test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
RCS Accelerators need a rework
burstdragon323
Member Posts: 853 Arc User
Of many things needing a new perspective, RCS acceleratos is one of them. In the old days they were fine, but with all the new ships with turn rates 5 or below, a new perspective is needed. After a lot of thought, I came up with 2 options:
A-Rework the Turn Bonus, and remove the Consoles from Marks I-VI.
I would say that at least a 5% increase on the RCS from VII-XII would benefit.
B-Change the percent into a Solid number, and limit them to one per ship.
Opinions?
A-Rework the Turn Bonus, and remove the Consoles from Marks I-VI.
I would say that at least a 5% increase on the RCS from VII-XII would benefit.
B-Change the percent into a Solid number, and limit them to one per ship.
Opinions?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
My opinion extends to all ships. No ship of one class should ever be able to match the forte of another class. Science and cruisers should never have the DPS and turn of an escort and cruisers and escorts should never be able to out-aux or have a greater shield capacity than a science.
Even then, a system of harsh diminishing returns could be put in place, to make even a second console almost pointless...or enable the same feature as the universal consoles, so that only one could be equipped on each ship, so that cruisers would never out-turn science/escort ships (except the slower-turning science ships, of course).
It should be a number not a %
Percent only helps those with a good turn rate
I'n the first place.
Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng
JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
I think that is the point of them..
If they added a flat value of say.. or 3 .. right.. you could slot 3-4 of em on an oddy.. and it would move as swiftly as an escort, and slotting them on escorts would them then well.. just plain stupid fast on the turn. I think in this particular case, "Working as intended" is fine. They're designed as such to give a boost to an existing stat, while not breaking the ship out of it's role.
but, myself i think they are "working as intended"
Which is why I said that if they changed it to a solid number system for them, limit them to one per ship. The main point is to give Heavy Cruisers (Galaxy for Example) and Carriers (Atrox, Vo'Quv) a small increase to turn.
For example, the Mk XI Rare console could give +2 turn to Cruisers and +3 to Heavy Carriers. That would give the Galaxy and Atrox/Vo'Quv a turn of 8, thus making them more viable, but not game breaking.
using 2 white mk xiis/green mk xis/blue mk x's/etc will already accomplish that. As somebody posted above, by design you force to sacrifice a little bit of survivability for maneuverability.
cruisers have a different role compared to escorts and sci vessels. Cruiser are tanks and support ships, their primary weapons are beam array so they do not need a high turn rate.
Moreover they have usually 4 devices slots, so you have enough space to use batteries and deuterium surplus. Also cruisers have a lot of eng slots, so you can use one or two AtD to improve your turn rate.
If you need a better turn rate, you should work on your build and/or your boffs skill... non only your ship's equipment.
Moreover an rcs console with absolute number will be owerpowered for cruisers and carriers and underpowered for escorts (who absolutely need speed and turn rate).
Playing STO spamming FAW is like playing chess using always the computer's suggested moves
This game is pretty much DPS online anyway. A console that won't be that great for escort won't surely change that. Beside console slots are precious.
if rcs console will be useless for escorts, then escort's pilot will never use a eng slot for it instead of (for ex.) a neutronium alloy. Escort using an rcs sacrifice some of their tank capability.
Moreover while is someway "realistic" thinking about a device that improve a bit your engine, is difficult to immagine a gear that double it. Also today you want cruisers turn good as sci vessels (and sci vessels turn good as escorts), tomorrow escorts pilots will ask the same about neutronium alloy.
I think every ship should have some weak spots...
Playing STO spamming FAW is like playing chess using always the computer's suggested moves
if rcs console will be useless for cruisers, then cruiser's pilot will never use a eng slot for it instead of (for ex.) a neutronium alloy. Cruisers using an rcs sacrifice some of their tank capability.
See the twist ? :rolleyes:
Truth is, good escorts are already too much tanky.
P.S. I fly escorts or other agile ships
Change rcs consoles and you will see escorts using as much neutronium alloy as possible... so they will tank better because will have a too little advantage in using rcs consoles
p.s.
I fly escorts too.
Playing STO spamming FAW is like playing chess using always the computer's suggested moves
So why good escorts tank almost as good as cruisers ? :rolleyes: And noone can sit and take damage...no idea who can afford negative defense value and bonus crit severity on him :rolleyes: Maybe in PvE against weak NPCs...
IMHO many cruisers pilot do not have a decent build? 99.9% of stf I see a lot of cruisers, no one can tank a cube, just sometime I see cruiser really tanking even a tactical cube for all the time the team need to destroy it.... so what you are telling is not as true as you'd like.
The real problem is that players want a cruiser dealing high dps like an escort, so they need a better turn rate to face the opponent.... if you want that may be you should use an escort, or at least sacrifice some of your tank capability and use a pair of AtD.
p.s.
to the one who whant a flat +2 to rcs console... a purple mk XII console give a 40% and there are engines with great turn rate... much more then a flat +2
Playing STO spamming FAW is like playing chess using always the computer's suggested moves
I completely agree, I think players need to play to the strengths of their chosen ship class and minimise their disadvantages. I really enjoy the different styles of ship classes and the challenge of building them to their ultimate potential.
1. The percentage bonus benefits faster ships way more than it benefits slower ones.
2. A single RCS console is basically not worth equipping on a slower ship.
3. Diminishing returns from multiple consoles makes equipping multiple RCS consoles on slower ships non-optimal as opposed to using other Engineering consoles.
4. Faster ships really don't need much of a turn rate bonus; it's only really effective against other fast ships. (Escort on Escort).
5. Turn rate scores are not really a true linear measurement; the actual rate of turn goes up dramatically. A ship with a turn rate of 7 has more than a 1 degree advantage over a ship with a turn rate of 6.
6. Thus, what an RCS console actually does for a slow ship is not very intuitive, and leads new players to expect more than the console is actually designed to deliver.
There is, in fact, practically no good reason to install one on a Galaxy except possibly for Cruiser-on-Cruiser gameplay. You're probably better off equipping an engine with a Turn rate buff.
What a slow ship really needs is something more along the lines of "bursty" turn rate buffs, to make emergency high-speed turns.
The benefit of bursts to turn rate for any ship is to introduce a new variable into the tactical situation. Not to make cruisers turn as well as escorts... but to keep the escort pilots on their toes and not to assume that their target can't bring its' weapons to bear or bring a stronger shield facing about.
Of course, that's also one reason to keep Evasive Manuvers ready on a cruiser and to use it tactically rather than just an "Oh-No" button.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
R.I.P
The real reason for turn rate is to bring as many available weapons into firing arc as possible. This is why slow-turning ships and limited arc weapons are not a good combination. Even PvE teaches that much.
Also why wise players change direction often and do not neglect their rear weapon slots whilst flying slow ships.
The big problem for Science-oriented builds is that many Science abilities have a limited arc of effect and they're always in the forward arc. Even fast Science vessels can have a hard time bringing certain abilities into play against faster escorts, which is why Science benefits from anything that slows down the opponent.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
really?
I fly also a wells with a science toon, it's equiped with 2 dual beam bank, 1x photon torpedo in the front, 1xtemporal device, 1xphoton torpedo, 1xchroniton torpedo in the rear
tactical lt cmd with TT1, TS2, TS3
ensign eng: EPtS1
all others stations are used as follow:
PH, TBR, GW1, GW3
HE1, TSS2
HE1, TSS2
no rcs console
I have no problem to delivery about 4500 DPS even if my primary role is stopping, slowing, debuffing and healing.
I also used the long range science vessel retrofit... good enough even if less resistent. The problem is when you want to use a science ship like an escort or like a cruiser. The same when you want to use a cruiser like a science ship or an escort.
p.s.
before using an escort I used cruisers with my tact toon... I was not good as an eng toon in tanking, but also I had not as mucj dps as a tact toon on escort... simply because my ship wasn't an escort and my toon wasn't an engineer.
Do you want a pure dps scip? then you have to be a tactical on a escort. Do you want to be a great tank? then you have to be a engineer on a cruiser... You cann't do everything good.
Playing STO spamming FAW is like playing chess using always the computer's suggested moves
This.
Don't even need to read the rest of the thread. Each type of ship has it's own strengths and weaknesses, no ship should do everything. Hence why the Vesta is coming in 3 different specs.
The problem with that is it's the same as saying. Only use RCS on Sci ships. Littrially their tottally usless otherwise. BH it wouldn;t even allow a cruiser to match an escort's turn rate, there's typiclly a 7-9 point differance. Even at +2 per consle only a handful of cruiser could pump their turn rate up that high, and they'd have to do so entierly a the expense of tanking ability. +1.5 and no cruiser is keeping up.
Still, their usefulness scale with BASE turn rate, so once again they are actually worst for cruisers, and best for escorts :P
There is just fundamental flaw in how RCS console works, or rather does not, for anything but escorts.
Use half speed to turn your ship.I never use RCS Accelerator's on any ship.It will waste a engineering slot.
They are worse for use for bigger ship then smaller ships sure smaller ship's will turn faster any way it is mostly be cause of the size of the ship.No real point on wasting a engineering slot for that item.
I were to set up a keybind that would basically slam me into reverse...
Would I have the hand-eye coordination to pilot my ship in reverse using my mouse?
Judging from the few times I've done it manually, I would definitely need practice... I always get mixed up and turn the wrong way.
But that's another way to change direction more quickly than you'd be able to do otherwise, and that method would probably work a lot better for cruisers than escorts that would be likely to over-turn in reverse.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Using 2 RCS consoles I can get the Fleet Torkaht turnrate from mid to upper 20s before any other gear, boffs, or captain powers boost if further. I've used DHCs w/this boat in PvP.
Aux2Damp which all cruisers can use boosts among other things turnrate.
Omega shields boost not only turn rate, but inertia too.
APO, APA boost turnrate.
Evasives, Deut boost turnrate.
Even better piloting and spiking engine power while a quick reverse helps.
There are numerous ways to restrict a target's movement to make your's relatively better.
My guess is people who are having issues are using:
1. Ships designed to broadbeam and have turnrates under 7 and don't like that playstyle.
Or
2. Bad Engines/builds for the turnrate they want.
Random Quote from Kerrat
"Sumlobus@****: your mums eat Iced Targ Poo"
C&H Fed banter
base turn 5-9 +3
base turn 10-15 +3.5
base turn 16-23 +4