I still disagree that all 4/4s need to be changed to 5/3. Why not bring in new ships set up 5/3 rather than forcing us who like our 4/4s just fine as they are to change?
I don't see the necessity to change all cruisers either. But where to draw the line ? The OP's proposal has the charme of simplicity.
5/3 is good for beams, dual beams and cannons. 4/4 just for beams.
Releasing new ships is insofar better, as it wouldn't negatively effect anyone.
But then again signature ships like the Negh'var already received their t6 upgrade... and these are the ships I'm interested in getting 5/3 the most.
Do you own a Galor ?
That ship fired in the shows only the forward mounted disruptor. The devs actually did something really cool: the animation of dual beams is just a single fat beam. Halfway there and then: 4/4. If it had 5/3 I could just grab some fluidic AP DBB's (which look very similar to the cardi weapons) + some omnis and had a decently performing ship. But: no. One can only do a broadsider, displaying a completely different fighting style compared to the original fom the shows.
I believe its the idea that we all need our 4/4 cruisers convered to 5/3 "for balance purposes". They are balanced just fine. We don't need to force every cruiser into a 5/3 loadout because it is not necessary. If this happens, where will it stop? When we can mount Dual Heavy Cannons on everything? When everything flies like a cookie cutter Avenger or Scimitar? When everything has the same BOff layout and console layout?
Guess it's just a matter of perspective. If you run a beam setup, it doesn't matter. 4/4 works so why should it get changed ?
That's one side of the coin.
Now have a look at warmaker001b's signature. That's how I want to set up my Klingon battlecruisers ingame. If a cannon/turret 4/4 setup would be on the same level as a broadsider, I wouldn't try to argue on the internet (you know what they say about it...)
But it isn't. To get it even near the efficiency of a broadside setup, every little optimization helps. And then 5/3 is a big deal.
Would 5/3 hurt my Fed captain's Galaxy built ? No, not at all. Whould it help my Klingons ? Yes, quite a lot.
Imho the game mechanics should be modified to make "lol RP builts" competitive. It is a Star Trek game after all.
Umm...you must be seeing something I'm not...because all I see is a bunch of Klingon firing disruptors...I see nothing in his sig that says all Battlecruisers should be 5/3...in fact there is no text in his sig at all!
Only thing I can figure is if you want to be like his sig then you should drop all rear weapons! Because those ships are clearly only firing dual cannons!
I still don't see the major need for all ships to be 5/3, after all, the majority of current 5/3 ships I do see in play, are mainly broadsiding with all beams like a 4/4 anyways!
The extra slot for instead of aft, is not a major necessity by any means!
Correct, there is imho no drawback for broadsiders. One even gets one more beam on target before reaching the orbit.
But it helps cannon builts quite a bit. Or opens up the option to fit DBB's/omnis.
Still people oppose it as if they would lose something from 5/3.
Now have a look at warmaker001b's signature. That's how I want to set up my Klingon battlecruisers ingame. If a cannon/turret 4/4 setup would be on the same level as a broadsider, I wouldn't try to argue on the internet (you know what they say about it...)
But it isn't. To get it even near the efficiency of a broadside setup, every little optimization helps. And then 5/3 is a big deal.
Would 5/3 hurt my Fed captain's Galaxy built ? No, not at all. Whould it help my Klingons ? Yes, quite a lot.
Imho the game mechanics should be modified to make "lol RP builts" competitive. It is a Star Trek game after all.
Last I checked - as I don't usually keep any in my inventory - taking a full rack of single cannons fore, turrets aft, and playing "add the tooltip values", then comparing them to even a 5/3s stock beam arrays fore Omni's aft total, you'll find that the cannon bird does moar damage than the beam array one.
Therefore, thusly, foresooth, etc., cannons are more effective than beams.
Granted, this is single target and within range 2 of said target, but still, I've proven my case. And if you need to play with BOff skills, compare the damage boost granted from CRF over what BFaW gives to the guy spamming beam fire into those last, big targets...
Replicate the same effect using DCs or DHCs vice DBBs.
There. I've given you a reason to fly your KDF battlecruisers in a "semi-canon" mode just like Warmaker's Siggy pic...
So now we need to talk "efficiency"? Ahem, my barely-cracks-9k Pathfinder is "efficient" enough to not cost a PuG any optionals, and is still flown in accordance to time-honored traditions such as "don't waste fire into the still-being-healed transformer", "wait till after the cube/sphere guards are dead to pay last respects to 10% rule before spamming BFaW - since BFaW may cause premature detonation", "Save Grav Well for targets of opportunity/CC, not use it just to stack a touch of damage onto the transformer unless the team's demonstrated an ability to handle the transformer first", etc. - methods ignored to pad my e-peen garner DPS numbers...
And it's only a 3/3! Do I need to be Captain-50k to play advanced?
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
I'm going to say no, but for different reasons. I do not want this game to basically become what BSGO became. Same damn ship over and over again, just a different cardboard cutout.
All ships 5/3, that basically turns this game into ship and land space barbie. Not the way I want this game to go.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
I still don't see the major need for all ships to be 5/3, after all, the majority of current 5/3 ships I do see in play, are mainly broadsiding with all beams like a 4/4 anyways!
The extra slot for instead of aft, is not a major necessity by any means!
Correct, there is imho no drawback for broadsiders. One even gets one more beam on target before reaching the orbit.
But it helps cannon builts quite a bit. Or opens up the option to fit DBB's/omnis.
Still people oppose it as if they would lose something from 5/3.
I oppose it because people like you feel entitled to have their favorite ship buffed when it doesn't need it...and I oppose the fact if some how...some way you got your way then the flood gates will open and people will start demanding everything gets buffed.
Then what happens after that? It gets like @talonxv said...generic and identical.
Can we make all of my Sci ships into a 4/2 set up, instead of 3/3?
All sci ships should be 4/3.
Actually no. I think they need to make sci abilities hit harder. DPS shouldn't be a science thing.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
Can we make all of my Sci ships into a 4/2 set up, instead of 3/3?
All sci ships should be 4/3.
Actually no. I think they need to make sci abilities hit harder. DPS shouldn't be a science thing.
If the abilities hits harder isn't that a part of the dps?
Well I meant more not through guns, but more their science abilities should do more.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
The whole point of "ships" is variety. Picking a ship you want to fly and that fits your play style and then optimizing it to get the most you can out of it. If all you want and/or care about is DPS, then use the DPS king ships and carbon copy what everyone else does.
Can we make all of my Sci ships into a 4/2 set up, instead of 3/3?
All sci ships should be 4/3.
Bet you'll say anything to get more people on your side!
Where does it end?
When you get 5/3 it isn't going to be fair the Sheshar has 1.3 shield mod...so that needs to be boosted!
It isn't fair the Qib has a turn rate of 11...so all Cruisers must be boosted to at least 11.
Not fair my Dread doesn't have all 4 cruiser commands...I should get them!
But my Guardian doesn't have a hangar...that is such a injustice! Now I get a hangar!
The Andromeda only have +5 to weapons...it's a travesty it doesn't have +10...so now all cruisers get +10 weapon power.
But but...the Command Battlecruisers have inspiration abilities...so my Resolute should have them!
Oh can't forget the Eclipse has Gather Intel...totally wrong that me Arbiter doesn't have it too!
While we're on the subject of the Eclipse, why don't all cruisers have integrated cloak?
See where I'm going here? I'm sure you don't...bet your reply is gonna be along the lines of "I want my Bortasqu' to have 5/3, it's unfair it doesn't!"
I still don't see the major need for all ships to be 5/3, after all, the majority of current 5/3 ships I do see in play, are mainly broadsiding with all beams like a 4/4 anyways!
The extra slot for instead of aft, is not a major necessity by any means!
Correct, there is imho no drawback for broadsiders. One even gets one more beam on target before reaching the orbit.
But it helps cannon builts quite a bit. Or opens up the option to fit DBB's/omnis.
Still people oppose it as if they would lose something from 5/3.
An extra cannon for may be nice, as does a DBB, but neither again are a necessity vs a 4/4 layout.
In fact, even a 4/4 can do DBB + omni aft, the only difference is 1 less DBB for vs a 5/3, and instead 1 extra BA aft in its place.
But, unless you are solely looking at full frontal cannon/DBB destruction full time, than even a 4/4 can easily hold its own in PVE material.
So, such a change isn't even a necessity by any means, other than a very limited build concept at best!
Heck, even a 4/3 is very effective for having 1 less weapon in general, as is a 3/3 sci if done right!!!
if I were any of you worried about forward/aft slots...
just start leveling up your roms, dust them off, etc and get ready for the master race ship cause its coming
if you don't/cant fly a scimy... then you have to decide to always be in an inferior ship and accept it:)
Actually... ship alone doesn't = win. My Romulan got plenty of use out of her T5 Mogai Retrofit, and later Fleet Mogai. Then I got a couple T6 ships, recently the Morrigu, and haven't felt inferior to anyone.
Also... I once out DPS'd a Scimitar in an Assault Cruiser Refit running a Tetryon build. They may have had the all powerful Scimitar, but the build was rainbow if I remember correctly and the tactics were... well... lets just say that they were not up to par for Infected Advanced. And I don't mean "must have X DPS". I mean the person flying the Scimitar was probably inexperienced with the ship and never got any build advice.
So while on paper a Scmitar may be "superior"... I'll just quote Clay from Xiaolin Showdown.
I've seen vids of people going crazy with T1 ships and getting some pretty decent damage off those ships, and that's with only 3 weapons slots TOTAL. So any ship can be a beast. Its all in the build itself.
I see the merit behind the idea of getting more new 5/3 oriented ships, I don't think ships we have already should be changed in anyway, as there are ways to make these ships still deal high sustained DPS, yes even if it means strapping arrays+torp/kc on BFAW dope and then a bunch of universals boosting damage, in fact those 4/4 ships with a good A2B+drake/dragon will be making pretty high damage.
On the flipside, I see the reason why people want more of the 5/3 ship loadout. Last time I checked, highest DPS ship in game was a Scimitar loaded with DBB setup (no not arrays). Scimitar is, however, exception in a sense it comes with Commander Tac, Lt Comm Tac and a battle cloak, a setup more kin to an heavy escort and not a dreadnought/battleship, most other 5/3 ships are engie-heavy ships.
I don't think slow turning engie-heavy ships should have 5/3 loadout, people are just gonna go with arrays on them anyway (and that fifth fore slot is going to take something from somewhere else to keep the ship balanced, not just one aft slot). And for broadsiding 5/3 or 4/4 is really absolutely the same thing. Sacrificing consoles slots for bunch of RCSs is a no-go imho because those slots could be occupied with universals boosting damage, crit, crit severity etc, and would benefit any DPS build better.
So yes, after reading the whole thread and both sides, I think there's a place for current 4/4 ships (and future ones too) as they have their playstyle and builds and I also agree there should be more 5/3 ships in game.
As for OP, get yourself Krenim Imperium, from the things you said in this thread, it seems likely that ship will fit you the most, though it might not be "big" enough for your tastes.
As for OP, get yourself Krenim Imperium, from the things you said in this thread, it seems likely that ship will fit you the most, though it might not be "big" enough for your tastes.
I am talking about cruisers and you are talking me about escort.
You are wrong all the line if you don't have understand that. I am talking about balance I am not looking for a ship.
I don't think slow turning engie-heavy ships should have 5/3 loadout, people are just gonna go with arrays on them anyway (and that fifth fore slot is going to take something from somewhere else to keep the ship balanced, not just one aft slot). And for broadsiding 5/3 or 4/4 is really absolutely the same thing. Sacrificing consoles slots for bunch of RCSs is a no-go imho because those slots could be occupied with universals boosting damage, crit, crit severity etc, and would benefit any DPS build better.
Why keep talking about the slow turn rate. The actuals 5/3 cruisers already have slow turn rate. That change nothing.
I am from Belgium and english isn't my main language, sorry if I make mistakes.
I am talking about cruisers and you are talking me about escort.
You are wrong all the line if you don't have understand that. I am talking about balance I am not looking for a ship.[/quote]
Ah so you just have to have a cruiser and make it top DPS, you're one of those people that just have to validate your own choice and are willing to yell bloody murder to the devs just because Your choice and playstyle that doesn't fit the design choices for the ship you're flying aren't producing the DPS you want. Well news flash, you're doing it wrong, it's not the ship's fault, it's your own fault for flying ships designed to be best used with beams and going with cannons, sure you can do it but you have to accept the loss of dps you get that way.
I am not "wrong" just because I share other's opinions that escorts are created for DPSing, and cruisers for more traditional Trek-ish playstyle, yet you want to change the whole game to accompany your wish to play cruiser like it's an escort, then defend your own choice (selfish one too since other people clearly here stated they enjoy 4/4 cruisers) by saying you ain't talkin about escorts? The only one wrong here is you for pushing your playstyle over other players.
Why keep talking about the slow turn rate. The actuals 5/3 cruisers already have slow turn rate. That change nothing.
Bad turn rate = bad cannon DPS. If you can't figure that out, you need to go back to basics and read STO 101 guides. It matters not if you have 5/3 or 4/4 if you ship can't turn for good. If you use RCS you leave precious console slots that could be used by unis boosting dps for silly turn consoles, weaking your DPS further. Then, cannons use higher tier Boff abilities as well, gimping your cruiser's limited tac boff layout further, then you have large ship with crappy inertia that can't maneouver so good into the sweet 2-3km range behind target for best cannon DPS -- so you have underpowered ship just so you can say "I hazz a kewl kruiser wiz cannonz", when instead you can go DBB for example, have HIGHER DPS and still enjoy your cruiser. OR, god forbid, accepting you like cannons and flying escorts.
Someone said it nicely, this is just another cry about BFAW thread masqueraded by something else.
I am talking about cruisers and you are talking me about escort.
You are wrong all the line if you don't have understand that. I am talking about balance I am not looking for a ship.
Ah so you just have to have a cruiser and make it top DPS, you're one of those people that just have to validate your own choice and are willing to yell bloody murder to the devs just because Your choice and playstyle that doesn't fit the design choices for the ship you're flying aren't producing the DPS you want. Well news flash, you're doing it wrong, it's not the ship's fault, it's your own fault for flying ships designed to be best used with beams and going with cannons, sure you can do it but you have to accept the loss of dps you get that way.
I am not "wrong" just because I share other's opinions that escorts are created for DPSing, and cruisers for more traditional Trek-ish playstyle, yet you want to change the whole game to accompany your wish to play cruiser like it's an escort, then defend your own choice (selfish one too since other people clearly here stated they enjoy 4/4 cruisers) by saying you ain't talkin about escorts? The only one wrong here is you for pushing your playstyle over other players.
Why keep talking about the slow turn rate. The actuals 5/3 cruisers already have slow turn rate. That change nothing.
Bad turn rate = bad cannon DPS. If you can't figure that out, you need to go back to basics and read STO 101 guides. It matters not if you have 5/3 or 4/4 if you ship can't turn for good. If you use RCS you leave precious console slots that could be used by unis boosting dps for silly turn consoles, weaking your DPS further. Then, cannons use higher tier Boff abilities as well, gimping your cruiser's limited tac boff layout further, then you have large ship with crappy inertia that can't maneouver so good into the sweet 2-3km range behind target for best cannon DPS -- so you have underpowered ship just so you can say "I hazz a kewl kruiser wiz cannonz", when instead you can go DBB for example, have HIGHER DPS and still enjoy your cruiser. OR, god forbid, accepting you like cannons and flying escorts.
Someone said it nicely, this is just another cry about BFAW thread masqueraded by something else.
Nothing smart to see here, move along.
- I am not trying to make cruisers top dps by changing them to 5/3 because guess what... 5/3 cruisers are already in the game.
- Ships designed for beams? Not that again. I never heard somewhere in the star trek universe about broadside. That's players who invented this in this game when they noticed it is effective. If ships were really made for broadside playstyle, that's not front or back weapons slots we should have but side slots.
- Of course adding some turn rate consoles is a choice but you don't have to add a lot. You have others ways to increase your turn rate.
- Where did I say I like canons? Actualy I am mostly playing with DBBs.
- DBBs on cruisers... Plz go read my first post again.
- BFAW masked...
Pfff why do I bother answer to this kind of people.
I am from Belgium and english isn't my main language, sorry if I make mistakes.
So why should my broadside cruisers DPS be gimped because you think all ships should be 5/3? Right now if my target swings itself into my rear arc I only lose half my beam DPS and open it up to spike damage from a torp, with your design I either lose the spike damage from the torp or lose 2/3 of my Beam DPS if they're in my rear arc.
- I am not trying to make cruisers top dps by changing them to 5/3 because guess what... 5/3 cruisers are already in the game.
Then why are you moaning about it here, instead of just going into the game and getting one of those "5/3 cruisers (...) already in the game"?
You know, I love frigates, everybody knows that, and there's this Baltim, 5/1 weapons, you know what? I want my BoP T6 5/1 loadout too! How 'bout my T'Liss? Because clearly all frigate ships must be 5/1 because one is, cuz...reasons? Kill diversity, let's just all run cookie cutter. I don't like Baltim but I like T6 Bop so now lets give bop 5/1 and make Baltim, a fine and expensive lobi ship, completely obsolete because T6 bop has the same damage but has a battle cloak. Great thinking.
- Ships designed for beams? Not that again. I never heard somewhere in the star trek universe about broadside. That's players who invented this in this game when they noticed it is effective. If ships were really made for broadside playstyle, that's not front or back weapons slots we should have but side slots.
There's a certain degree of turn rate a ship can have to be useful for cannons. Anything lower then 11-12 is too slow for cannons, hence all those cruisers with 5 or 6 or 7 turn rate are obviously designed for beams. You may not like that fact, but it changes not their stats. Yes, you can run RCSs, fleet neutroniums with +turn, science consoles with +turn, but you rob yourself of firepower and survivability. You wanted top DPS, by robbing yourself of unis that boosts your dps and installing RCSs you definitely won't achieve optimal DPS for that ship.
- Of course adding some turn rate consoles is a choice but you don't have to add a lot. You have others ways to increase your turn rate.
Any ways of adding turn rate means loosing DPS. Consoles? Can run unis to boost damage. Skills? Can run some other to boost crit or crit severity. Ship skills? Can run better turn+speed - or astika's supremacy instead... tough choice, eh?
- DBBs on cruisers... Plz go read my first post again.
DBBs are currently the highest DPS, and yes many run them on faster cruisers.
- Where did I say I like canons? Actualy I am mostly playing with DBBs.
- BFAW masked...
Well, first you say you like playing with DBBs then you go and speak negatively about BFAW. If you use DBB and not use BFAW then there's your problem right there.
Pfff why do I bother answer to this kind of people.
Thank you very much for your kind words. It seems to me you feel everyone else is wrong including the Devs and you yourself correct, in which case we have nothing more to speak about.
As for OP, get yourself Krenim Imperium, from the things you said in this thread, it seems likely that ship will fit you the most, though it might not be "big" enough for your tastes.
I am talking about cruisers and you are talking me about escort.
You are wrong all the line if you don't have understand that. I am talking about balance I am not looking for a ship.
I don't think slow turning engie-heavy ships should have 5/3 loadout, people are just gonna go with arrays on them anyway (and that fifth fore slot is going to take something from somewhere else to keep the ship balanced, not just one aft slot). And for broadsiding 5/3 or 4/4 is really absolutely the same thing. Sacrificing consoles slots for bunch of RCSs is a no-go imho because those slots could be occupied with universals boosting damage, crit, crit severity etc, and would benefit any DPS build better.
Why keep talking about the slow turn rate. The actuals 5/3 cruisers already have slow turn rate. That change nothing.
Bortasqu' = 5.5 turn rate and only 18 inertia...like someone pointed out earlier it has one of the slowest turn rate in the game and I believe it is the lowest inertia (Whale of a Vo'Quv is only .5 slower turn and has a little more inertia as listed on the wiki)
Kurak = turn rate of 9 and 50 intertia...definitely a lot faster.
So please...stop using the argument that the Battlecruisers are slow ships, when you're trying to make claims with the slowest ship in the game practically.
I still remember when people were complaining about Dual Heavy Cannons being the end all gun and this being Escorts Online.
Yup, that died after the Aux2Bat and DEM doffed problem. Then Elachi beams where all the rage. Then R&D hit and that Pen modifier became the must have item. Who knows, next season some other junk might be popular.
We don't need any changes to ships. Frankly, I'm surprised this thread has lasted so long. Probably because the OP is dead set on keeping it alive.
Are we comparing Cruisers and Battlecruisers? Battlecruisers sacrifice significant durability for that weapon layout while still not being as inherently nimble as an Escort.
That's not fixing the broken bone, that's just putting a bandage on it. What we IMHO should do is instead make aft weaponry just as useful as fore weaponry.
Well that would be great to have some new special weapon like the cutting beam in reputation but the devs seems to be stuck on console, torpedo and beam array/dual cannons pattern.
No, more 360° weapons wouldn't fix this. I think that there would need to be more worthwhile weapons/equipment that could only be mounted on the aft slots. So far, the only equipment that meets the "only aft weapon" requirement are mines, and those are grossly underused. Mainly because there aren't many scenarios where mines would be more useful than firing weapons manually.
As for OP, get yourself Krenim Imperium, from the things you said in this thread, it seems likely that ship will fit you the most, though it might not be "big" enough for your tastes.
I am talking about cruisers and you are talking me about escort.
You are wrong all the line if you don't have understand that. I am talking about balance I am not looking for a ship.
I don't think slow turning engie-heavy ships should have 5/3 loadout, people are just gonna go with arrays on them anyway (and that fifth fore slot is going to take something from somewhere else to keep the ship balanced, not just one aft slot). And for broadsiding 5/3 or 4/4 is really absolutely the same thing. Sacrificing consoles slots for bunch of RCSs is a no-go imho because those slots could be occupied with universals boosting damage, crit, crit severity etc, and would benefit any DPS build better.
Why keep talking about the slow turn rate. The actuals 5/3 cruisers already have slow turn rate. That change nothing.
Bortasqu' = 5.5 turn rate and only 18 inertia...like someone pointed out earlier it has one of the slowest turn rate in the game and I believe it is the lowest inertia (Whale of a Vo'Quv is only .5 slower turn and has a little more inertia as listed on the wiki)
Kurak = turn rate of 9 and 50 intertia...definitely a lot faster.
So please...stop using the argument that the Battlecruisers are slow ships, when you're trying to make claims with the slowest ship in the game practically.
Lol what are you trying to prove?
I can do the exact same thing as you :
Elachi Sheshar = 6 turn rate 25 inertia.
Qib battlecruiser = 11 turn rate 55 inertia
So please try again.
I am from Belgium and english isn't my main language, sorry if I make mistakes.
Comments
I don't see the necessity to change all cruisers either. But where to draw the line ? The OP's proposal has the charme of simplicity.
5/3 is good for beams, dual beams and cannons. 4/4 just for beams.
Releasing new ships is insofar better, as it wouldn't negatively effect anyone.
But then again signature ships like the Negh'var already received their t6 upgrade... and these are the ships I'm interested in getting 5/3 the most.
Do you own a Galor ?
That ship fired in the shows only the forward mounted disruptor. The devs actually did something really cool: the animation of dual beams is just a single fat beam. Halfway there and then: 4/4. If it had 5/3 I could just grab some fluidic AP DBB's (which look very similar to the cardi weapons) + some omnis and had a decently performing ship. But: no. One can only do a broadsider, displaying a completely different fighting style compared to the original fom the shows.
Umm...you must be seeing something I'm not...because all I see is a bunch of Klingon firing disruptors...I see nothing in his sig that says all Battlecruisers should be 5/3...in fact there is no text in his sig at all!
Only thing I can figure is if you want to be like his sig then you should drop all rear weapons! Because those ships are clearly only firing dual cannons!
Correct, there is imho no drawback for broadsiders. One even gets one more beam on target before reaching the orbit.
But it helps cannon builts quite a bit. Or opens up the option to fit DBB's/omnis.
Still people oppose it as if they would lose something from 5/3.
Last I checked - as I don't usually keep any in my inventory - taking a full rack of single cannons fore, turrets aft, and playing "add the tooltip values", then comparing them to even a 5/3s stock beam arrays fore Omni's aft total, you'll find that the cannon bird does moar damage than the beam array one.
Therefore, thusly, foresooth, etc., cannons are more effective than beams.
Granted, this is single target and within range 2 of said target, but still, I've proven my case. And if you need to play with BOff skills, compare the damage boost granted from CRF over what BFaW gives to the guy spamming beam fire into those last, big targets...
Replicate the same effect using DCs or DHCs vice DBBs.
There. I've given you a reason to fly your KDF battlecruisers in a "semi-canon" mode just like Warmaker's Siggy pic...
So now we need to talk "efficiency"? Ahem, my barely-cracks-9k Pathfinder is "efficient" enough to not cost a PuG any optionals, and is still flown in accordance to time-honored traditions such as "don't waste fire into the still-being-healed transformer", "wait till after the cube/sphere guards are dead to pay last respects to 10% rule before spamming BFaW - since BFaW may cause premature detonation", "Save Grav Well for targets of opportunity/CC, not use it just to stack a touch of damage onto the transformer unless the team's demonstrated an ability to handle the transformer first", etc. - methods ignored to pad my e-peen garner DPS numbers...
And it's only a 3/3! Do I need to be Captain-50k to play advanced?
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
All ships 5/3, that basically turns this game into ship and land space barbie. Not the way I want this game to go.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
I oppose it because people like you feel entitled to have their favorite ship buffed when it doesn't need it...and I oppose the fact if some how...some way you got your way then the flood gates will open and people will start demanding everything gets buffed.
Then what happens after that? It gets like @talonxv said...generic and identical.
All sci ships should be 4/3.
Actually no. I think they need to make sci abilities hit harder. DPS shouldn't be a science thing.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
If the abilities hits harder isn't that a part of the dps?
Well I meant more not through guns, but more their science abilities should do more.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
The whole point of "ships" is variety. Picking a ship you want to fly and that fits your play style and then optimizing it to get the most you can out of it. If all you want and/or care about is DPS, then use the DPS king ships and carbon copy what everyone else does.
Bet you'll say anything to get more people on your side!
Where does it end?
When you get 5/3 it isn't going to be fair the Sheshar has 1.3 shield mod...so that needs to be boosted!
It isn't fair the Qib has a turn rate of 11...so all Cruisers must be boosted to at least 11.
Not fair my Dread doesn't have all 4 cruiser commands...I should get them!
But my Guardian doesn't have a hangar...that is such a injustice! Now I get a hangar!
The Andromeda only have +5 to weapons...it's a travesty it doesn't have +10...so now all cruisers get +10 weapon power.
But but...the Command Battlecruisers have inspiration abilities...so my Resolute should have them!
Oh can't forget the Eclipse has Gather Intel...totally wrong that me Arbiter doesn't have it too!
While we're on the subject of the Eclipse, why don't all cruisers have integrated cloak?
See where I'm going here? I'm sure you don't...bet your reply is gonna be along the lines of "I want my Bortasqu' to have 5/3, it's unfair it doesn't!"
An extra cannon for may be nice, as does a DBB, but neither again are a necessity vs a 4/4 layout.
In fact, even a 4/4 can do DBB + omni aft, the only difference is 1 less DBB for vs a 5/3, and instead 1 extra BA aft in its place.
But, unless you are solely looking at full frontal cannon/DBB destruction full time, than even a 4/4 can easily hold its own in PVE material.
So, such a change isn't even a necessity by any means, other than a very limited build concept at best!
Heck, even a 4/3 is very effective for having 1 less weapon in general, as is a 3/3 sci if done right!!!
Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!
Actually... ship alone doesn't = win. My Romulan got plenty of use out of her T5 Mogai Retrofit, and later Fleet Mogai. Then I got a couple T6 ships, recently the Morrigu, and haven't felt inferior to anyone.
Also... I once out DPS'd a Scimitar in an Assault Cruiser Refit running a Tetryon build. They may have had the all powerful Scimitar, but the build was rainbow if I remember correctly and the tactics were... well... lets just say that they were not up to par for Infected Advanced. And I don't mean "must have X DPS". I mean the person flying the Scimitar was probably inexperienced with the ship and never got any build advice.
So while on paper a Scmitar may be "superior"... I'll just quote Clay from Xiaolin Showdown.
I've seen vids of people going crazy with T1 ships and getting some pretty decent damage off those ships, and that's with only 3 weapons slots TOTAL. So any ship can be a beast. Its all in the build itself.
On the flipside, I see the reason why people want more of the 5/3 ship loadout. Last time I checked, highest DPS ship in game was a Scimitar loaded with DBB setup (no not arrays). Scimitar is, however, exception in a sense it comes with Commander Tac, Lt Comm Tac and a battle cloak, a setup more kin to an heavy escort and not a dreadnought/battleship, most other 5/3 ships are engie-heavy ships.
I don't think slow turning engie-heavy ships should have 5/3 loadout, people are just gonna go with arrays on them anyway (and that fifth fore slot is going to take something from somewhere else to keep the ship balanced, not just one aft slot). And for broadsiding 5/3 or 4/4 is really absolutely the same thing. Sacrificing consoles slots for bunch of RCSs is a no-go imho because those slots could be occupied with universals boosting damage, crit, crit severity etc, and would benefit any DPS build better.
So yes, after reading the whole thread and both sides, I think there's a place for current 4/4 ships (and future ones too) as they have their playstyle and builds and I also agree there should be more 5/3 ships in game.
As for OP, get yourself Krenim Imperium, from the things you said in this thread, it seems likely that ship will fit you the most, though it might not be "big" enough for your tastes.
I am talking about cruisers and you are talking me about escort.
You are wrong all the line if you don't have understand that. I am talking about balance I am not looking for a ship.
Why keep talking about the slow turn rate. The actuals 5/3 cruisers already have slow turn rate. That change nothing.
I am talking about cruisers and you are talking me about escort.
You are wrong all the line if you don't have understand that. I am talking about balance I am not looking for a ship.[/quote]
Ah so you just have to have a cruiser and make it top DPS, you're one of those people that just have to validate your own choice and are willing to yell bloody murder to the devs just because Your choice and playstyle that doesn't fit the design choices for the ship you're flying aren't producing the DPS you want. Well news flash, you're doing it wrong, it's not the ship's fault, it's your own fault for flying ships designed to be best used with beams and going with cannons, sure you can do it but you have to accept the loss of dps you get that way.
I am not "wrong" just because I share other's opinions that escorts are created for DPSing, and cruisers for more traditional Trek-ish playstyle, yet you want to change the whole game to accompany your wish to play cruiser like it's an escort, then defend your own choice (selfish one too since other people clearly here stated they enjoy 4/4 cruisers) by saying you ain't talkin about escorts? The only one wrong here is you for pushing your playstyle over other players.
Bad turn rate = bad cannon DPS. If you can't figure that out, you need to go back to basics and read STO 101 guides. It matters not if you have 5/3 or 4/4 if you ship can't turn for good. If you use RCS you leave precious console slots that could be used by unis boosting dps for silly turn consoles, weaking your DPS further. Then, cannons use higher tier Boff abilities as well, gimping your cruiser's limited tac boff layout further, then you have large ship with crappy inertia that can't maneouver so good into the sweet 2-3km range behind target for best cannon DPS -- so you have underpowered ship just so you can say "I hazz a kewl kruiser wiz cannonz", when instead you can go DBB for example, have HIGHER DPS and still enjoy your cruiser. OR, god forbid, accepting you like cannons and flying escorts.
Someone said it nicely, this is just another cry about BFAW thread masqueraded by something else.
Nothing smart to see here, move along.
- I am not trying to make cruisers top dps by changing them to 5/3 because guess what... 5/3 cruisers are already in the game.
- Ships designed for beams? Not that again. I never heard somewhere in the star trek universe about broadside. That's players who invented this in this game when they noticed it is effective. If ships were really made for broadside playstyle, that's not front or back weapons slots we should have but side slots.
- Of course adding some turn rate consoles is a choice but you don't have to add a lot. You have others ways to increase your turn rate.
- Where did I say I like canons? Actualy I am mostly playing with DBBs.
- DBBs on cruisers... Plz go read my first post again.
- BFAW masked...
Pfff why do I bother answer to this kind of people.
Then why are you moaning about it here, instead of just going into the game and getting one of those "5/3 cruisers (...) already in the game"?
You know, I love frigates, everybody knows that, and there's this Baltim, 5/1 weapons, you know what? I want my BoP T6 5/1 loadout too! How 'bout my T'Liss? Because clearly all frigate ships must be 5/1 because one is, cuz...reasons? Kill diversity, let's just all run cookie cutter. I don't like Baltim but I like T6 Bop so now lets give bop 5/1 and make Baltim, a fine and expensive lobi ship, completely obsolete because T6 bop has the same damage but has a battle cloak. Great thinking.
There's a certain degree of turn rate a ship can have to be useful for cannons. Anything lower then 11-12 is too slow for cannons, hence all those cruisers with 5 or 6 or 7 turn rate are obviously designed for beams. You may not like that fact, but it changes not their stats. Yes, you can run RCSs, fleet neutroniums with +turn, science consoles with +turn, but you rob yourself of firepower and survivability. You wanted top DPS, by robbing yourself of unis that boosts your dps and installing RCSs you definitely won't achieve optimal DPS for that ship.
Any ways of adding turn rate means loosing DPS. Consoles? Can run unis to boost damage. Skills? Can run some other to boost crit or crit severity. Ship skills? Can run better turn+speed - or astika's supremacy instead... tough choice, eh?
DBBs are currently the highest DPS, and yes many run them on faster cruisers.
Well, first you say you like playing with DBBs then you go and speak negatively about BFAW. If you use DBB and not use BFAW then there's your problem right there.
Thank you very much for your kind words. It seems to me you feel everyone else is wrong including the Devs and you yourself correct, in which case we have nothing more to speak about.
Good luck.
Bortasqu' = 5.5 turn rate and only 18 inertia...like someone pointed out earlier it has one of the slowest turn rate in the game and I believe it is the lowest inertia (Whale of a Vo'Quv is only .5 slower turn and has a little more inertia as listed on the wiki)
Kurak = turn rate of 9 and 50 intertia...definitely a lot faster.
So please...stop using the argument that the Battlecruisers are slow ships, when you're trying to make claims with the slowest ship in the game practically.
Yup, that died after the Aux2Bat and DEM doffed problem. Then Elachi beams where all the rage. Then R&D hit and that Pen modifier became the must have item. Who knows, next season some other junk might be popular.
We don't need any changes to ships. Frankly, I'm surprised this thread has lasted so long. Probably because the OP is dead set on keeping it alive.
Don't give Cryptic any ideas.
Helpful Tools: Dictionary.com - Logical fallacies - Random generator - Word generator - Color tool - Extra Credits - List of common English language errors - New T6 Big booty tutorial
Lol what are you trying to prove?
I can do the exact same thing as you :
Elachi Sheshar = 6 turn rate 25 inertia.
Qib battlecruiser = 11 turn rate 55 inertia
So please try again.