torp + disruptors or phasers and not loose anything energy wise. (however you are still giving up a weapon hard point for a torpedo with dmg boosts only = to 1-2 consoles at most)... so I would say that although its LESS of a drop it is still a drop over just running all energy.
The only build I have found myself to be semi viable as a mix.... is running both. Bio-enhanced + set bonus, as well as Grave photon with the set. That means you are running 2 torps though... but the advantage there anyway is torpedo doffs start to make a difference. (2 torps proc the doffs a lot faster and those 2 torps with 3 doffs can be a constant stream of torps). Although I found on that build the DPS was better still if you dumped all the energy consoles and just ran Torpedo consoles.
Still full energy or full torp was more dps unless I missed some other way to boost that build. Still it was a 30k build... so not unviable. The idea of removing all the Boost all consoles like the warheads and manifolds and replacing them with one genaric that boosted ALL kinetic and Energy... would just open that possible build up for anyone that wants to run it with anything... It wouldn't be a perfect fix. It would mean that the best energy can bust 100k DPS the best torp can bust 80k DPS... and at least people insisting on running more canon setups can still hope to hit 40-50k and be viable at least.
I actually do run two torps on a cruiser one fore and one aft, been running the gravimetric and bio. been playing around with putting the hyper on as well against the vaadwaur and iconians. with the other three back slots filled with the two ap 360s and the KCB, as long as i can keep the target withing the front 270* i have 5 beams on target and the torps hammering away. only when they get behind me do i run into problems, and TS3 is a way to keep them honest
Try putting both torps up front and run at least 2, and 3 if you can torp doffs. the 360s +KCB in the back are fine... just throw another beam in the back.
By having both torps in the front you can focus on keeping them firing (with the doffs). By splitting them one fore and aft you really loose that torp shotgun effect that you want if your going to bother with kinetic at all.