[...]
If that was actually true then there would never be any threads of people asking how to do things/defeat x enemy/ pass x mission etc. Despite what you think skill is needed, especially when you go off meta.
I don't believe skill isn't needed, I believe it is easy to aquire and once you have done that, the gear rules STO. And that can hardly be argued by any people who are not deluding themselves.
Right...so EVERYONE else is wrong and you are right. [...]
Well, EVERYONE else refused to prove their point, I didn't.
A standard has already been established by the community as a whole for measuring performance.
If you wish to prove your point, do so using the standards already established, your feeble attempt to make your own standard was rightfully ignored.
Here is a post on the latest record run in ISA. Since no skill is involved according to you, go ahead and copy paste the build and post your parse showing you have matched this output. It should be easy.. no skill is needed right?
Go ahead.. we'll wait...
That standard doesn’t measure how effective a ship is in other content. It’s a measure of ISA and ISA only. It’s not even a true DPS measure anymore because it’s so short it’s basically replaced CA with ISA being used to measure spike DPS instead of sustained DPS which is what it used to be.
Also DPS alone does not tell you how effective a ship is. My low DPS ship kills faster and is way more effective than my high DPS ships. My 80k DPS ship can out kill many 200k DPS ships in lots of TFO's, it should even outperform that 980k ISA DPS run ship in certain TFO's. While there is a place for DPS there is for more then just DPS.
Saying that I fully agree there is skill involved in those runs and there is fun to be had trying to improve efficiency in DPS runs. But ISA runs are not a measure of how good a ship is in content.
I don’t think that Sea made any other claims. Still a ship with only lt. tac stations and 3 tac consoles slots is a clear downgrade compared to countless other ships we have when it comes to dealing DMG in matches where such a thing is required under current game rules. So basically everywhere.
Only option out of that would be to make faw2 or csv1 for example more desirable to have than their high ranking counterparts or to introduce other mechanics which makes them less relevant. Mixed Armaments Synergy for example is such a power and gives an alternative in a commander eng slot compared to a CSV of a commander tac slot in a tac ship for example. But for that you need a MW ship which will then even have yet another console slot everybody fills with a locater.
As far as the limited tac console slots is concerned I recall the pre-season13 meta where in fac sci console slots became more desirable to have in light of the over performing embassy plasma explosion consoles. As I recall most players (aside from min/mixers) where unhappy with that arrangement especially a lot of forum users.
All in all why do we have this discussion? We play a combat oriented pew pew game in which 4 tac consoles are simply better than 3 tac consoles and where faw3 is better than faw2. If that’s not the order of things I don’t know what would be.
Alternative would be to come up with content where the layout of the buran is more desirable than that of its competitors. That would change things but at the moment I don’t see much of it.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
That seems a bit too far to me because with the right gear, skill can be unimportant on normal.
Many of my builds rely on gear and gear synergy, Gear can be very important for some builds. Often one needs both gear and skills. If you took the idea of my build I just used it without all the important gear it wouldn’t work.
Gear matters just as much as skill. It’s a combination of the two and how you put the gear together and pilot. You can compensate for bad skill with better gear just like you can compensate for bad gear with better skill.
Of course gear does have a huge impact.
Of course skill has a huge impact.
Of course team play has a huge impact.
Nobody in this game will be able to tell you how big of an impact either of which has aside from taking a wild guess. We only see the multiplicative outcome of those 3 factors and look at the extremes of close to 1M DPS for groups that master it compared to groups that don’t and fail miserably in the very same content.
In all honesty, I don’t think this is a problem at all. On the contrary it’s most likely the very charm of this game compared to arcade games simply because it leaves room for everybody to improve and contribute.
Low on Gear -> Practice your piloting skills to make up for it!
Low on Skill -> Epic it all out and let the rest do by your pets!
No team in sight -> make a jack of all trades and master of none ship and set sails!
For 1M DPS you going to need it all, to simply beat the content not much of any.
Game is rather fine, only those who have it all get bored unless they set the goals for themselves.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
[...]
If that was actually true then there would never be any threads of people asking how to do things/defeat x enemy/ pass x mission etc. Despite what you think skill is needed, especially when you go off meta.
I don't believe skill isn't needed, I believe it is easy to aquire and once you have done that, the gear rules STO. And that can hardly be argued by any people who are not deluding themselves.
Right...so EVERYONE else is wrong and you are right. [...]
Well, EVERYONE else refused to prove their point, I didn't.
you could just build the ships people are using to do the dps values. but you refuse to do so too. so basically everyone should follow your way that you dont need to do anything at all.
=> easier if just one person is doing something than everyone else
at the end, the more abilities you have to use propperly, the more difficult it get. if you have just a faw or csv+beta+eptw to use its just moving into a flanking position if you have intel/raider and stay there start shooting at close range. but if you have like 15-20 abilities to use, it getting a bit more complicated to use them propperly in a short timeframe.
It is up to each player to decide what to in game and what tools feel right for the respective task he or she chooses. If that’s the Buran, then it is a good ship perhaps the best even.
Agreed - and back on topic (since this thread was apparently created to discuss the Buran's DPS potential, not DPS in general) my previous comments were simply intended to reflect how disappointed I have been at reading some of the comments I've seen in-game, on Reddit and on Facebook pertaining to the Buran.
In most cases the response seems to have been "hard pass because BOFF seating". Some players clearly can't see past that. Thankfully, whilst there has been similar here, on the forums, many of the regulars here know that the BOFF seating is not the be-all-end all. Honestly - there are SO many consoles, traits and abilities available now that it's quite easy to offset the supposedly lacking BOFF seating.
I guess the enjoyment I get out of the ship, and the fact that I love the design (enough to order a 3D print model), means I find the negativity toward it from some a bit disappointing. It's a great ship and more than capable of handling Advanced content PuGs.
In the debut livestream Borticus talked about the BOff seating. Him and Jette had seen the commentary and had a discussion about whether it was right. Apparently the focus of the criticism of the boff seating was the idea: "LtC Tac or it's junk". So they had a talk and the end result of the talk was to decide that the real question should be if it has room for at least 3 tac boff seats, which it does.
So they had a talk and the end result of the talk was to decide that the real question should be if it has room for at least 3 tac boff seats, which it does.
LOL, so they picked out something rather irrelevant and called it even.
Still thanks for info.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
It is up to each player to decide what to in game and what tools feel right for the respective task he or she chooses. If that’s the Buran, then it is a good ship perhaps the best even.
Agreed - and back on topic (since this thread was apparently created to discuss the Buran's DPS potential, not DPS in general) my previous comments were simply intended to reflect how disappointed I have been at reading some of the comments I've seen in-game, on Reddit and on Facebook pertaining to the Buran.
In most cases the response seems to have been "hard pass because BOFF seating". Some players clearly can't see past that. Thankfully, whilst there has been similar here, on the forums, many of the regulars here know that the BOFF seating is not the be-all-end all. Honestly - there are SO many consoles, traits and abilities available now that it's quite easy to offset the supposedly lacking BOFF seating.
I guess the enjoyment I get out of the ship, and the fact that I love the design (enough to order a 3D print model), means I find the negativity toward it from some a bit disappointing. It's a great ship and more than capable of handling Advanced content PuGs.
Well yea, while Hellspawny made a few min/max DPS examples for the ship on the league homepage to squeeze most out of it my personal off meta approach would be to set it up as a PvE tank. It has the relevant cruiser commands, enough free space to slot +aggro consoles and a lt sci slot for gravity wells which generate easy aggro.
Especially for phaser we have so many good uni consoles by now that the lack of tac consoles can be forgiven. Such a build would also work (without the +aggro elements) as kind of jack of all trades build which should not let you down if the pug you end up with is bad.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
[...]
A standard has already been established by the community as a whole for measuring performance.
1. That standard is useless, because it has too many variables in it to measure an individual ship's performance.
2. We are not trying to measure "performance" (and if we would, it would be mission completion time, not DPS, that would matter). We are trying to find the factuality about the influences of "skill" in pressing buttons vs gear.
3. I don't drive a big car, not because I could not afford it, but because I find it a pointless waste of resources.
I don't expect the usual suspects to grasp this intellectually, as the star of reason shines very far from their planet, but the test you make needs to be somewhat suited to the question you are asking.
For really determining the value of "skill" in pressing buttons vs. the value of equipment to press buttons on, we'd need a lot of data points and we'd NEED TO RULE OUT THE VARIABLES between individual ship builds, team compositions, skill point distributions, etc. That means ISA, or in fact any team mission, is useless. Yes, I know you don't understand that. I've given up explaining, just believe me if that'll have to do.
So, how do we do that? Sure, we all use the same build! Ship, gear, skill points, specializations, traits... all that needs to be the same. And then we need to collect lots of data points with that. But seriously, how can any reasonable person expect lots of people to pour tons of resources and time into copying a given build? Of course it would be stupid to expect that.
But hey, the game offers a way here! A way how we can actually all play with the same, near-endgame build, in a solo mission, so that ALL THE VARIABLES ARE ELIMINATED, and the best thing is, THIS ONLY COSTS LESS THAN HALF AN HOUR OF TIME, AND NO RESOURCES AT ALL!
Awesome, let's all do that, right. Just for science!
The people who claim it's all about skill whined about not being able to get super-duper gear. As if their great power derives from the great gear, and not from their skill. And as if this was about them personally, instead of about the game and the question at hand about it.
You know, like they really, truly don't understand anything.
dude, like i said.
it is about the
positioning (flanking, the amount of enemies you have in your weapon arc, distance to target). those 3 things will increase or decrease your damage at that point. the benefit from flanking is in your tooltip. weapon arc is in your tooltip too, difficulty is
to have a high, possibly 100% time on targets of enough targets for your attacks. Distance to target could be calculated too, staying at 10 km will reduce your energyweapons by 50-20% final damage
buffuse: in your example you have like 3-4 buffs + the buffs from your captain. thats not too difficult to use propperly. but if you have way more to press, it will get more difficult. in addition you want a high uptime of your buffs when shoot at targets and not waste them when flying around and dont have them rdy when you have enemies. the more buffs you have to press in a correct order and not doing that will increase the visibility of the difference
build (gear+traits+boffskills), yes could have a big impact especially the increase from mk xii=>xv for your weapons, but its not all. traits will have a big impact too, because they give you a great amount of damagepotential
if you fail with one of those parts, you will do less damage than others. sure, if you're great in one thing you might be able to compensate something. but all 3 together are part of the skill, even tho positioning and buffuse are the things YOU need to do mainly on your own while other could help you with the build. thats why a lot of people focus first on the build/gear, because they could get help with that and its defnitly the easiest part
in team enviroments, the team will have a huge impact on that one too.
but since you usualy refuse to understand that, hey feel free to enjoy the game
[...]
A standard has already been established by the community as a whole for measuring performance.
1. That standard is useless, because it has too many variables in it to measure an individual ship's performance.
2. We are not trying to measure "performance" (and if we would, it would be mission completion time, not DPS, that would matter). We are trying to find the factuality about the influences of "skill" in pressing buttons vs gear.
3. I don't drive a big car, not because I could not afford it, but because I find it a pointless waste of resources.
I don't expect the usual suspects to grasp this intellectually, as the star of reason shines very far from their planet, but the test you make needs to be somewhat suited to the question you are asking.
For really determining the value of "skill" in pressing buttons vs. the value of equipment to press buttons on, we'd need a lot of data points and we'd NEED TO RULE OUT THE VARIABLES between individual ship builds, team compositions, skill point distributions, etc. That means ISA, or in fact any team mission, is useless. Yes, I know you don't understand that. I've given up explaining, just believe me if that'll have to do.
So, how do we do that? Sure, we all use the same build! Ship, gear, skill points, specializations, traits... all that needs to be the same. And then we need to collect lots of data points with that. But seriously, how can any reasonable person expect lots of people to pour tons of resources and time into copying a given build? Of course it would be stupid to expect that.
But hey, the game offers a way here! A way how we can actually all play with the same, near-endgame build, in a solo mission, so that ALL THE VARIABLES ARE ELIMINATED, and the best thing is, THIS ONLY COSTS LESS THAN HALF AN HOUR OF TIME, AND NO RESOURCES AT ALL!
Awesome, let's all do that, right. Just for science!
The people who claim it's all about skill whined about not being able to get super-duper gear. As if their great power derives from the great gear, and not from their skill. And as if this was about them personally, instead of about the game and the question at hand about it.
You know, like they really, truly don't understand anything.
dude, like i said.
it is about the
[...]
Gear.
read what i wrote. and try to understand it. that could be extremly helpful for the discussion.
Let's refrain from attacking or ganging up on others, otherwise I'll just lock the thread.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
It is up to each player to decide what to in game and what tools feel right for the respective task he or she chooses. If that’s the Buran, then it is a good ship perhaps the best even.
Agreed - and back on topic (since this thread was apparently created to discuss the Buran's DPS potential, not DPS in general) my previous comments were simply intended to reflect how disappointed I have been at reading some of the comments I've seen in-game, on Reddit and on Facebook pertaining to the Buran.
In most cases the response seems to have been "hard pass because BOFF seating". Some players clearly can't see past that. Thankfully, whilst there has been similar here, on the forums, many of the regulars here know that the BOFF seating is not the be-all-end all. Honestly - there are SO many consoles, traits and abilities available now that it's quite easy to offset the supposedly lacking BOFF seating.
I guess the enjoyment I get out of the ship, and the fact that I love the design (enough to order a 3D print model), means I find the negativity toward it from some a bit disappointing. It's a great ship and more than capable of handling Advanced content PuGs.
In the debut livestream Borticus talked about the BOff seating. Him and Jette had seen the commentary and had a discussion about whether it was right. Apparently the focus of the criticism of the boff seating was the idea: "LtC Tac or it's junk". So they had a talk and the end result of the talk was to decide that the real question should be if it has room for at least 3 tac boff seats, which it does.
I can sort of see that because as a torpedo boat the Buran outperforms a lot of ships that do have LtC Tac but do not have command seating. My current build which is not a torpedo boat needs 4 tac seats but I can get away with 3 being Ensign level as long as I have at least one rank 2 slot all is good.
It is up to each player to decide what to in game and what tools feel right for the respective task he or she chooses. If that’s the Buran, then it is a good ship perhaps the best even.
Agreed - and back on topic (since this thread was apparently created to discuss the Buran's DPS potential, not DPS in general) my previous comments were simply intended to reflect how disappointed I have been at reading some of the comments I've seen in-game, on Reddit and on Facebook pertaining to the Buran.
In most cases the response seems to have been "hard pass because BOFF seating". Some players clearly can't see past that. Thankfully, whilst there has been similar here, on the forums, many of the regulars here know that the BOFF seating is not the be-all-end all. Honestly - there are SO many consoles, traits and abilities available now that it's quite easy to offset the supposedly lacking BOFF seating.
I guess the enjoyment I get out of the ship, and the fact that I love the design (enough to order a 3D print model), means I find the negativity toward it from some a bit disappointing. It's a great ship and more than capable of handling Advanced content PuGs.
In the debut livestream Borticus talked about the BOff seating. Him and Jette had seen the commentary and had a discussion about whether it was right. Apparently the focus of the criticism of the boff seating was the idea: "LtC Tac or it's junk". So they had a talk and the end result of the talk was to decide that the real question should be if it has room for at least 3 tac boff seats, which it does.
I can sort of see that because as a torpedo boat the Buran outperforms a lot of ships that do have LtC Tac but do not have command seating. My current build which is not a torpedo boat needs 4 tac seats but I can get away with 3 being Ensign level as long as I have at least one rank 2 slot all is good.
Hey thats cool.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
It is up to each player to decide what to in game and what tools feel right for the respective task he or she chooses. If that’s the Buran, then it is a good ship perhaps the best even.
Agreed - and back on topic (since this thread was apparently created to discuss the Buran's DPS potential, not DPS in general) my previous comments were simply intended to reflect how disappointed I have been at reading some of the comments I've seen in-game, on Reddit and on Facebook pertaining to the Buran.
In most cases the response seems to have been "hard pass because BOFF seating". Some players clearly can't see past that. Thankfully, whilst there has been similar here, on the forums, many of the regulars here know that the BOFF seating is not the be-all-end all. Honestly - there are SO many consoles, traits and abilities available now that it's quite easy to offset the supposedly lacking BOFF seating.
I guess the enjoyment I get out of the ship, and the fact that I love the design (enough to order a 3D print model), means I find the negativity toward it from some a bit disappointing. It's a great ship and more than capable of handling Advanced content PuGs.
In the debut livestream Borticus talked about the BOff seating. Him and Jette had seen the commentary and had a discussion about whether it was right. Apparently the focus of the criticism of the boff seating was the idea: "LtC Tac or it's junk". So they had a talk and the end result of the talk was to decide that the real question should be if it has room for at least 3 tac boff seats, which it does.
I can sort of see that because as a torpedo boat the Buran outperforms a lot of ships that do have LtC Tac but do not have command seating. My current build which is not a torpedo boat needs 4 tac seats but I can get away with 3 being Ensign level as long as I have at least one rank 2 slot all is good.
Hey thats cool.
Speaking of which have you seen the new rep? It looks like this ships very large hull is going synergise with many of the new rep items. Perhaps not as a serious high end build, but we could build around high hull capacity, with high passive hull regeneration and still end up with some decent damage output from the high hull damage linked from the new items. Also due to the high hull regeneration which will also synergize with the high hull capacity you won’t need any healing bridge officer powers so all those engineering teams and other healing powers can be swapped out for damage type powers.
The Buran seems really odd to me at first but now after seeing the new rep, I think I understand what the devs are aiming for. Its starting to look far more attractive now.
It is up to each player to decide what to in game and what tools feel right for the respective task he or she chooses. If that’s the Buran, then it is a good ship perhaps the best even.
Agreed - and back on topic (since this thread was apparently created to discuss the Buran's DPS potential, not DPS in general) my previous comments were simply intended to reflect how disappointed I have been at reading some of the comments I've seen in-game, on Reddit and on Facebook pertaining to the Buran.
In most cases the response seems to have been "hard pass because BOFF seating". Some players clearly can't see past that. Thankfully, whilst there has been similar here, on the forums, many of the regulars here know that the BOFF seating is not the be-all-end all. Honestly - there are SO many consoles, traits and abilities available now that it's quite easy to offset the supposedly lacking BOFF seating.
I guess the enjoyment I get out of the ship, and the fact that I love the design (enough to order a 3D print model), means I find the negativity toward it from some a bit disappointing. It's a great ship and more than capable of handling Advanced content PuGs.
In the debut livestream Borticus talked about the BOff seating. Him and Jette had seen the commentary and had a discussion about whether it was right. Apparently the focus of the criticism of the boff seating was the idea: "LtC Tac or it's junk". So they had a talk and the end result of the talk was to decide that the real question should be if it has room for at least 3 tac boff seats, which it does.
I can sort of see that because as a torpedo boat the Buran outperforms a lot of ships that do have LtC Tac but do not have command seating. My current build which is not a torpedo boat needs 4 tac seats but I can get away with 3 being Ensign level as long as I have at least one rank 2 slot all is good.
Hey thats cool.
Speaking of which have you seen the new rep? It looks like this ships very large hull is going synergise with many of the new rep items. Perhaps not as a serious high end build, but we could build around high hull capacity, with high passive hull regeneration and still end up with some decent damage output from the high hull damage linked from the new items. Also due to the high hull regeneration which will also synergize with the high hull capacity you won’t need any healing bridge officer powers so all those engineering teams and other healing powers can be swapped out for damage type powers.
The Buran seems really odd to me at first but now after seeing the new rep, I think I understand what the devs are aiming for. Its starting to look far more attractive now.
I have not yet seen the new stuff but will take a look.
I just follow your posts a bit as I aim for a kinetic build as a side quest on one of my toons as well and your posts are helpful. I currently use the jem hadar carrier which also has command powers and seem to do fine (think close to 200k in isa pugs). Atm I eye a bit the tzenkethi dread for that but that is a lot of EC for such a sidequest. We shal see.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
trust me i did. and all you did was just to say the same wrong statement again.
we proved what you want to find out already over and over again in the past.
and you want to prove something with pretty much suboptimal gear. actually you want to find out stuff by failing one of my points directly
having the same gear fine. but get the best possible and you will get better results for your test
It is up to each player to decide what to in game and what tools feel right for the respective task he or she chooses. If that’s the Buran, then it is a good ship perhaps the best even.
Agreed - and back on topic (since this thread was apparently created to discuss the Buran's DPS potential, not DPS in general) my previous comments were simply intended to reflect how disappointed I have been at reading some of the comments I've seen in-game, on Reddit and on Facebook pertaining to the Buran.
In most cases the response seems to have been "hard pass because BOFF seating". Some players clearly can't see past that. Thankfully, whilst there has been similar here, on the forums, many of the regulars here know that the BOFF seating is not the be-all-end all. Honestly - there are SO many consoles, traits and abilities available now that it's quite easy to offset the supposedly lacking BOFF seating.
I guess the enjoyment I get out of the ship, and the fact that I love the design (enough to order a 3D print model), means I find the negativity toward it from some a bit disappointing. It's a great ship and more than capable of handling Advanced content PuGs.
In the debut livestream Borticus talked about the BOff seating. Him and Jette had seen the commentary and had a discussion about whether it was right. Apparently the focus of the criticism of the boff seating was the idea: "LtC Tac or it's junk". So they had a talk and the end result of the talk was to decide that the real question should be if it has room for at least 3 tac boff seats, which it does.
I can sort of see that because as a torpedo boat the Buran outperforms a lot of ships that do have LtC Tac but do not have command seating. My current build which is not a torpedo boat needs 4 tac seats but I can get away with 3 being Ensign level as long as I have at least one rank 2 slot all is good.
Hey thats cool.
Speaking of which have you seen the new rep? It looks like this ships very large hull is going synergise with many of the new rep items. Perhaps not as a serious high end build, but we could build around high hull capacity, with high passive hull regeneration and still end up with some decent damage output from the high hull damage linked from the new items. Also due to the high hull regeneration which will also synergize with the high hull capacity you won’t need any healing bridge officer powers so all those engineering teams and other healing powers can be swapped out for damage type powers.
The Buran seems really odd to me at first but now after seeing the new rep, I think I understand what the devs are aiming for. Its starting to look far more attractive now.
I have not yet seen the new stuff but will take a look.
I just follow your posts a bit as I aim for a kinetic build as a side quest on one of my toons as well and your posts are helpful. I currently use the jem hadar carrier which also has command powers and seem to do fine (think close to 200k in isa pugs). Atm I eye a bit the tzenkethi dread for that but that is a lot of EC for such a sidequest. We shal see.
Thank you, I am glad some of my posts are useful. In a little more detail this is what I am thinking and it should work on any big hull ship not just the Buran. The two key elements of passive hull regeneration are the higher the hull repair rate % number, the faster the healing ticks happen. From memory and this might be a little off, somewhere around 300% to 400% is around about 1 healing tick per second. Next comes hull, the bigger the hull the bigger those healing ticks are. I could spend ages posting all the little tweaks I know about but I am not sure this is the right thread for that. Things like the TOS Bridge Officer Uhura boosts both hull regen and damage output. Anyway stack into hull Capacity to boost damage and passive healing amounts.
Next comes the Stamets and Tilly’s Ingenuity set based around a Quantum torpedo boat with Con firepower 2 and 3 slotted and because it me thrown in some rear Quantum mines. This will give none stop high yield torpedoes, a large hull Capacity bonus, an unknown but apparently Enormous Hull Regeneration bonus added with a few select hull traits and hull equipment you won’t need any bridge officer slots on healing officer.
Now every attack you do does extra Mycelial energy damage based on your Hull Capacity which should be massive at over 200k+ hull Capacity? With an added trigger ability that will deal damage to enemies based on your Hull Capacity. Now mix in the Lorca’s Ambition set so Dark Matter Quantum Torpedo shoot consent high yield via with Con firepower 2 and 3 with added Shield Penetration and a large crit chance bonus from Lorca’s Custom Fire Controls. So now all crit strikes gain a stacking bonus to Critical Severity and as an added bonus you are passively shooting free Dark Matter Quantums at enemies who fall below 50% Health.
For traits things like Tyler’s Duality Gain Critical Chance based off Hull Capacity to go with the Fleet Buran massive Hull Modifier of 1.54. This build theory should get around the lack of Lieutenant Commander Tactical slot, while also freeing up Commander Engineering to be DPS based instead of healing. Clearly there are some unknowns but the general idea should be sound and I believe this build offers a different style to what most people are used to using.
When I look at the Buran from this build point of view the bridge officer and console layout seems far less odd and even pretty good.
EDIT: While we don't have access to all this yet, I think I will recreate my old passive hull regeneration with added hull capacity build and see how it fairs in todays state of game. Any negatively I had towards the Bura layout has completely gone away now I have seen the new rep. For me the Buran has gone from zero desire to buy it, to very interesting.
You can give a guy the absolute best ship in the game, with the absolute best gear in the game, and they can STILL be terrible at killing enemies. On the other hand you can give a skilled player meh gear and a meh ship and they'll be able to do pretty well. So as the pic I provided says...
“If you have a ship against a single target, and fire all you got for as long as required in the best possible order of pressing the buttons at it, always being in the best position for doing so, then you will cause the best possible damage for that build. If you have one phaser beam array, that will be less than if you have eight, but either way, at that skill level, you will do the best possible damage for whatever you have. Agreed?”
No I do not agree as there is more to it than that and that is also an overly isolated situation. Just flying up to a single target and firing for as long as required in the best possible order of pressing the buttons in the best position would not automatically produce the best possible damage for my build, more so in a real situation. With my build flying up to a target after its appeared and following the rules you just listed produces noticeable worse damage for me then the way I normally act. With my build the gear is far less important then player skill and piloting.
“What exactly the DPS at 100% skill is, depends on the gear, and the gear alone,”
That is not fully correct because there is also a random element that impacts DPS beyond gear or skill. Even if someone has 100% the same skill and 100% the same gear they will not always get the same DPS.
If we exclude the random element then that statement is correct but the reverse is also correct as well. What exactly the DPS at 100% best gear is, depends on skill, and skill alone.
You can give a guy the absolute best ship in the game, with the absolute best gear in the game, and they can STILL be terrible at killing enemies. On the other hand you can give a skilled player meh gear and a meh ship and they'll be able to do pretty well. So as the pic I provided says...
Great and very relevant pic! Have two recent real life... er, game example to go with it:
A fellow fleet member who isn't a new player: Crafted him a full set of technically perfect VR gear for his ship and person that even included an experimental upgrade so his gear can rank up with him. He could be breaking the game with gear like this but unfortunately is having some issues leveling his new toon.
Another fleet member (me): there are many players who've posted in this thread that could hop into one of my main's ships, adjust the keybinds to suit, then proceed to double the damage I do at minimum (if not far more).
Why am I detecting high levels of sarcasm?
Probably because you're so dug into this belief that all you need is gear and a spacebar to do anything that nothing any of us say will change your mind. You're just "entertaining" us and "challenging" us to prove you wrong.
Gear is only part of the equasion. Not the end all solution. Piloting, timing of BOff abilities, knowing when to shoot and when NOT to shoot... Skill and Knowlege are just as important. A Veteran player will know these things. A rookie player won't. Money can by good gear, but HOW it is used will determine effectiveness.
I again point at the "Not the size of your howitzer" picture I posted earlier.
You want to see a player who won't get the most out of a top end build? How about any new player to the game who doesn't know the game mechanics? You give them a top end build, they won't know what does what or how to use it.
Why am I detecting high levels of sarcasm?
Probably because you're so dug into this belief that all you need is gear and a spacebar to do anything that nothing any of us say will change your mind. You're just "entertaining" us and "challenging" us to prove you wrong.
I knew that eventually, people would start to see this. That is why I have opted to limit my replies to this poster.
There are 2 possibilities here..
1. He knows what he is saying is ridiculous and he's just trying to get a reaction out of people.
2. He's actually dense enough to believe what he's saying.
In the case of #2, he's obviously not listening anyway so this entire exchange is futile. In the case of #1 he's not worth the interaction to begin with.
It's just a form of trolling, nothing more. He knows what he's saying is ridiculous, it's obvious. There are millions of opinions on this board and you can say pretty much anything and someone will have an opposing view.. except for this. Everyone agrees he's completely and totally wrong, it's not worth debating because there is no argument in his favor. All he is trying to do is invoke a reaction, nothing more. He's simply posing an absurd view point to see how people react.
You're all wasting your time trying to talk to this guy. See him for what he is and stop playing his game.
[...]
You can give a guy the absolute best ship in the game, with the absolute best gear in the game, and they can STILL be terrible at killing enemies.[...]
So you are saying you know people who would do less than 10k dps with a build similar to the ones that make the top of the charts? Can you introduce me in-game to such a person?
Yes I could but I won't. That would be highly unprofessional of me. He is the person whom I mentioned in my previous post as a fellow fleet member (however in my experience he's hardly alone).
Also, you mis-quoted me even though I agree with said mis-quote. I think Sea has the right idea. Am bowing out of this thread as it's simply going around in circles and is now more of an argument than a reasonable debate despite the best intentions of some good people. Good day sir.
Comments
I don’t think that Sea made any other claims. Still a ship with only lt. tac stations and 3 tac consoles slots is a clear downgrade compared to countless other ships we have when it comes to dealing DMG in matches where such a thing is required under current game rules. So basically everywhere.
Only option out of that would be to make faw2 or csv1 for example more desirable to have than their high ranking counterparts or to introduce other mechanics which makes them less relevant. Mixed Armaments Synergy for example is such a power and gives an alternative in a commander eng slot compared to a CSV of a commander tac slot in a tac ship for example. But for that you need a MW ship which will then even have yet another console slot everybody fills with a locater.
As far as the limited tac console slots is concerned I recall the pre-season13 meta where in fac sci console slots became more desirable to have in light of the over performing embassy plasma explosion consoles. As I recall most players (aside from min/mixers) where unhappy with that arrangement especially a lot of forum users.
All in all why do we have this discussion? We play a combat oriented pew pew game in which 4 tac consoles are simply better than 3 tac consoles and where faw3 is better than faw2. If that’s not the order of things I don’t know what would be.
Alternative would be to come up with content where the layout of the buran is more desirable than that of its competitors. That would change things but at the moment I don’t see much of it.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Of course gear does have a huge impact.
Of course skill has a huge impact.
Of course team play has a huge impact.
Nobody in this game will be able to tell you how big of an impact either of which has aside from taking a wild guess. We only see the multiplicative outcome of those 3 factors and look at the extremes of close to 1M DPS for groups that master it compared to groups that don’t and fail miserably in the very same content.
In all honesty, I don’t think this is a problem at all. On the contrary it’s most likely the very charm of this game compared to arcade games simply because it leaves room for everybody to improve and contribute.
Low on Gear -> Practice your piloting skills to make up for it!
Low on Skill -> Epic it all out and let the rest do by your pets!
No team in sight -> make a jack of all trades and master of none ship and set sails!
For 1M DPS you going to need it all, to simply beat the content not much of any.
Game is rather fine, only those who have it all get bored unless they set the goals for themselves.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
you could just build the ships people are using to do the dps values. but you refuse to do so too. so basically everyone should follow your way that you dont need to do anything at all.
=> easier if just one person is doing something than everyone else
at the end, the more abilities you have to use propperly, the more difficult it get. if you have just a faw or csv+beta+eptw to use its just moving into a flanking position if you have intel/raider and stay there start shooting at close range. but if you have like 15-20 abilities to use, it getting a bit more complicated to use them propperly in a short timeframe.
ingame: @Felisean
My character Tsin'xing
LOL, so they picked out something rather irrelevant and called it even.
Still thanks for info.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Well yea, while Hellspawny made a few min/max DPS examples for the ship on the league homepage to squeeze most out of it my personal off meta approach would be to set it up as a PvE tank. It has the relevant cruiser commands, enough free space to slot +aggro consoles and a lt sci slot for gravity wells which generate easy aggro.
Especially for phaser we have so many good uni consoles by now that the lack of tac consoles can be forgiven. Such a build would also work (without the +aggro elements) as kind of jack of all trades build which should not let you down if the pug you end up with is bad.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
dude, like i said.
it is about the
to have a high, possibly 100% time on targets of enough targets for your attacks. Distance to target could be calculated too, staying at 10 km will reduce your energyweapons by 50-20% final damage
if you fail with one of those parts, you will do less damage than others. sure, if you're great in one thing you might be able to compensate something. but all 3 together are part of the skill, even tho positioning and buffuse are the things YOU need to do mainly on your own while other could help you with the build. thats why a lot of people focus first on the build/gear, because they could get help with that and its defnitly the easiest part
in team enviroments, the team will have a huge impact on that one too.
but since you usualy refuse to understand that, hey feel free to enjoy the game
ingame: @Felisean
read what i wrote. and try to understand it. that could be extremly helpful for the discussion.
ingame: @Felisean
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Hey thats cool.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
The Buran seems really odd to me at first but now after seeing the new rep, I think I understand what the devs are aiming for. Its starting to look far more attractive now.
I have not yet seen the new stuff but will take a look.
I just follow your posts a bit as I aim for a kinetic build as a side quest on one of my toons as well and your posts are helpful. I currently use the jem hadar carrier which also has command powers and seem to do fine (think close to 200k in isa pugs). Atm I eye a bit the tzenkethi dread for that but that is a lot of EC for such a sidequest. We shal see.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
we proved what you want to find out already over and over again in the past.
and you want to prove something with pretty much suboptimal gear. actually you want to find out stuff by failing one of my points directly
having the same gear fine. but get the best possible and you will get better results for your test
ingame: @Felisean
Next comes the Stamets and Tilly’s Ingenuity set based around a Quantum torpedo boat with Con firepower 2 and 3 slotted and because it me thrown in some rear Quantum mines. This will give none stop high yield torpedoes, a large hull Capacity bonus, an unknown but apparently Enormous Hull Regeneration bonus added with a few select hull traits and hull equipment you won’t need any bridge officer slots on healing officer.
Now every attack you do does extra Mycelial energy damage based on your Hull Capacity which should be massive at over 200k+ hull Capacity? With an added trigger ability that will deal damage to enemies based on your Hull Capacity. Now mix in the Lorca’s Ambition set so Dark Matter Quantum Torpedo shoot consent high yield via with Con firepower 2 and 3 with added Shield Penetration and a large crit chance bonus from Lorca’s Custom Fire Controls. So now all crit strikes gain a stacking bonus to Critical Severity and as an added bonus you are passively shooting free Dark Matter Quantums at enemies who fall below 50% Health.
For traits things like Tyler’s Duality Gain Critical Chance based off Hull Capacity to go with the Fleet Buran massive Hull Modifier of 1.54. This build theory should get around the lack of Lieutenant Commander Tactical slot, while also freeing up Commander Engineering to be DPS based instead of healing. Clearly there are some unknowns but the general idea should be sound and I believe this build offers a different style to what most people are used to using.
When I look at the Buran from this build point of view the bridge officer and console layout seems far less odd and even pretty good.
EDIT: While we don't have access to all this yet, I think I will recreate my old passive hull regeneration with added hull capacity build and see how it fairs in todays state of game. Any negatively I had towards the Bura layout has completely gone away now I have seen the new rep. For me the Buran has gone from zero desire to buy it, to very interesting.
You can give a guy the absolute best ship in the game, with the absolute best gear in the game, and they can STILL be terrible at killing enemies. On the other hand you can give a skilled player meh gear and a meh ship and they'll be able to do pretty well. So as the pic I provided says...
That is not fully correct because there is also a random element that impacts DPS beyond gear or skill. Even if someone has 100% the same skill and 100% the same gear they will not always get the same DPS.
If we exclude the random element then that statement is correct but the reverse is also correct as well. What exactly the DPS at 100% best gear is, depends on skill, and skill alone.
- A fellow fleet member who isn't a new player: Crafted him a full set of technically perfect VR gear for his ship and person that even included an experimental upgrade so his gear can rank up with him. He could be breaking the game with gear like this but unfortunately is having some issues leveling his new toon.
- Another fleet member (me): there are many players who've posted in this thread that could hop into one of my main's ships, adjust the keybinds to suit, then proceed to double the damage I do at minimum (if not far more).
Glad peeps are enjoying the new Buran class.Piloting > gear
Probably because you're so dug into this belief that all you need is gear and a spacebar to do anything that nothing any of us say will change your mind. You're just "entertaining" us and "challenging" us to prove you wrong.
Gear is only part of the equasion. Not the end all solution. Piloting, timing of BOff abilities, knowing when to shoot and when NOT to shoot... Skill and Knowlege are just as important. A Veteran player will know these things. A rookie player won't. Money can by good gear, but HOW it is used will determine effectiveness.
I again point at the "Not the size of your howitzer" picture I posted earlier.
You want to see a player who won't get the most out of a top end build? How about any new player to the game who doesn't know the game mechanics? You give them a top end build, they won't know what does what or how to use it.
I knew that eventually, people would start to see this. That is why I have opted to limit my replies to this poster.
There are 2 possibilities here..
1. He knows what he is saying is ridiculous and he's just trying to get a reaction out of people.
2. He's actually dense enough to believe what he's saying.
In the case of #2, he's obviously not listening anyway so this entire exchange is futile. In the case of #1 he's not worth the interaction to begin with.
It's just a form of trolling, nothing more. He knows what he's saying is ridiculous, it's obvious. There are millions of opinions on this board and you can say pretty much anything and someone will have an opposing view.. except for this. Everyone agrees he's completely and totally wrong, it's not worth debating because there is no argument in his favor. All he is trying to do is invoke a reaction, nothing more. He's simply posing an absurd view point to see how people react.
You're all wasting your time trying to talk to this guy. See him for what he is and stop playing his game.
Also, you mis-quoted me even though I agree with said mis-quote. I think Sea has the right idea. Am bowing out of this thread as it's simply going around in circles and is now more of an argument than a reasonable debate despite the best intentions of some good people. Good day sir.