Nothing more satisfying in space combat for me than watching a cluster torpedo split into mines around an enemy hull and the subsequent barrage of explosions and damage numbers that inevitably follows.
Well, ...nothing except for perhaps a colossal Tricobalt mine explosion that knocks hostile vessels around and creates a tear in subspace. Of course, combining both experiences into a Vaadwaur Cluster Torpedo makes for my absolute favorite weapon.
I will admit that dual Tetryon beams are pleasing to look at, though.
Exotic is not a "weapon type". Exotic is a means of dispensing death usually via compaction and/or extreme temperature adjustments... Though you can find "exotic" effects on various weapons...
As long as vanilla AP has an inherent 20% additional CritD, it will always have an edge.
Only when you parse. And only when you "really really build right".
For example, if I were to swap out my little Feddie Sci ship's Polaron build for an antiproton build, I couldn't get enough CritH/extra CritD to "make up" for the effects my polaron drains do to help my science be even more efficient, even though I would "parse higher".
Draining power lowers enemy shield resistance, shield recharge rates, slows them down, weakens energy weapon and exotic damage, lessens heals, etc. All of which help make the target "more susceptible" to exotic effects and/or my comrade's antiproton weapons...
Hence why I said that it's not the numerics, it's the proc. Build for CritH/CritD? Vanilla Antiproton. Build for Science? Polaron or Tetryon are the more apt suspects for those with significant DrainX investments, Plasma burns appreciate EPGs IIRC, Disruptors' damage resistance debuff is generally appreciated, and some builds roll with Phaser's "pray for the right offline effect at the right time..."
Wish the poll had "dependent on build" as an answer. Cause that's the trvth. And as old as that Roman Building Spelling...
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]
As much as it is true that how effective the proc of an energy type would be is based on what kind of build you are using, the fact that ant-proton has a stati bonus over a proc like other energy types does make it a bit unbalanced. AAN I know the reasoning for it was that in the past anti-proton was rarer to be found, but now with how common an easy it is to obtain anti-proton weapons, maybe the static critical severity buff should changed to be more inline with the other energy-types.
I personally would love to see them rework the innate static critical severity bonus of the anti-proton type into being more of a stacking proc, which might have a slightly higher chance to proc, while also having the fully stacked critical severity buff being between 25-30%. Though seeing them implement the Proton energy type into a stand alone type would be nice too, which could have a similar stacking shield/defense by-passing effect (though a weaker overall damage maybe to make up for the shield/defense by-passing effect.).
Surprised Disruptors are getting no love.
Love mine.
Disrputors are great. Especially Coalition Disruptors... unless they are bugged and I just don't know it. Thinking about switching all my KDF tactical and engineer captains to that weapon. I traditionally give all my science captains polaron weapons regardless of the faction. Disruptors are actually the weapon type I use the most at the moment.
Disruptors (normal and Coalition): KDF Tactical #1, KDF Engineer, Fed Engineer #2
Polaron: Romulan Science, KDF Science
Plasma: Romulan Tacticle (Gonna switch over to (Plasmatic Biomatter once I have a full set)
Phasers (Agony): Fed Engineer #1
Antiproton: KDF Tactical #2
Tetryon: Fed Tactical
Torpedo: Fed Science
Yes sir, that's a good KDF right there.
#GreenMachine
I have:
Dedicated rainbow(Fed Eng, makes a serious effort to run as many colors of beams as possible, build is tweaked to not care about damage types)
mixed disruptor(KDF tac)
mixed phaser(Fed Sci)
mixed Polaron(fed tac)
mixed plasma(fed eng)
mixed phaser(fed tac)
mixed tetryon(fed sci)
mixed phaser(fed eng)
mixed AP(fed tac)
RomPlas(rom sci)
RomPlas(rom Eng)
Delta Pol(rom tac)
mixed disruptor(kdf sci)
casual rainbow(rom eng, Reman who uses whatever he has lying around)
Coalition Disruptor(Talaxian fed tac)
TOS Phaser(TOS eng)
This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
The best weapon is quite easy to understand. It's whatever doff/adm card is best for the mission. There you go, the best weapons for end game STO are doffs and Adm cards.
As much as it is true that how effective the proc of an energy type would be is based on what kind of build you are using, the fact that ant-proton has a stati bonus over a proc like other energy types does make it a bit unbalanced. AAN I know the reasoning for it was that in the past anti-proton was rarer to be found, but now with how common an easy it is to obtain anti-proton weapons, maybe the static critical severity buff should changed to be more inline with the other energy-types.
I personally would love to see them rework the innate static critical severity bonus of the anti-proton type into being more of a stacking proc, which might have a slightly higher chance to proc, while also having the fully stacked critical severity buff being between 25-30%. Though seeing them implement the Proton energy type into a stand alone type would be nice too, which could have a similar stacking shield/defense by-passing effect (though a weaker overall damage maybe to make up for the shield/defense by-passing effect.).
No, the "static bonus to crit" on Antiprotons is the "proc". Always has been. However, the effect was "balanced" around the original "standard" crit rates (ie, at the "nominal" crit rate, how much extra severity is needed to kill targets as fast as those set on plasma fire or suffered through a shields offline moment...)
The reason it seems everyone "loves" Antiproton is that it's one of the two "energies" that provide a "directly visible" effect on a parse - Tetryon and it's "shield damage" entry being the other one. The other four don't show up in parses per-se, but the effects of them can when one looks hard enough...
The "unbalancing" of Antiproton comes from the proliferation of CritH - no other weapon can "trigger it's proc effect" as frequently as an antiproton ship which doubles or trebles it's critical hit rate...
And to a lesser extent, same with the "Protonic" effect - if you look at the "Protonic Polaron down the Drain Cruiser" thread, you see the entire concept of the build is to stack "dice rolls" and "CritH" so that when you're getting 40 checks for a crit per volley, and 25% of them crits generate proton damage - at a 10% crit rate you should land at least one proton damage effect per volley. When tested under the effects of the Sci ultimate Probability manipulation? Pain. Lots of pain... (hmm, 40 checks, 50% landing rate, 20 crits, 25% of these generate proton damage, so ~5 proton damages per volley...)
And remember, much like Antiproton's crit effect, the number's set around landing a proton damage effect once every 4 crits, at the standard crit hit percentages, and replacing the effects of say a [DMG] mod...
To me, either no or all procs should revolve around the critical hit rate. This way, you don't encounter situations like "you're building for crit? Antiproton or Protonics are the way to go", but if you're building for something else, use blank.
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]
Comments
Nothing more satisfying in space combat for me than watching a cluster torpedo split into mines around an enemy hull and the subsequent barrage of explosions and damage numbers that inevitably follows.
Well, ...nothing except for perhaps a colossal Tricobalt mine explosion that knocks hostile vessels around and creates a tear in subspace. Of course, combining both experiences into a Vaadwaur Cluster Torpedo makes for my absolute favorite weapon.
I will admit that dual Tetryon beams are pleasing to look at, though.
Hell yeah Gabriel Bell!
Exotic is not a "weapon type". Exotic is a means of dispensing death usually via compaction and/or extreme temperature adjustments...
Only when you parse. And only when you "really really build right".
For example, if I were to swap out my little Feddie Sci ship's Polaron build for an antiproton build, I couldn't get enough CritH/extra CritD to "make up" for the effects my polaron drains do to help my science be even more efficient, even though I would "parse higher".
Draining power lowers enemy shield resistance, shield recharge rates, slows them down, weakens energy weapon and exotic damage, lessens heals, etc. All of which help make the target "more susceptible" to exotic effects and/or my comrade's antiproton weapons...
Hence why I said that it's not the numerics, it's the proc. Build for CritH/CritD? Vanilla Antiproton. Build for Science? Polaron or Tetryon are the more apt suspects for those with significant DrainX investments, Plasma burns appreciate EPGs IIRC, Disruptors' damage resistance debuff is generally appreciated, and some builds roll with Phaser's "pray for the right offline effect at the right time..."
Wish the poll had "dependent on build" as an answer. Cause that's the trvth. And as old as that Roman Building Spelling...
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 personally would love to see them rework the innate static critical severity bonus of the anti-proton type into being more of a stacking proc, which might have a slightly higher chance to proc, while also having the fully stacked critical severity buff being between 25-30%. Though seeing them implement the Proton energy type into a stand alone type would be nice too, which could have a similar stacking shield/defense by-passing effect (though a weaker overall damage maybe to make up for the shield/defense by-passing effect.).
Dedicated rainbow(Fed Eng, makes a serious effort to run as many colors of beams as possible, build is tweaked to not care about damage types)
mixed disruptor(KDF tac)
mixed phaser(Fed Sci)
mixed Polaron(fed tac)
mixed plasma(fed eng)
mixed phaser(fed tac)
mixed tetryon(fed sci)
mixed phaser(fed eng)
mixed AP(fed tac)
RomPlas(rom sci)
RomPlas(rom Eng)
Delta Pol(rom tac)
mixed disruptor(kdf sci)
casual rainbow(rom eng, Reman who uses whatever he has lying around)
Coalition Disruptor(Talaxian fed tac)
TOS Phaser(TOS eng)
My character Tsin'xing
A chill just ran down my spine when i read that.
My character Tsin'xing
No, the "static bonus to crit" on Antiprotons is the "proc". Always has been. However, the effect was "balanced" around the original "standard" crit rates (ie, at the "nominal" crit rate, how much extra severity is needed to kill targets as fast as those set on plasma fire or suffered through a shields offline moment...)
The reason it seems everyone "loves" Antiproton is that it's one of the two "energies" that provide a "directly visible" effect on a parse - Tetryon and it's "shield damage" entry being the other one. The other four don't show up in parses per-se, but the effects of them can when one looks hard enough...
The "unbalancing" of Antiproton comes from the proliferation of CritH - no other weapon can "trigger it's proc effect" as frequently as an antiproton ship which doubles or trebles it's critical hit rate...
And to a lesser extent, same with the "Protonic" effect - if you look at the "Protonic Polaron down the Drain Cruiser" thread, you see the entire concept of the build is to stack "dice rolls" and "CritH" so that when you're getting 40 checks for a crit per volley, and 25% of them crits generate proton damage - at a 10% crit rate you should land at least one proton damage effect per volley. When tested under the effects of the Sci ultimate Probability manipulation? Pain. Lots of pain... (hmm, 40 checks, 50% landing rate, 20 crits, 25% of these generate proton damage, so ~5 proton damages per volley...)
And remember, much like Antiproton's crit effect, the number's set around landing a proton damage effect once every 4 crits, at the standard crit hit percentages, and replacing the effects of say a [DMG] mod...
To me, either no or all procs should revolve around the critical hit rate. This way, you don't encounter situations like "you're building for crit? Antiproton or Protonics are the way to go", but if you're building for something else, use blank.
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]