Only mines I can think that have any practical use are the Tractor ones (because they fire till the die, and have a long range, ending up doing pretty good damage for what they are), and the Nukara Web mines (because when they connect, their damage is extreme).
I am also not liking the Tribble Beam Overload much, it's TOO powerful. The people spamming FaW on Holodeck are just going to swap to New Beam Overload and do even more insane damage with their beams thanks to a rather massive 50% damage buff (that mechanic is good, but maybe 10%, 20% and 30% would be better numbers) and ANOTHER 50% Crit Severity, which those people already have a massive amount, resulting in broken damage per shot.
To put it in context, 50% Crit Severity is 2.5 CrtD weapon procs, which on it's own is very powerful. Adding an addition 50% base damage to that is just going to make Beam Overload the new Fire At Will, and make Cannons fall even further behind Beams in DPS.
Or, you could keep new OP BO as it is, and make Crit Severity give diminishing returns, capping at about 150% (much like damage resists cap at about 70% thanks to diminishing returns). That would stop all the DPS bloat, and make procs like Dmg and CrtH, and maybe even Acc, more useful, rather than just being CrtD. (Remember, base Crit Severity is 50%, each CrtD proc (and inbuilt proc on Antiprotons) on a weapon is an additional 20%, Max-DPS dictates either CrtDx3 + Pen + Acc/Dmg on an Antiproton Single Beam, and CrtDx4 + Acc/Dmg on a Coalition Disruptor Single Beam, which results in already being at 130% Crit Severity, then you can add skills, traits, temporary boosts and you quickly see them getting over 200%, at which point the extra damage is so extreme they are doing around 5x more damage per shot than a non-crit, Heck, I've witnessed one do over 30,000 damage on a SINGLE Single Coalition Disruptor Beam (even not counting the -100 Damage Reset Co-Dis can do still results in well over 15,000 a shot) hit!
So, in short, Buff Torpedoes/Mines so people want to use them for purposes other than "because Canon says so" (which is the reason I rig my ships with Torpedoes), Nerf Tribble Beam Overload (it's too powerful, but Buff Holodeck Beam Overload, it's not much of an upgrade over a standard volley), Make CrtD give diminishing returns and soft cap at 150% to stop DPS bloat.
Also, on the subject of Lances being "Heavy Weapons", they would need a significant Damage and/or Fire Rate buff to compete with the likes of the Railgun, a condition where they go wide-beam on ship seperation, and probably a restriction to the ship they came on (so they remain unique, but can be upgraded and become more viable).
If you can't solve it logically, solve it like a moron.
51 + 1 Foundry Character Slots is NOT enough. Some of us love our characters. If I want to buy more character slots, why can't I? I couldn't experience the entire Delta Recruitment event without deleting a character.
The Iconians themselves can't time travel because their memories revert, but there is nothing to say an Iconian couldn't write everything she needed to do on a PADD, pin it to herself, travel back, read the PADD, do the tasks and return. Or just get one of her Non-Herald underlings to go back in time for her.
Oh yeah, I do Foundry missions for both KDFs and Feds. Just search KSTF (Short for Kinas Special Task Force, where Kinas is the name of the Admiral you will be serving under). The earlier ones are less story based and more combat based, while the later ones have a much heavier story element, but keep the large battles.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Definitely would say that the lance-weapons would need a buff to their damage output, as well as to their rate of fire to make them worth using. I could see the different modes of firing the lance-weapon, being one wide-beam an one narrow-beam, could be actually the unique aspect to the ship they came on native maybe as a mode-change (kinda like how the rail-gun has the console for a aoe attack). Making that though a mode-change toggle on the native ship would be nice, as than you could choose which mode to use more actively, and would keep a unique aspect to the ships while allowing the lance-weapon to be used on more ships with a heavy weapon slot on them.
I have to agree that it's too powerful. However, this has more to do with a complete lack of incentive to use cannons and turrets. With the numbers I'm seeing in practice, there's no justifiable reason to use cannons over beams.
Dbbs are nearly as powerful as dual cannons anyway, 360 degree turrets are very weak compared to 360 degree omnibeams. On top of this, there is no extra proc with cannons anymore. The changes you're making have replaced one OP beam ability for another OP beam ability whilst nerfing cannons.
I personally would love to see them release a heavy version of the turret, could even keep the one per shp limit implemented for omni-arrays with it (so one crafted/rep, and one mission), which could be kinda like the heavy turret that you get from the Undine rep. Also giving turrets a heavy version could make it that ships that can't use dual cannons, could see using single cannons as a viable alternative to beam banks or arrays.
For me i think one issue with cannons specially dual cannons is that the two variants share a firing arc, which makes it seem at least that only one of these two versions can be in a viable/favorable standing with players, since if dual heavy cannons are in a good viable space dual cannons feel redundant. So even if just for the sake of testing, maybe try having the two versions of dual cannons get different firing arcs, such as having dual cannons gaining a 65-75 degree arc while keeping dual heavies at a 45 degree arc.
I personally would love to see them release a heavy version of the turret, could even keep the one per shp limit implemented for omni-arrays with it (so one crafted/rep, and one mission), which could be kinda like the heavy turret that you get from the Undine rep. Also giving turrets a heavy version could make it that ships that can't use dual cannons, could see using single cannons as a viable alternative to beam banks or arrays.
For me i think one issue with cannons specially dual cannons is that the two variants share a firing arc, which makes it seem at least that only one of these two versions can be in a viable/favorable standing with players, since if dual heavy cannons are in a good viable space dual cannons feel redundant. So even if just for the sake of testing, maybe try having the two versions of dual cannons get different firing arcs, such as having dual cannons gaining a 65-75 degree arc while keeping dual heavies at a 45 degree arc.
But doing that would mean that Dual Cannons would suffer a damage nerf, making them even more useless. Still not Single Cannon useless, but still useless.
Maybe generally cutting Beam damage down (or making them do the same damage, but rather than 4 powerful shots, do 8 weaker shots like that weird Dyson Rep Proton Weapon so they don't do as silly crit damage which cannons cannot compete with). Turrets being the weakest makes sense, as they are 360 firing (the Special (Mission) Omni Beams do the same DPS as turrets, but because Beams they do more per shot, while the Normal (Craftable/Lockbox) Omnis do the same DPS and damage per shot as regular single beams).
Also, the difference between Duals and Dual Heavies is that Duals are Weap cost 10 and lower Damage Per Shot, while Dual Heavies are 12 Weap Cost, much higher Damage per shot, identical DPS, and an innate +10% Crit Severity. I typically slot 2 DHC and a DC just for visuals (I don't care about chasing DPS, that's for the hyper rich in their 8 Single Beam Scimitars).
Also, the Heavy Turret and Heavy Single Cannons (Elachi Lobi and Hirogen Lobi to my knowledge, don't think there are any more) do the same thing that Dual Heavy Cannons do to Dual Cannons, no stated DPS buff, just less shots that are more powerful.
If you can't solve it logically, solve it like a moron.
51 + 1 Foundry Character Slots is NOT enough. Some of us love our characters. If I want to buy more character slots, why can't I? I couldn't experience the entire Delta Recruitment event without deleting a character.
The Iconians themselves can't time travel because their memories revert, but there is nothing to say an Iconian couldn't write everything she needed to do on a PADD, pin it to herself, travel back, read the PADD, do the tasks and return. Or just get one of her Non-Herald underlings to go back in time for her.
Oh yeah, I do Foundry missions for both KDFs and Feds. Just search KSTF (Short for Kinas Special Task Force, where Kinas is the name of the Admiral you will be serving under). The earlier ones are less story based and more combat based, while the later ones have a much heavier story element, but keep the large battles.
CrypticSpartans rebalancing has turned into an incompetent joke for the most part with play styles being skewed in favor of one set way of doing things with pushing people more to just use beams.
Everything has been turned down, including beams. Actually, cannons are at a pretty nice place from what I have been seeing in Tribble. Sci-Torp builds are also pretty good. All of them are pretty competitive (or even better than) beams at the moment in Tribble.
I'd say that so far the changes have added choices you can make in build direction. The "nerfs" look bad when you read them but once you've tried them out and adapted to them, they work pretty well.
Turrets do less base damage than omnibeams. I'm not talking about emitter arrays. Either Turrets need buffing or omnibeams need nerfing. It's silly to have two different 360 degree standard weapons doing very different dps.
Also 8 weaker shots on beams seems silly aswell because that gives them more proc than cannons, further decreasing their value. However if these could be modified by cannon abilities then that's fine. Except it still devalues normal Turrets and cannons xd
Turrets do less base damage than omnibeams. I'm not talking about emitter arrays. Either Turrets need buffing or omnibeams need nerfing. It's silly to have two different 360 degree standard weapons doing very different dps.
Also 8 weaker shots on beams seems silly aswell because that gives them more proc than cannons, further decreasing their value. However if these could be modified by cannon abilities then that's fine. Except it still devalues normal Turrets and cannons xd
Weapons now proc per cycle, NOT per shot. Most procs went per cycle before but some, like Plasma Explosion, went per shot. I think the only thing that procs on shot rather than cycle is crits, but I'm not sure on this, since there is no reliable way to check. But less damage per shot from crit bloat actually reduces damage overall, despite the maths saying it will be identical due to the random nature of crits.
Also, there are 2 different Omni Beams. The ones you get from Missions hit around the same damage of an identically procced, mk and quality (yes, quality provides a flat damage buff) turret, while the ones you get from Lockboxes and Crafting do the same damage as a single beam array. Both have a restriction limit that restricts them to 1 of each type as well so you can only ever have 2. Another thing with Omni Beams is that their procs aren't great, especially for crit abusing for max DPS. A well procced turret will hit better than an Omni beam on a crit abuser's ship.
The really powerful 360 degree weapon is the Omega Rep Kinetic Cutting Beam, which is neither a beam nor a cannon, more it's own weird thing, I would say it's closest relative would be the JJ-Lockbox's mining laser console. But that works equally well on a cannon or beam build so it's all good.
If you can't solve it logically, solve it like a moron.
51 + 1 Foundry Character Slots is NOT enough. Some of us love our characters. If I want to buy more character slots, why can't I? I couldn't experience the entire Delta Recruitment event without deleting a character.
The Iconians themselves can't time travel because their memories revert, but there is nothing to say an Iconian couldn't write everything she needed to do on a PADD, pin it to herself, travel back, read the PADD, do the tasks and return. Or just get one of her Non-Herald underlings to go back in time for her.
Oh yeah, I do Foundry missions for both KDFs and Feds. Just search KSTF (Short for Kinas Special Task Force, where Kinas is the name of the Admiral you will be serving under). The earlier ones are less story based and more combat based, while the later ones have a much heavier story element, but keep the large battles.
You say that, then show some proper numbers. Has energy damage been reduced to 60% of its old base or something?
I *strongly* doubt that beams have been dragged down so far that it makes up for the lowered science powers and kinetic massacre.
Ok... based on the "average" DPS run (semi-random DPS players, non-"nannied" L>R runs), current Holodeck numbers have beam builds at the 280-300k range, high end exotic builds are in the 170-220k range, torpedo ships are in the 180-220k range and cannons are in the 190-200k range.
Last few Tribble runs the "300k" beam boats are at the 150-160k range. The players I know to average in the mid 200k range in Holodeck are in the 80-120k range. The beam builds that are in the 100-150k in Holodeck struggle to hit 100k at Tribble. DHC builds in Tribble are at 150-160k range (for those that I know are at the 200k range in Holodeck). High-end EPG builds are in the 120-130k range. I haven't tested my own torp ships yet, but I think they should be hitting above 100k too.
So far I can see a narrower gap between the builds, which is a good thing. But the above are mostly high-end builds in ISA.
You say that, then show some proper numbers. Has energy damage been reduced to 60% of its old base or something?
I *strongly* doubt that beams have been dragged down so far that it makes up for the lowered science powers and kinetic massacre.
Ok... based on the "average" DPS run (semi-random DPS players, non-"nannied" L>R runs), current Holodeck numbers have beam builds at the 280-300k range, high end exotic builds are in the 170-220k range, torpedo ships are in the 180-220k range and cannons are in the 190-200k range.
Last few Tribble runs the "300k" beam boats are at the 150-160k range. The players I know to average in the mid 200k range in Holodeck are in the 80-120k range. The beam builds that are in the 100-150k in Holodeck struggle to hit 100k at Tribble. DHC builds in Tribble are at 150-160k range (for those that I know are at the 200k range in Holodeck). High-end EPG builds are in the 120-130k range. I haven't tested my own torp ships yet, but I think they should be hitting above 100k too.
So far I can see a narrower gap between the builds, which is a good thing. But the above are mostly high-end builds in ISA.
Those are down mostly to the fixes to Feedback Pulse which used to do insanely bloated damage (often 5x more than incoming damage); the needed nerf to FaW; and the thankful reduction of Plasma Explosion's damage (which no longer does shield pen damage and procs per cycle rather than shot). (I have a (Holodeck) parse of someone doing 232.47k DPS (with a 74k, 27k, and 2 sub 10k team) in a Disruptor type beam spammer Scimi which proves the above, 59.1k from FaW III, 46.7k from Plasma Explosion, 37.5k from FBP II, 27.4k from non-buffed Disruptors, 11.1k from the TTF Rep Disruptor FaW III (which is to be expected, considering it's special quality), etc)
As "Lower End" (AKA Not Crit Abusing) builds (20k+) aren't relying on these powers/consoles so much, they likely won't see much of a drop, if any. It's also highly unlikely the "Why are you in an Advanced Queue?" builds (Sub 10k with no tanking power) will see any difference at all.
Seems crit abusing is still able to produce insanely bloated numbers though, I say it's time for CrtD to have diminishing returns like Armour rating does with the soft cap at around 150% (100% over the base 50%) (Armour Rating's soft cap is pretty much 70%, pushing it higher is not really going to happen much) so that CrtDx3/4 isn't the only way to do DPS with weapons.
We are getting there. At least the discrepancy between weapon types is going. Now we need the discrepancy between CrtD and other procs shrinking.
If you can't solve it logically, solve it like a moron.
51 + 1 Foundry Character Slots is NOT enough. Some of us love our characters. If I want to buy more character slots, why can't I? I couldn't experience the entire Delta Recruitment event without deleting a character.
The Iconians themselves can't time travel because their memories revert, but there is nothing to say an Iconian couldn't write everything she needed to do on a PADD, pin it to herself, travel back, read the PADD, do the tasks and return. Or just get one of her Non-Herald underlings to go back in time for her.
Oh yeah, I do Foundry missions for both KDFs and Feds. Just search KSTF (Short for Kinas Special Task Force, where Kinas is the name of the Admiral you will be serving under). The earlier ones are less story based and more combat based, while the later ones have a much heavier story element, but keep the large battles.
I personally would love to see them release a heavy version of the turret, could even keep the one per shp limit implemented for omni-arrays with it (so one crafted/rep, and one mission), which could be kinda like the heavy turret that you get from the Undine rep. Also giving turrets a heavy version could make it that ships that can't use dual cannons, could see using single cannons as a viable alternative to beam banks or arrays.
For me i think one issue with cannons specially dual cannons is that the two variants share a firing arc, which makes it seem at least that only one of these two versions can be in a viable/favorable standing with players, since if dual heavy cannons are in a good viable space dual cannons feel redundant. So even if just for the sake of testing, maybe try having the two versions of dual cannons get different firing arcs, such as having dual cannons gaining a 65-75 degree arc while keeping dual heavies at a 45 degree arc.
But doing that would mean that Dual Cannons would suffer a damage nerf, making them even more useless. Still not Single Cannon useless, but still useless.
I am not sure that even with a damage nerf from the increased firing arc would render dual cannons useless. Since with a firing arc of 65-75 degrees it would make it that even some of the larger slow-turning dual cannon capable ships would need less things to boost their turning rate to use them effectively. which could mean they can slot more tactical/defensive based consoles or specs. It might render dual cannons largely useless on nimbler ships that can use heavy cannons without much turn boosting consoles, but would make using dual cannons on some of the other ships that can slot them more viable a choice.
Maybe generally cutting Beam damage down (or making them do the same damage, but rather than 4 powerful shots, do 8 weaker shots like that weird Dyson Rep Proton Weapon so they don't do as silly crit damage which cannons cannot compete with). Turrets being the weakest makes sense, as they are 360 firing (the Special (Mission) Omni Beams do the same DPS as turrets, but because Beams they do more per shot, while the Normal (Craftable/Lockbox) Omnis do the same DPS and damage per shot as regular single beams).
Honestly the more I think about it. The idea of making beams weaker against hulls would bring cannons up into a position of equality. Since beams would be good against shields an weak against hull, torpedoes as they are would be weak against shields an strong against hull, while cannons would fill the middle ground of equally effective against hulls an shields.
Also, the difference between Duals and Dual Heavies is that Duals are Weap cost 10 and lower Damage Per Shot, while Dual Heavies are 12 Weap Cost, much higher Damage per shot, identical DPS, and an innate +10% Crit Severity. I typically slot 2 DHC and a DC just for visuals (I don't care about chasing DPS, that's for the hyper rich in their 8 Single Beam Scimitars).
This kind of shows how overall dual heavies are largely a superior weapon choice to the dual cannons, mostly from the fact they get the innate critical severity, and even though in some ways the reduced weapon power cost could be nice to use the dual cannons, but it can be offset by the player managing their power better an so getting a boost to their spike damage.
Also, the Heavy Turret and Heavy Single Cannons (Elachi Lobi and Hirogen Lobi to my knowledge, don't think there are any more) do the same thing that Dual Heavy Cannons do to Dual Cannons, no stated DPS buff, just less shots that are more powerful.
I think that making some of the existing heavy turret like in the lobi store, and the undine rep have high damage output an dps would be nice, mostly as a way of giving a boost to single cannons making them a competitive option to beam array an bank set-ups. You could buff the damage of the heavy variants of the turrets (even creating some new ones that could be released in the missions like the omni-arrays are) to make using/slotting them attractive to make cannon set-ups more appealing to use, and yet keeping turrets still the weakest weapon type. Mostl the idea is more of a way of propping up single cannons being used on nondual cannon capable ships, though a direct buff to single cannons would be fine as well, but would merely be a question of what to buff on single cannons to make them more viable an option compared to beam arrays an banks.
I personally would like to see the damage as well as critical severity buff that happens after using beam overload for a short duration, but which only affects beam weapons be altered to affect all energy weapons. Maybe make it that it would give the stated bonus to beams, but would give a reduced boost to cannon weapons, which could make it quite appealing to use with a mixed beam/cannon build. It would still be interesting to see how it might have looked/worked to have the buff gained from using beam overload based on how many beams you have slotted, with the bonus being divided between slotted beams on the ship giving it a situation of both high burst damage an high sustain damage based on the build setup.
@roebotsixtyfive actually, there is a point where CrtD stacking doesn't give much benefit. Like any of the damage "categories", CrtD can get saturated. That's why Tacs go well with DmgX3 mods rather than CrtD.
@roebotsixtyfive actually, there is a point where CrtD stacking doesn't give much benefit. Like any of the damage "categories", CrtD can get saturated. That's why Tacs go well with DmgX3 mods rather than CrtD.
According to the DPS guide. Dmg outpeforms CrtD on lower crit chances, but anything near or over 20%+ Crit Chance it's CrtD that wins every time. And these DPS beam spam mobiles are always doing at least that many crits (which is why I call them crit abusers).
If you can't solve it logically, solve it like a moron.
51 + 1 Foundry Character Slots is NOT enough. Some of us love our characters. If I want to buy more character slots, why can't I? I couldn't experience the entire Delta Recruitment event without deleting a character.
The Iconians themselves can't time travel because their memories revert, but there is nothing to say an Iconian couldn't write everything she needed to do on a PADD, pin it to herself, travel back, read the PADD, do the tasks and return. Or just get one of her Non-Herald underlings to go back in time for her.
Oh yeah, I do Foundry missions for both KDFs and Feds. Just search KSTF (Short for Kinas Special Task Force, where Kinas is the name of the Admiral you will be serving under). The earlier ones are less story based and more combat based, while the later ones have a much heavier story element, but keep the large battles.
I am quite enjoying the discussion on torps and mines. While I am biased toward using them, I don't think the shield resistance mechanic needs to be changed. What I WOULD like to see is consistency in mechanics & behavior, as well as sorely needed bug fixes, THEN take stock of what can be changed to improve their performance without making them OP.
I will say this: The reason to change TriC's to their current mechanic went out the window with the Rail Gun.
With the fix in EPG and ControlX (thank you) and change to the Gravimetric torpedo (ONE rift proc guaranteed on each target in a Torpedo Spread), can we expect the two other torpedoes that are currently the exception to this rule (Neutronic and Quantum Phase) to receive a similar change? As it stands right now, those are the only two torpedoes that have a secondary effect to have a zero percent chance of generating a special effect on any target other than the main target when utilized under TS. This was initially changed during the Kemocite Incident to control the number of (out of control) procs occurring while under TS + KLW.
Furthermore, under the last series of tests:
Neutronic under TS does not have its drain effect stack per torpedo, and doesn't last the full duration of 6sec.
Quantum Phase High Yield (HY) does not drain the shields of the main target.
TriC torps do NOT have their cd's reset when affected by a Concentrate Firepower proc, despite the animation appearing to overlay an eligible HY buff for the TriC.
Targetable Torpedo Flight speed appears to be linked only to Torpedo Pre-Fire Sequence. Said torps can still be shot down easily.
The baseline torpedo speed for all torps should be at the Kelvin Photon Torpedo speed.
@roebotsixtyfive actually, there is a point where CrtD stacking doesn't give much benefit. Like any of the damage "categories", CrtD can get saturated. That's why Tacs go well with DmgX3 mods rather than CrtD.
According to the DPS guide. Dmg outpeforms CrtD on lower crit chances, but anything near or over 20%+ Crit Chance it's CrtD that wins every time. And these DPS beam spam mobiles are always doing at least that many crits (which is why I call them crit abusers).
The (Metals) DPS League certainly has very useful and good guides, but you have to consider the setting they tend to play their ships in. Tacs have a higher number of Cat 2 and Severity boosts so outside very quick pre-made runs (where CrtD spikes can affect final DPS numbers more), Dmg has a higher average boost to damage.
@roebotsixtyfive actually, there is a point where CrtD stacking doesn't give much benefit. Like any of the damage "categories", CrtD can get saturated. That's why Tacs go well with DmgX3 mods rather than CrtD.
According to the DPS guide. Dmg outpeforms CrtD on lower crit chances, but anything near or over 20%+ Crit Chance it's CrtD that wins every time. And these DPS beam spam mobiles are always doing at least that many crits (which is why I call them crit abusers).
The (Metals) DPS League certainly has very useful and good guides, but you have to consider the setting they tend to play their ships in. Tacs have a higher number of Cat 2 and Severity boosts so outside very quick pre-made runs (where CrtD spikes can affect final DPS numbers more), Dmg has a higher average boost to damage.
Except the charts you provided has Dmg being outclassed by CrtD half of the time (and vice versa) and the highest overall being CrtDx4. So CrtD is still higher. Plus these are all AP, which normally go with Pen.
But, the good news is these super spammy ships are having some of their more broken sources of bloated DPS fixed (Feedback Pulse in particular was beyond broken).
If you can't solve it logically, solve it like a moron.
51 + 1 Foundry Character Slots is NOT enough. Some of us love our characters. If I want to buy more character slots, why can't I? I couldn't experience the entire Delta Recruitment event without deleting a character.
The Iconians themselves can't time travel because their memories revert, but there is nothing to say an Iconian couldn't write everything she needed to do on a PADD, pin it to herself, travel back, read the PADD, do the tasks and return. Or just get one of her Non-Herald underlings to go back in time for her.
Oh yeah, I do Foundry missions for both KDFs and Feds. Just search KSTF (Short for Kinas Special Task Force, where Kinas is the name of the Admiral you will be serving under). The earlier ones are less story based and more combat based, while the later ones have a much heavier story element, but keep the large battles.
Of course they are halved. 2 of the charts were for non Tacs (where CrtD is better) and 2 are for Tacs (where Dmg is better).
Except it also showed that Non-Tacs got the highest DPS with CrtD, higher than any values Tacs get with Dmg. Which is total BS, since Tacs can do over 500k (I looked at the build from one of these 500k+ ones, and guess what, CrtD not Dmg), while Non-Tacs can only get about 350k.
The prices on the exchange also show this, with CrtDx3 being more expensive and hence more desirable than Dmgx3. The supply is equal, the crafting bots churn them out equally as it's all an equal RNG, but the demand for CrtDx3 is higher hence the price is higher.
If you can't solve it logically, solve it like a moron.
51 + 1 Foundry Character Slots is NOT enough. Some of us love our characters. If I want to buy more character slots, why can't I? I couldn't experience the entire Delta Recruitment event without deleting a character.
The Iconians themselves can't time travel because their memories revert, but there is nothing to say an Iconian couldn't write everything she needed to do on a PADD, pin it to herself, travel back, read the PADD, do the tasks and return. Or just get one of her Non-Herald underlings to go back in time for her.
Oh yeah, I do Foundry missions for both KDFs and Feds. Just search KSTF (Short for Kinas Special Task Force, where Kinas is the name of the Admiral you will be serving under). The earlier ones are less story based and more combat based, while the later ones have a much heavier story element, but keep the large battles.
Comments
I am also not liking the Tribble Beam Overload much, it's TOO powerful. The people spamming FaW on Holodeck are just going to swap to New Beam Overload and do even more insane damage with their beams thanks to a rather massive 50% damage buff (that mechanic is good, but maybe 10%, 20% and 30% would be better numbers) and ANOTHER 50% Crit Severity, which those people already have a massive amount, resulting in broken damage per shot.
To put it in context, 50% Crit Severity is 2.5 CrtD weapon procs, which on it's own is very powerful. Adding an addition 50% base damage to that is just going to make Beam Overload the new Fire At Will, and make Cannons fall even further behind Beams in DPS.
Or, you could keep new OP BO as it is, and make Crit Severity give diminishing returns, capping at about 150% (much like damage resists cap at about 70% thanks to diminishing returns). That would stop all the DPS bloat, and make procs like Dmg and CrtH, and maybe even Acc, more useful, rather than just being CrtD. (Remember, base Crit Severity is 50%, each CrtD proc (and inbuilt proc on Antiprotons) on a weapon is an additional 20%, Max-DPS dictates either CrtDx3 + Pen + Acc/Dmg on an Antiproton Single Beam, and CrtDx4 + Acc/Dmg on a Coalition Disruptor Single Beam, which results in already being at 130% Crit Severity, then you can add skills, traits, temporary boosts and you quickly see them getting over 200%, at which point the extra damage is so extreme they are doing around 5x more damage per shot than a non-crit, Heck, I've witnessed one do over 30,000 damage on a SINGLE Single Coalition Disruptor Beam (even not counting the -100 Damage Reset Co-Dis can do still results in well over 15,000 a shot) hit!
So, in short, Buff Torpedoes/Mines so people want to use them for purposes other than "because Canon says so" (which is the reason I rig my ships with Torpedoes), Nerf Tribble Beam Overload (it's too powerful, but Buff Holodeck Beam Overload, it's not much of an upgrade over a standard volley), Make CrtD give diminishing returns and soft cap at 150% to stop DPS bloat.
Also, on the subject of Lances being "Heavy Weapons", they would need a significant Damage and/or Fire Rate buff to compete with the likes of the Railgun, a condition where they go wide-beam on ship seperation, and probably a restriction to the ship they came on (so they remain unique, but can be upgraded and become more viable).
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
I have to agree that it's too powerful. However, this has more to do with a complete lack of incentive to use cannons and turrets. With the numbers I'm seeing in practice, there's no justifiable reason to use cannons over beams.
Dbbs are nearly as powerful as dual cannons anyway, 360 degree turrets are very weak compared to 360 degree omnibeams. On top of this, there is no extra proc with cannons anymore. The changes you're making have replaced one OP beam ability for another OP beam ability whilst nerfing cannons.
For me i think one issue with cannons specially dual cannons is that the two variants share a firing arc, which makes it seem at least that only one of these two versions can be in a viable/favorable standing with players, since if dual heavy cannons are in a good viable space dual cannons feel redundant. So even if just for the sake of testing, maybe try having the two versions of dual cannons get different firing arcs, such as having dual cannons gaining a 65-75 degree arc while keeping dual heavies at a 45 degree arc.
But doing that would mean that Dual Cannons would suffer a damage nerf, making them even more useless. Still not Single Cannon useless, but still useless.
Maybe generally cutting Beam damage down (or making them do the same damage, but rather than 4 powerful shots, do 8 weaker shots like that weird Dyson Rep Proton Weapon so they don't do as silly crit damage which cannons cannot compete with). Turrets being the weakest makes sense, as they are 360 firing (the Special (Mission) Omni Beams do the same DPS as turrets, but because Beams they do more per shot, while the Normal (Craftable/Lockbox) Omnis do the same DPS and damage per shot as regular single beams).
Also, the difference between Duals and Dual Heavies is that Duals are Weap cost 10 and lower Damage Per Shot, while Dual Heavies are 12 Weap Cost, much higher Damage per shot, identical DPS, and an innate +10% Crit Severity. I typically slot 2 DHC and a DC just for visuals (I don't care about chasing DPS, that's for the hyper rich in their 8 Single Beam Scimitars).
Also, the Heavy Turret and Heavy Single Cannons (Elachi Lobi and Hirogen Lobi to my knowledge, don't think there are any more) do the same thing that Dual Heavy Cannons do to Dual Cannons, no stated DPS buff, just less shots that are more powerful.
Everything has been turned down, including beams. Actually, cannons are at a pretty nice place from what I have been seeing in Tribble. Sci-Torp builds are also pretty good. All of them are pretty competitive (or even better than) beams at the moment in Tribble.
I'd say that so far the changes have added choices you can make in build direction. The "nerfs" look bad when you read them but once you've tried them out and adapted to them, they work pretty well.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Turrets do less base damage than omnibeams. I'm not talking about emitter arrays. Either Turrets need buffing or omnibeams need nerfing. It's silly to have two different 360 degree standard weapons doing very different dps.
Also 8 weaker shots on beams seems silly aswell because that gives them more proc than cannons, further decreasing their value. However if these could be modified by cannon abilities then that's fine. Except it still devalues normal Turrets and cannons xd
I *strongly* doubt that beams have been dragged down so far that it makes up for the lowered science powers and kinetic massacre.
Weapons now proc per cycle, NOT per shot. Most procs went per cycle before but some, like Plasma Explosion, went per shot. I think the only thing that procs on shot rather than cycle is crits, but I'm not sure on this, since there is no reliable way to check. But less damage per shot from crit bloat actually reduces damage overall, despite the maths saying it will be identical due to the random nature of crits.
Also, there are 2 different Omni Beams. The ones you get from Missions hit around the same damage of an identically procced, mk and quality (yes, quality provides a flat damage buff) turret, while the ones you get from Lockboxes and Crafting do the same damage as a single beam array. Both have a restriction limit that restricts them to 1 of each type as well so you can only ever have 2. Another thing with Omni Beams is that their procs aren't great, especially for crit abusing for max DPS. A well procced turret will hit better than an Omni beam on a crit abuser's ship.
The really powerful 360 degree weapon is the Omega Rep Kinetic Cutting Beam, which is neither a beam nor a cannon, more it's own weird thing, I would say it's closest relative would be the JJ-Lockbox's mining laser console. But that works equally well on a cannon or beam build so it's all good.
Ok... based on the "average" DPS run (semi-random DPS players, non-"nannied" L>R runs), current Holodeck numbers have beam builds at the 280-300k range, high end exotic builds are in the 170-220k range, torpedo ships are in the 180-220k range and cannons are in the 190-200k range.
Last few Tribble runs the "300k" beam boats are at the 150-160k range. The players I know to average in the mid 200k range in Holodeck are in the 80-120k range. The beam builds that are in the 100-150k in Holodeck struggle to hit 100k at Tribble. DHC builds in Tribble are at 150-160k range (for those that I know are at the 200k range in Holodeck). High-end EPG builds are in the 120-130k range. I haven't tested my own torp ships yet, but I think they should be hitting above 100k too.
So far I can see a narrower gap between the builds, which is a good thing. But the above are mostly high-end builds in ISA.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Those are down mostly to the fixes to Feedback Pulse which used to do insanely bloated damage (often 5x more than incoming damage); the needed nerf to FaW; and the thankful reduction of Plasma Explosion's damage (which no longer does shield pen damage and procs per cycle rather than shot). (I have a (Holodeck) parse of someone doing 232.47k DPS (with a 74k, 27k, and 2 sub 10k team) in a Disruptor type beam spammer Scimi which proves the above, 59.1k from FaW III, 46.7k from Plasma Explosion, 37.5k from FBP II, 27.4k from non-buffed Disruptors, 11.1k from the TTF Rep Disruptor FaW III (which is to be expected, considering it's special quality), etc)
As "Lower End" (AKA Not Crit Abusing) builds (20k+) aren't relying on these powers/consoles so much, they likely won't see much of a drop, if any. It's also highly unlikely the "Why are you in an Advanced Queue?" builds (Sub 10k with no tanking power) will see any difference at all.
Seems crit abusing is still able to produce insanely bloated numbers though, I say it's time for CrtD to have diminishing returns like Armour rating does with the soft cap at around 150% (100% over the base 50%) (Armour Rating's soft cap is pretty much 70%, pushing it higher is not really going to happen much) so that CrtDx3/4 isn't the only way to do DPS with weapons.
We are getting there. At least the discrepancy between weapon types is going. Now we need the discrepancy between CrtD and other procs shrinking.
I am not sure that even with a damage nerf from the increased firing arc would render dual cannons useless. Since with a firing arc of 65-75 degrees it would make it that even some of the larger slow-turning dual cannon capable ships would need less things to boost their turning rate to use them effectively. which could mean they can slot more tactical/defensive based consoles or specs. It might render dual cannons largely useless on nimbler ships that can use heavy cannons without much turn boosting consoles, but would make using dual cannons on some of the other ships that can slot them more viable a choice.
Honestly the more I think about it. The idea of making beams weaker against hulls would bring cannons up into a position of equality. Since beams would be good against shields an weak against hull, torpedoes as they are would be weak against shields an strong against hull, while cannons would fill the middle ground of equally effective against hulls an shields.
This kind of shows how overall dual heavies are largely a superior weapon choice to the dual cannons, mostly from the fact they get the innate critical severity, and even though in some ways the reduced weapon power cost could be nice to use the dual cannons, but it can be offset by the player managing their power better an so getting a boost to their spike damage.
I think that making some of the existing heavy turret like in the lobi store, and the undine rep have high damage output an dps would be nice, mostly as a way of giving a boost to single cannons making them a competitive option to beam array an bank set-ups. You could buff the damage of the heavy variants of the turrets (even creating some new ones that could be released in the missions like the omni-arrays are) to make using/slotting them attractive to make cannon set-ups more appealing to use, and yet keeping turrets still the weakest weapon type. Mostl the idea is more of a way of propping up single cannons being used on nondual cannon capable ships, though a direct buff to single cannons would be fine as well, but would merely be a question of what to buff on single cannons to make them more viable an option compared to beam arrays an banks.
I personally would like to see the damage as well as critical severity buff that happens after using beam overload for a short duration, but which only affects beam weapons be altered to affect all energy weapons. Maybe make it that it would give the stated bonus to beams, but would give a reduced boost to cannon weapons, which could make it quite appealing to use with a mixed beam/cannon build. It would still be interesting to see how it might have looked/worked to have the buff gained from using beam overload based on how many beams you have slotted, with the bonus being divided between slotted beams on the ship giving it a situation of both high burst damage an high sustain damage based on the build setup.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
...So are you using alot of =% to Exotic vs EPG consoles?
My side by side comparison has my Deteriorating SecDef proc 447 EPG ship go from 6,325 (Holodeck) to 4,500 (Tribble)
Rouge Sto Wiki Editor.
According to the DPS guide. Dmg outpeforms CrtD on lower crit chances, but anything near or over 20%+ Crit Chance it's CrtD that wins every time. And these DPS beam spam mobiles are always doing at least that many crits (which is why I call them crit abusers).
I will say this: The reason to change TriC's to their current mechanic went out the window with the Rail Gun.
With the fix in EPG and ControlX (thank you) and change to the Gravimetric torpedo (ONE rift proc guaranteed on each target in a Torpedo Spread), can we expect the two other torpedoes that are currently the exception to this rule (Neutronic and Quantum Phase) to receive a similar change? As it stands right now, those are the only two torpedoes that have a secondary effect to have a zero percent chance of generating a special effect on any target other than the main target when utilized under TS. This was initially changed during the Kemocite Incident to control the number of (out of control) procs occurring while under TS + KLW.
Furthermore, under the last series of tests:
Neutronic under TS does not have its drain effect stack per torpedo, and doesn't last the full duration of 6sec.
Quantum Phase High Yield (HY) does not drain the shields of the main target.
TriC torps do NOT have their cd's reset when affected by a Concentrate Firepower proc, despite the animation appearing to overlay an eligible HY buff for the TriC.
Targetable Torpedo Flight speed appears to be linked only to Torpedo Pre-Fire Sequence. Said torps can still be shot down easily.
The baseline torpedo speed for all torps should be at the Kelvin Photon Torpedo speed.
Thank you.
Fleet Defiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support | Fleet Manticore Kinetic Strike Ship | Tactical Command Kinetic Siege Refit | Fleet Defiant Quantum Phase Escort | Fleet Valiant Kinetic Heavy Fire Support
Turning the Galaxy-X into a Torpedo Dreadnought & torpedo tutorial, with written torpedo guide.
"A good weapon and a great strategy will win you many battles." - Marshall
I knew using Kinetics would be playing the game on hard mode, but what I didn't realize was how bad the deck is stacked against Kinetics.
The math says otherwise.
The (Metals) DPS League certainly has very useful and good guides, but you have to consider the setting they tend to play their ships in. Tacs have a higher number of Cat 2 and Severity boosts so outside very quick pre-made runs (where CrtD spikes can affect final DPS numbers more), Dmg has a higher average boost to damage.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Except the charts you provided has Dmg being outclassed by CrtD half of the time (and vice versa) and the highest overall being CrtDx4. So CrtD is still higher. Plus these are all AP, which normally go with Pen.
But, the good news is these super spammy ships are having some of their more broken sources of bloated DPS fixed (Feedback Pulse in particular was beyond broken).
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Except it also showed that Non-Tacs got the highest DPS with CrtD, higher than any values Tacs get with Dmg. Which is total BS, since Tacs can do over 500k (I looked at the build from one of these 500k+ ones, and guess what, CrtD not Dmg), while Non-Tacs can only get about 350k.
The prices on the exchange also show this, with CrtDx3 being more expensive and hence more desirable than Dmgx3. The supply is equal, the crafting bots churn them out equally as it's all an equal RNG, but the demand for CrtDx3 is higher hence the price is higher.