FAW was indeed better once upon a time, but it has always been more akin to cannon scatter volley skill than the rapid cannon fire skill.
That's true, but I'm not sure there needs to be a "rapid fire" skill for beams... for one, there already is a single-target direct damage buff similar to rapid fire, it's called BO (and no, I don't mean body odor).
One solution, as others have said, may be to significantly lessen the innate power drain for snoozers as a class. So a beam overload on a single array, while not being omgroflstomp, would add up to some strong, fairly spammable pressure damage. Another would be to strengthen the subsystem targeting skills while balancing them with longer cooldowns, making them viable high-level powers. Knocking someone's engines or shields off is a damn strong damage buff, after all.
That's true, but I'm not sure there needs to be a "rapid fire" skill for beams... for one, there already is a single-target direct damage buff similar to rapid fire, it's called BO (and no, I don't mean body odor).
Beam Overload doesn't really INCREASE your damage, it just rearranges it by front loading a powerful shot followed by weaker shots as your power recovers. Unless you use it while under Nadion Inversion (stupid-long cooldown), or immediately buff with a battery (stupid-long cooldown) or EPTW (boff slot and not as effective) after using it.
The problem is that fire at will and beam overload both have drawbacks. Fire at will murders your power level and aggros the entire universe if you use it with arrays (though, DBB+FAW is great for ships that can actually turn well enough to use DBBs), and Overload has the aforementioned power drain. They require secondary abilities or actions in order to compensate for their drawbacks and make them a net gain. Cannon abilities.... don't have drawbacks. Rapid Fire is a straight up "moar dakka!!!" single target thing, and even Scatter Volley is a DPS increase along with multi-target ability. Neither of them are especially cruel to your power level when you use them. They take your guns and they make them more effective, period.
Further consider that the majority of cruisers can't use many tactical abilities, not even the level 3 versions of the beam tactics.
The only time I've ever seen a broadside attack that made me say "Woah" in the same awed fashion as seeing a twinked escort melt 3 elite spheres in about 6 seconds, is using 8 beam arrays with FAW3 and Nadion Inversion. It does quite serious damage to a multitude of targets. But you can only do it every 3 minutes. You can try fighting the power drain of FAW broadside beam boats with EPTW and batteries and EPS Transfer and that DEM doff that adds drain resistance, but in the final analysis trying to milk reliable and significant damage out of a cruiser this way throws away the healing and resists you will need to survive all the return fire.
So yeah. Beam array broadsiding is terrible because of the power drain, beam tactical abilities are complicated and doubled-edged.
That's true, but I'm not sure there needs to be a "rapid fire" skill for beams... for one, there already is a single-target direct damage buff similar to rapid fire, it's called BO (and no, I don't mean body odor).
One solution, as others have said, may be to significantly lessen the innate power drain for snoozers as a class. So a beam overload on a single array, while not being omgroflstomp, would add up to some strong, fairly spammable pressure damage. Another would be to strengthen the subsystem targeting skills while balancing them with longer cooldowns, making them viable high-level powers. Knocking someone's engines or shields off is a damn strong damage buff, after all.
An much earlier version of Beam Overload actually use to have an "bug" that let the skill affect all beam arrays on a ship. Broadside cruisers for that period of time were something to behold. Not a suggestion, just an amusing anecdote.
Lessening power drain would definitely be a good start though.
An much earlier version of Beam Overload actually use to have an "bug" that let the skill affect all beam arrays on a ship. Broadside cruisers for that period of time were something to behold. Not a suggestion
Actually I think this could be reworked into the game, make Beam Overload affect all beams for 50% of the current power drain (per beam) and increase all beam damage by 50% (For a 6 beam cruiser you would have the same effect as current but spread across all the beams) for 1 firing sequence (4 hits per beam at 50% extra damage) giving a fair mount of damage with less recovery time, this would make a broadside something once again to "behold". It would also make weapon batteries more useful on cruisers as they would offer that instant recovery many would want/need.
What FAW needs is for accuracy mods to be taken into account, needs more DPS boost at it's lower levels and for lower drain on the power system (which would add to the DPS boost), the only problem then is the amount of competition between these two skills, at the moment I dare not use BO as it plays havoc with my capability to do damage as it is whereas I can use FAW to great effect covering an enemy fleet in AP:B so escorts can wipe them out in seconds.
I also think the gcd for these could be dropped as the power price of doing it would be impractical unless you know with absolute certainty you are going down so you'd have something comparable to GDF a sort of "I'm going down, lets do max damage before I do" of course this is likely overpowered so I can't support it myself, I'm just putting it out there.
Its not as terrible to broadside as it seems if you run 150ish weapon power, easy enough to accomplish in several escorts and most cruisers. But a buff to beam arrays will be more beneficial for a beam escort than a beam cruiser.
But once again in that situation +15 weapon power > +5 weapon power.
It is the hull, the cruiser itself that is the problem. The foundation is broken and provides no inherently useful benefits unlike the other hulls that mean anything. Eight weapon slots = pointless and +10% max hull = pointless.
But a buff to beam arrays will be more beneficial for a beam escort than a beam cruiser.
Even so, escort pilots looking for DPS will still go for DHCs as they still do over 2x the damage of a beam array, 3DHCs will level with a 6 beam cruiser (I say 6 because 8 is power suicide, I've tried), anything more than that is beyond said cruiser, then you add buffs and the difference is even greater.
A slight buff to beam damage and/or a reduction in their power drain would go some way to helping cruisers without affecting escorts, then there is the much needed revamp of beam buff powers would bring them to a more level playing field.
Its not as terrible to broadside as it seems if you run 150ish weapon power, easy enough to accomplish in several escorts and most cruisers. But a buff to beam arrays will be more beneficial for a beam escort than a beam cruiser.
But once again in that situation +15 weapon power > +5 weapon power.
Very true unless Cryptic were to introduce an new class(es) of beam arrays that were not useable by escorts.
It is the hull, the cruiser itself that is the problem. The foundation is broken and provides no inherently useful benefits unlike the other hulls that mean anything. Eight weapon slots = pointless and +10% max hull = pointless.
I agree it's a large part of the problem, but what would help with this flaw? An additional +5 power to all subsystems, add innate resistance bonuses to the hull, more raw hull (say 50% instead of 10%), +2 to turn rates, an bonus that would reduce energy weapon power drain? There are a lot of potential options.
Even so, escort pilots looking for DPS will still go for DHCs as they still do over 2x the damage of a beam array, 3DHCs will level with a 6 beam cruiser (I say 6 because 8 is power suicide, I've tried), anything more than that is beyond said cruiser, then you add buffs and the difference is even greater.
A slight buff to beam damage and/or a reduction in their power drain would go some way to helping cruisers without affecting escorts, then there is the much needed revamp of beam buff powers would bring them to a more level playing field.
Assuming a standard beam array is meant to punch as hard as a Dual Heavy Cannon.
Curently the fanbase is still comparing Baseballs to basketballs and its not a fair comparison becuase while they are both balls they are both equal to what one uses them for.
Beam Arrays = wide AoE attack that requires little manuevering or attention to details. One can litterly pick a target in range and fire from almost any angle at them. Some angles in fact that the escort must work twice as hard to overcome becuase thier weapons of choice while doing more damage have a too narrow a firing arc unless you are pointing directly at your target.
Dual Beam Banks = Higher damage at the cost of a narrower firing arc.
Beam Arrays can do excellent damage with 6-8 beams if one pushes the weapons power beyond 125 for the duration of an attack.
Engineers are especially good at this since they have a inherent power conserving ability and it can even be accomplished via DEM and certain DOffs that help conserve power.
The belief that a Cruiser with beam arrays is not a challenge to the Escorts supremancy in battle is not true anymore and is fading fast.
The idea that one good way to help the Cruiser is to accent thier sheer mass in the form of better hitpoints (though healing may have to be assessed to keep the Cruiser from being beyond death) say a 25-30% increase.
Of course this will have to be fairly done to all Cruisers, Battle Cruisers and hybrids ingame.
Why so low?
Simple. I've seen too many Good Cruiser players flying around Ker'rat with a pack of BoPs, Raptors and Battle Cruisers behind them doing nothing until finally the sheer number of attackers over whelms them.
This is not the characteristics of a weak vessel.
Changes to Beam Arrays and Dual Beam Banks that have already been discussed add nausieum would help as not the Cruiser has more than one wide firing arc styled weapon.
Create the Heavy beam arrays and put them ingame as the new top end damaging beam weapon instead of dual beams.
Do not Increase the turn rate of Federation Cruisers. Instead reduce the deficiency that low engine power has just for Cruisers so that they can zero-axis spin quicker to rotate a shield facing towards the enemy.
Remove any effect Tactical Captain Buffs or tactical BOff buffs have on Science powers.
The Tac/Escort pairing will still be the best DD in the game but only with his on toys now.
The background premise of this thread is still trying to make the Cruiser a Cruiscort in my opinion and that is a path to us as a playerbase being right back here in 6 months complaining about how bad escorts have it and how easy Crusiers have become and frankly I'm tired of the silly back in forth this game has on balance that flip/flops everytime somebody thinks thier favorite "thing" is lackluster compared to others.
Originally Posted by bareel
It is the hull, the cruiser itself that is the problem. The foundation is broken and provides no inherently useful benefits unlike the other hulls that mean anything. Eight weapon slots = pointless and +10% max hull = pointless.
I must agree. Hull gamewide is somewhat useless unless you are a master of Hull and/or resist stacking.
It is too easily destroyed and too quickly destroyed. Hull should be hard to hurt and slow to heal in my opinion.
How many times have we seen a Cruiser or other vessel in canon still functioning with whole decks exposed to space due to being attacked. Kirk made a carreer out of it.
We know from ships like the Fleet Olympic (which has an innate ability that is similar to the Biofuncton Monitor Console) that it is possible for Cryptic to assign ships capabilities that are very much like consoles or skill points.
Perhaps instead of increased hitpoints...what about giving cruisers "hull plating" and "armor reinforcements" points?
This would make them more resistant without the need to increase their HP in any way.
I'd also suggest that the less maneuverable the ship is, the more bonus points it should get.
This way "sluggish" ships would benefit more, making them more attractive.
I must agree. Hull gamewide is somewhat useless unless you are a master of Hull and/or resist stacking.
It is too easily destroyed and too quickly destroyed. Hull should be hard to hurt and slow to heal in my opinion.
How many times have we seen a Cruiser or other vessel in canon still functioning with whole decks exposed to space due to being attacked. Kirk made a carreer out of it.
QFT.
You always saw ships slowly loosing their shields during battle in the shows and movies, but I don't think I ever saw them recovering until afterwards.
I'd actually like to see both damage and healing toned down to make resistances and base heals (like shield regen rate) more relevant. Fighting would be much more strategic, and intense, if you knew that your shield levels and hull damage were going to persist for extended periods rather then recovering instantly.
I'd actually like to see both damage and healing toned down to make resistances and base heals (like shield regen rate) more relevant. Fighting would be much more strategic, and intense, if you knew that your shield levels and hull damage were going to persist for extended periods rather then recovering instantly.
I disagree, it would only serve to make burst damage (escorts) even more effective...
At the moment an cruiser is a hard target for an escort, now strip them of their ability to heal up quickly from that and it's the easiest thing in the game to take down as they can't escape the overwhelming force of DHCs, even a science ship would last longer...
I disagree, it would only serve to make burst damage (escorts) even more effective...
At the moment an cruiser is a hard target for an escort, now strip them of their ability to heal up quickly from that and it's the easiest thing in the game to take down as they can't escape the overwhelming force of DHCs, even a science ship would last longer...
I did suggest damage be reduced, and it would have to depend on how it's balanced. I'm not talking dropping damage by 1 or 2 percent here, but extending a fight so it takes 2-3 times longer for the average player to loose (or take down) shields.
If done properly escorts would STILL do the most damage, but would also have the least amount of HP and DR skills. Being able to position your escort and staying out of the different weapon arcs would actually be necessary again, rather then sitting in one place and opening up with DHCs for the entire time.
You always saw ships slowly loosing their shields during battle in the shows and movies, but I don't think I ever saw them recovering until afterwards.
If you go back and do a study you will find that is not always true. For Example if the Enterprise was attacked by say a race considered weaker than themselves they shields tended to last longer but against a race considered stronger or more advanced then the shields dropped quicker.
The difference between being attacked by say the Breen versus being attacked by the Borg.
I'd actually like to see both damage and healing toned down to make resistances and base heals (like shield regen rate) more relevant. Fighting would be much more strategic, and intense, if you knew that your shield levels and hull damage were going to persist for extended periods rather then recovering instantly.
I would prefer healing and resistance stay the same for shields as one's Shield resist can be Buffed strictly by Shield Power levels, EPTS*, TSS* directly to offset damage.
Hull does not have such a mechanic as a power level that can increase its resistance, for that we have armor and alloys. If the diminishing returns for Armor/Alloy did not start with the first console placed on a ship such a mechanic may function better.
The upside is though you can buff that resistance (both shield and hull actually) with abilities like PH, HE and A2sif or especially A2D.
Maybe the key is to give Auxpower an inherent Hull damage resistance dependent on its level that is in addition to what ever else the player may use abilitywise?
I was under the belief that a vessels Intertial dampners system was an automatic effect and the A2D ability was a conciuos effort to send more power to said system in a emergency.
The sheer intellectual dishonesty exhibited in threads such as this is impressive.
I don't think it's possible to explain anything to the likes of bareel. For every argument you produce, he has an army of strawmen to assail.
Nobody could keep up with the ludicrous statements made in these threads: afterall, it's much easier to make a silly claim ("Escorts are better tanks than Cruisers!" than to refute it.
So yeah, you guys keep believing that a Ship with 350%-400% of an Escort's survivability, ~60%-75% of an Escort's damage and potentially a bit of control (EWP) is UP compared to said Escort.
If Cryptic is wise enough not to listen, good; if they aren't, we'll just all play Cruisers Online.
If you go back and do a study you will find that is not always true. For Example if the Enterprise was attacked by say a race considered weaker than themselves they shields tended to last longer but against a race considered stronger or more advanced then the shields dropped quicker.
The difference between being attacked by say the Breen versus being attacked by the Borg.
True, but you could get the same effect from a large shield capacity and strong resistances.
You always heard "Shields down to X%" in a fight, but never "Shields recovered to X%". Granted, the shields probably were recovering but my point was the damage always seemed to be cumulative, there were no quick fixes.
I'm just splitting hairs really, the effect is the same.
Anyway, to come back to the discussion at hand, I like the idea that AUX level would provide bonus armor resistance. Actually since you brought it up, I think if Cryptic spent some time trying to re balance the power systems it would help cruisers immensely.
The incentives and bonuses for putting power in the shields and weapons systems are MUCH higher then the aux and eng. Almost to the point where it's a waste unless you have a specific build/ability you want to buff.
If Aux and Eng had more relevant bonuses, the cruiser's inherent power bonuses would have more weight and help even things out a little bit.
How does this crazy idea strike you: The max power level for Eng, Shields and Weapons would be dependent on your Aux level (or Eng). Not a 1 for 1, but enough that you couldn't set power to 25 and forget about it.
The sheer intellectual dishonesty exhibited in threads such as this is impressive.
I don't think it's possible to explain anything to the likes of bareel. For every argument you produce, he has an army of strawmen to assail.
Nobody could keep up with the ludicrous statements made in these threads: afterall, it's much easier to make a silly claim ("Escorts are better tanks than Cruisers!" than to refute it.
So yeah, you guys keep believing that a Ship with 350%-400% of an Escort's survivability, ~60%-75% of an Escort's damage and potentially a bit of control (EWP) is UP compared to said Escort.
If Cryptic is wise enough not to listen, good; if they aren't, we'll just all play Cruisers Online.
The idea that escorts are just as effective/better tanks as cruisers comes not from the fact that escorts are tanks in the same sense that cruisers are, but that they can more effectively tank in PvE combat thanks to a number of skills that enhance escort survivability in combination with a number of high level, no drawback damage boosting skills that punt the escort's damage up to the point that cookie cutter cannon-build escorts can in many cases park their asses right in the face of a target and soak more than enough damage to utterly destroy said target before dying...and do it in such a small fraction of the time it takes for a cruiser to kill the target that even if it moves off between kills and waits until hull and shields are fully regenerated without heals that it can still make better time in clearing out enemies than a cruiser that's fitted out with hull and shield heals and dives into combat without any rest.
It's not true 100% of the time, especially when you're fighting the larger bosses that really do take multiple people working on it to kill in any sort of appreciable time frame, but it holds true for enough of the game that it is a valid argument for "Escorts are overpowered when compared to the other ships." Again, this is a generalization, but can you honestly tell me you can't solo a cube with an escort and kill it in less time than a cruiser or science vessel could?
This is where the idea that escorts are better tanks come from.
Though I wonder, where the hell did you get the idea that a cruiser can manage ~60-75% of an escorts damage output from? Because as far as I could tell this thread was about Federation cruisers, not Klingon Battle cruisers.
Oh yes, and personal attacks do such a good job of making people see your point.
True, but you could get the same effect from a large shield capacity and strong resistances.
You always heard "Shields down to X%" in a fight, but never "Shields recovered to X%". Granted, the shields probably were recovering but my point was the damage always seemed to be cumulative, there were no quick fixes.
I'm just splitting hairs really, the effect is the same.
It was an example to show that the Canon use of the technology is different than what we have to use in STO. In Star Trek some races are just not as advanced as others and their weapons tech shows this. In STO all weapons are equal regardless whom uses them.
Anyway, to come back to the discussion at hand, I like the idea that AUX level would provide bonus armor resistance. Actually since you brought it up, I think if Cryptic spent some time trying to re balance the power systems it would help cruisers immensely.
The incentives and bonuses for putting power in the shields and weapons systems are MUCH higher then the aux and eng. Almost to the point where it's a waste unless you have a specific build/ability you want to buff.
If Aux and Eng had more relevant bonuses, the cruiser's inherent power bonuses would have more weight and help even things out a little bit.
You are correct to a point in my opinion.
Weapon and Shield power does have obviuos returns though Engine and Auxillary does as well.
Literally the higher your Engine power the better you turn. Its just an easily overlooked effect compared to the others.
The Higher your Aux the better most Science powers work.
So they do have extra effects, just not ones thawhen compared to the results from weapons and Shields seems all that great.
So, yes a revamp with the Power Stats doing a little more passive bonuses would be cool.
How does this crazy idea strike you: The max power level for Eng, Shields and Weapons would be dependent on your Aux level (or Eng). Not a 1 for 1, but enough that you couldn't set power to 25 and forget about it.
Nah, I will pass on that.
Only becuase we already know from the IP that Auxillary doesn't control the avialibility of the other power levels.
Auxillary in the IP was always a power source beyond the normal. Literally an backup or emergency power source.
Or so thats how I always considered it.
Before any discusion on balance can begin though there must be consensus that the cruiser hull itself is underpowered. That alone was the purpose of this thread. Not abilities, not weapons, just base hull design.
However now that we have reached, I hope, that consensus their is a wide variety of options available depending on the direction one wants to push the game. There is the equal but different style and then there is the ship role style mostly exemplified in PvP. I am a fan of the equal but different style myself so that is the direction my suggestions will go.
Offensive Capability
Cruisers get eight weapon slots but can realistically only use 6 or 7 with a typical setup because of weapon drain mechanics. The obvious solution to that problem is to introduce rear mount only torpedo weapons with the same firing arc as standard cannons. Another potential fix would be to give them an innate weapon energy drain resistance although that could interact in an odd way with some builds. But I will rant about weapon design later on in the post.
Defensive Capability
Because this game focuses more on sustainability than it does raw health that is what should be increased. An escort avoids more damage and a science vessel regenerates faster so the obvious solution is for the cruiser to resist more damage. A flat 10% resist all that operates outside of normal diminishing returns to all damage would be rock solid.
And on weapons, why is weapon balance designed soley upon their firing arc instead of how a ships complete weapon layout will be in practice other than cryptic expected us to keep a beam array on our cannon build escorts? This annoys me.
Instead they should be taken (and balanced) as pairs or units taking into account how the front weapon and rear weapon arcs will overlap.
Maybe the key is to give Auxpower an inherent Hull damage resistance dependent on its level that is in addition to what ever else the player may use abilitywise?
I was under the belief that a vessels Intertial dampners system was an automatic effect and the A2D ability was a conciuos effort to send more power to said system in a emergency.
I have stated many times that AUX should grant a passive hull resist. Although in retrospect perhaps if it provided a small passive hull regen that would be better.
We also need new engineering consoles designed like the new embassy science ones. A flat resist boost with an additional effect or two like energy weapon damage, accuracy, regen rates, something.
And on weapons, why is weapon balance designed soley upon their firing arc instead of how a ships complete weapon layout will be in practice other than cryptic expected us to keep a beam array on our cannon build escorts? This annoys me.
Instead they should be taken (and balanced) as pairs or units taking into account how the front weapon and rear weapon arcs will overlap.
If this is really the case why didn't cryptic set equip limits for dual cannons/dual heavy cannons?
Yup. That's the name of the game. So much so, that it's at the point where I am going to go for a fleet defiant (and NO, I do NOT want a bloody battle-cloak) and probably stay in it. Or just live in my FPE. OR be an TRIBBLE and despite getting yelled at continue to fly my Odyssey. Actually I think I'll go with that last one.
I have to admit I do not understand why you feel forced to play any type of ship. The beauty of the STO space combat system is that you don't NEED to be anything in particular to get through content, either Elite or Normal. What I do is have several alts, something I'm sure mot players already have. While I usually play my Tac Escort the most sometimes I prefer to fly my Engi Cruiser and tank like nobody's business. Others I try to get my new Sci captain in a Recon to work like I want it to... using grav wells of DOOM and kinetic only weapons (ok, ok, maybe my sci ship isn't as good yet, i'm trying to make a working sci powers/torp/mine build and its not going so well lol).
My suggestion to you all is to have different alts that do different things. With the way the game works if you REALLY want to grind you are better off using several alts anyway, so why not make them all play and feel very different? I guarantee the variety will make things less grindy.
The idea that escorts are just as effective/better tanks as cruisers comes not from the fact that escorts are tanks in the same sense that cruisers are, but that they can more effectively tank in PvE combat thanks to a number of skills that enhance escort survivability in combination with a number of high level, no drawback damage boosting skills that punt the escort's damage up to the point that cookie cutter cannon-build escorts can in many cases park their asses right in the face of a target and soak more than enough damage to utterly destroy said target before dying...
Only one Tactical ability is mostly only availible to Escorts that help them tank "better" than a Cruiser.
Attack Pattern Omega. Escorts can cycle two of them to maintain maximum bonus damage resistance.
Only a few Cruiser have a LTC tac SLot to use ApO1, and they can not cycle them unless they use twin or single ATB1 to keep it rolling.
Only one special defense bonus is given to escorts to help them tank. They recieve 10% more Bonuse defense when moving at an attack speed. Cruiser are 10% less.
THis is meant to reflect that an escort, like a fighter, has a betetr chance to juke and evade than a massive Cruiser in combat.
If a cruiser dies quick in PvE then they are doing something wrong because that is all that really sperates them from escort in PvP and the NPC's in this game do not hit near as effectively as a human to be a threat in 90% of the game. The other 10% is not that much stronger since it relies on 1-shots to kill the player more than anything else.
Before any discusion on balance can begin though there must be consensus that the cruiser hull itself is underpowered.
Hull period is under powered in STO. Its not just a Cruiser thing.
But on further rereading I found the idea made sense, a passive Hull resist buff dependent on Aux power levels similiar to what Shields does for shield resists.
such would be a huge boon to Cruiser since they more than escort can run Multiple copies of EPTA and EPTS on thier builds to keep both power levels as maxed as possible.
Though it will not take some player too long to figure how to do almost the same on other ships through non-direct methods.
Only one Tactical ability is mostly only availible to Escorts that help them tank "better" than a Cruiser.
Attack Pattern Omega. Escorts can cycle two of them to maintain maximum bonus damage resistance.
Only a few Cruiser have a LTC tac SLot to use ApO1, and they can not cycle them unless they use twin or single ATB1 to keep it rolling.
Only one special defense bonus is given to escorts to help them tank. They recieve 10% more Bonuse defense when moving at an attack speed. Cruiser are 10% less.
THis is meant to reflect that an escort, like a fighter, has a betetr chance to juke and evade than a massive Cruiser in combat.
If a cruiser dies quick in PvE then they are doing something wrong because that is all that really sperates them from escort in PvP and the NPC's in this game do not hit near as effectively as a human to be a threat in 90% of the game. The other 10% is not that much stronger since it relies on 1-shots to kill the player more than anything else.
I was actually thinking of Attack Pattern Delta as a devensive bonus though mostly the fact that practically every escort is going to be running two copies of Tactical Team 1 which is a much more effective "defense" bonus than running around because your shields soak so much of your damage and you've efffectively increased your shield HP by a factor of four everytime you use it.
I suppose I should use an example for what I mean by effective tanking - in Khitomer Space Normal when you blow two generators a pair of Spheres show up. Before the latest buff to the Borg I could do this with an escort and blow away both spheres while taking moderate damage. In the same amount of time I could take on one with a cruiser and sustain only moderate damage. While hull HP would be lower on the escort at no point would I have had to disengage and heal.
With the cube that shows up in the Elite version my Escort will take more damage true, but it's ability to soak damage is still sufficient to allow it to sit and hammer away at the Cube until it's dead.
That is what I mean when I say that an escort can tank just as/more effectively than a cruiser. Not that it can soak total damage batter than a cruiser, but that it's effective ability to soak damage is equal to or greater than a cruiser's.
I actually think hull base resists should be lowered and a bonus could be granted by size of crew. This would make scorts have to disengage to heal, which is what they were designed do to, while giving cruisers added staying power, which they were suppose to able to do. Also to make crew more meaningful, make crew affect TT shiled transfer. But at the same time make it where more crew equals more resist to loosing crew as well as crew recovery. Makes sense, more people on a ship means more people to help those who have been injured.
Only one Tactical ability is mostly only availible to Escorts that help them tank "better" than a Cruiser.
Attack Pattern Omega. Escorts can cycle two of them to maintain maximum bonus damage resistance.
Only a few Cruiser have a LTC tac SLot to use ApO1, and they can not cycle them unless they use twin or single ATB1 to keep it rolling.
Only one special defense bonus is given to escorts to help them tank. They recieve 10% more Bonuse defense when moving at an attack speed. Cruiser are 10% less.
THis is meant to reflect that an escort, like a fighter, has a betetr chance to juke and evade than a massive Cruiser in combat.
If a cruiser dies quick in PvE then they are doing something wrong because that is all that really sperates them from escort in PvP and the NPC's in this game do not hit near as effectively as a human to be a threat in 90% of the game. The other 10% is not that much stronger since it relies on 1-shots to kill the player more than anything else.
10% more defense translates into taking less damage, not quite 10% less but still less and it takes a lower amount of engine subsystem power to hit this mystical impulse speed.
And once again you are mixing boff abilities vs ship type. But on that note the damage increase you gain from attack patterns or weapon abilities are effected by how powerful your weapons are to begin with. At the same time a heal ability will grant the same exact value to any ship regardless of its shield modifier or maximum hull health.
Finally if anyone dies quick in PvE then they are doing something wrong.
Before any discusion on balance can begin though there must be consensus that the cruiser hull itself is underpowered.
Bareel, Bareel, Bareel. First off, why isn't your name Barrel? I kept wanting to type that. And before any of your discussion can take place YOU must agree that a hull type (ie. cruiser) will and should always be underpowered when its not used according to its design intent. Clearly a sportscar is overpowered compared to a pickup truck in a race... but the question is why are you racing against a sportscar with a pickup truck
Just a few minutes ago I took my Engi cruiser for a spin. I parked its phat cruiser a$$ next to a gate and tanked it and some spheres, then I sat on a Tac cube tanking it. I know from personal experience that my better equipped escort can't hope to do that. Not even close. If you don't want to tank or heal, don't fly a cruiser without understanding that you will not be as good as everything else at THEIR specialization. Why insist on suffering with a type of ship you clearly don't want to fly? Why do that to yourself? If you think escorts are really so much better then fly one and have fun.
There's a misconception that an escort's "tankiness" comes from the flat defense bonus in PvP (in PvE I've no idea why people claim escorts are "tankier"). In truth their best form of tanking comes from using superior mobility to not take damage in the first place: stay out of range of narrow, high-damage arcs, avoid CC (Grav Wells, Warp Plasma), etc.
A properly-built Engie snoozer will outtank a Taxscort by an order of magnitude. Your run-of-the-mill escort simply doesn't have the BOff slots or the skill spec to complement real high-end tanking or healing.
Bareel, Bareel, Bareel. First off, why isn't your name Barrel? I kept wanting to type that. And before any of your discussion can take place YOU must agree that a hull type (ie. cruiser) will and should always be underpowered when its not used according to its design intent. Clearly a sportscar is overpowered compared to a pickup truck in a race... but the question is why are you racing against a sportscar with a pickup truck
Just a few minutes ago I took my Engi cruiser for a spin. I parked its phat cruiser a$$ next to a gate and tanked it and some spheres, then I sat on a Tac cube tanking it. I know from personal experience that my better equipped escort can't hope to do that. Not even close. If you don't want to tank or heal, don't fly a cruiser without understanding that you will not be as good as everything else at THEIR specialization. Why insist on suffering with a type of ship you clearly don't want to fly? Why do that to yourself? If you think escorts are really so much better then fly one and have fun.
Before any discusion on balance can begin though there must be consensus that the cruiser hull itself is underpowered. That alone was the purpose of this thread. Not abilities, not weapons, just base hull design.
However now that we have reached, I hope, that consensus their is a wide variety of options available depending on the direction one wants to push the game. There is the equal but different style and then there is the ship role style mostly exemplified in PvP. I am a fan of the equal but different style myself so that is the direction my suggestions will go.
And I do fly escorts and battlecruisers because from a PvE standpoint they are optimal. However I have exhausted my build options in them and would like to use other hulls for variety sake but their current underpowered state annoys me. As does the concept of the holy trinity being used in a star trek MMO while in space.
There's a misconception that an escort's "tankiness" comes from the flat defense bonus in PvP (in PvE I've no idea why people claim escorts are "tankier"). In truth their best form of tanking comes from using superior mobility to not take damage in the first place: stay out of range of narrow, high-damage arcs, avoid CC (Grav Wells, Warp Plasma), etc.
A properly-built Engie snoozer will outtank a Taxscort by an order of magnitude. Your run-of-the-mill escort simply doesn't have the BOff slots or the skill spec to complement real high-end tanking or healing.
Incorrect, with a dedicated healer the escort is a stronger tank because they can both hit resistance caps, get the same numeric amount of healing, but the escort avoids more raw damage and can better position themselves.
10% more defense translates into taking less damage, not quite 10% less but still less and it takes a lower amount of engine subsystem power to hit this mystical impulse speed.
And once again you are mixing boff abilities vs ship type. But on that note the damage increase you gain from attack patterns or weapon abilities are effected by how powerful your weapons are to begin with. At the same time a heal ability will grant the same exact value to any ship regardless of its shield modifier or maximum hull health.
Finally if anyone dies quick in PvE then they are doing something wrong.
True, 10% is still basically 10% and I mixed the BOffs versus vessel because the Escort only gets the ApO advantage mainly on Escorts.
Those two bonuses hardly make the escorts a Tank, though they do help.
If the Cruiser thinks its unfair then someone needs to invent , devise or experiment with a cruiser viable cycling defense becuase the Escort is not breaking any rules or exploiting by cycling 2 ApO's. Its a benefit that is well within thier design.
Say like, cycling A2D with A2sif for the resists, or TSS with EPTS for the resists, or HE with PH for the resists. Cruisers that can't tank are doing something wrong.
Comments
That's true, but I'm not sure there needs to be a "rapid fire" skill for beams... for one, there already is a single-target direct damage buff similar to rapid fire, it's called BO (and no, I don't mean body odor).
One solution, as others have said, may be to significantly lessen the innate power drain for snoozers as a class. So a beam overload on a single array, while not being omgroflstomp, would add up to some strong, fairly spammable pressure damage. Another would be to strengthen the subsystem targeting skills while balancing them with longer cooldowns, making them viable high-level powers. Knocking someone's engines or shields off is a damn strong damage buff, after all.
vids and guides and stuff
[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
Beam Overload doesn't really INCREASE your damage, it just rearranges it by front loading a powerful shot followed by weaker shots as your power recovers. Unless you use it while under Nadion Inversion (stupid-long cooldown), or immediately buff with a battery (stupid-long cooldown) or EPTW (boff slot and not as effective) after using it.
The problem is that fire at will and beam overload both have drawbacks. Fire at will murders your power level and aggros the entire universe if you use it with arrays (though, DBB+FAW is great for ships that can actually turn well enough to use DBBs), and Overload has the aforementioned power drain. They require secondary abilities or actions in order to compensate for their drawbacks and make them a net gain. Cannon abilities.... don't have drawbacks. Rapid Fire is a straight up "moar dakka!!!" single target thing, and even Scatter Volley is a DPS increase along with multi-target ability. Neither of them are especially cruel to your power level when you use them. They take your guns and they make them more effective, period.
Further consider that the majority of cruisers can't use many tactical abilities, not even the level 3 versions of the beam tactics.
The only time I've ever seen a broadside attack that made me say "Woah" in the same awed fashion as seeing a twinked escort melt 3 elite spheres in about 6 seconds, is using 8 beam arrays with FAW3 and Nadion Inversion. It does quite serious damage to a multitude of targets. But you can only do it every 3 minutes. You can try fighting the power drain of FAW broadside beam boats with EPTW and batteries and EPS Transfer and that DEM doff that adds drain resistance, but in the final analysis trying to milk reliable and significant damage out of a cruiser this way throws away the healing and resists you will need to survive all the return fire.
So yeah. Beam array broadsiding is terrible because of the power drain, beam tactical abilities are complicated and doubled-edged.
An much earlier version of Beam Overload actually use to have an "bug" that let the skill affect all beam arrays on a ship. Broadside cruisers for that period of time were something to behold. Not a suggestion, just an amusing anecdote.
Lessening power drain would definitely be a good start though.
Actually I think this could be reworked into the game, make Beam Overload affect all beams for 50% of the current power drain (per beam) and increase all beam damage by 50% (For a 6 beam cruiser you would have the same effect as current but spread across all the beams) for 1 firing sequence (4 hits per beam at 50% extra damage) giving a fair mount of damage with less recovery time, this would make a broadside something once again to "behold". It would also make weapon batteries more useful on cruisers as they would offer that instant recovery many would want/need.
What FAW needs is for accuracy mods to be taken into account, needs more DPS boost at it's lower levels and for lower drain on the power system (which would add to the DPS boost), the only problem then is the amount of competition between these two skills, at the moment I dare not use BO as it plays havoc with my capability to do damage as it is whereas I can use FAW to great effect covering an enemy fleet in AP:B so escorts can wipe them out in seconds.
I also think the gcd for these could be dropped as the power price of doing it would be impractical unless you know with absolute certainty you are going down so you'd have something comparable to GDF a sort of "I'm going down, lets do max damage before I do" of course this is likely overpowered so I can't support it myself, I'm just putting it out there.
Any criticism of of these ideas is welcome
But once again in that situation +15 weapon power > +5 weapon power.
It is the hull, the cruiser itself that is the problem. The foundation is broken and provides no inherently useful benefits unlike the other hulls that mean anything. Eight weapon slots = pointless and +10% max hull = pointless.
Even so, escort pilots looking for DPS will still go for DHCs as they still do over 2x the damage of a beam array, 3DHCs will level with a 6 beam cruiser (I say 6 because 8 is power suicide, I've tried), anything more than that is beyond said cruiser, then you add buffs and the difference is even greater.
A slight buff to beam damage and/or a reduction in their power drain would go some way to helping cruisers without affecting escorts, then there is the much needed revamp of beam buff powers would bring them to a more level playing field.
Very true unless Cryptic were to introduce an new class(es) of beam arrays that were not useable by escorts.
I agree it's a large part of the problem, but what would help with this flaw? An additional +5 power to all subsystems, add innate resistance bonuses to the hull, more raw hull (say 50% instead of 10%), +2 to turn rates, an bonus that would reduce energy weapon power drain? There are a lot of potential options.
Assuming a standard beam array is meant to punch as hard as a Dual Heavy Cannon.
Curently the fanbase is still comparing Baseballs to basketballs and its not a fair comparison becuase while they are both balls they are both equal to what one uses them for.
Beam Arrays = wide AoE attack that requires little manuevering or attention to details. One can litterly pick a target in range and fire from almost any angle at them. Some angles in fact that the escort must work twice as hard to overcome becuase thier weapons of choice while doing more damage have a too narrow a firing arc unless you are pointing directly at your target.
Dual Beam Banks = Higher damage at the cost of a narrower firing arc.
Beam Arrays can do excellent damage with 6-8 beams if one pushes the weapons power beyond 125 for the duration of an attack.
Engineers are especially good at this since they have a inherent power conserving ability and it can even be accomplished via DEM and certain DOffs that help conserve power.
The belief that a Cruiser with beam arrays is not a challenge to the Escorts supremancy in battle is not true anymore and is fading fast.
The idea that one good way to help the Cruiser is to accent thier sheer mass in the form of better hitpoints (though healing may have to be assessed to keep the Cruiser from being beyond death) say a 25-30% increase.
Of course this will have to be fairly done to all Cruisers, Battle Cruisers and hybrids ingame.
Why so low?
Simple. I've seen too many Good Cruiser players flying around Ker'rat with a pack of BoPs, Raptors and Battle Cruisers behind them doing nothing until finally the sheer number of attackers over whelms them.
This is not the characteristics of a weak vessel.
Changes to Beam Arrays and Dual Beam Banks that have already been discussed add nausieum would help as not the Cruiser has more than one wide firing arc styled weapon.
Create the Heavy beam arrays and put them ingame as the new top end damaging beam weapon instead of dual beams.
Do not Increase the turn rate of Federation Cruisers. Instead reduce the deficiency that low engine power has just for Cruisers so that they can zero-axis spin quicker to rotate a shield facing towards the enemy.
Remove any effect Tactical Captain Buffs or tactical BOff buffs have on Science powers.
The Tac/Escort pairing will still be the best DD in the game but only with his on toys now.
The background premise of this thread is still trying to make the Cruiser a Cruiscort in my opinion and that is a path to us as a playerbase being right back here in 6 months complaining about how bad escorts have it and how easy Crusiers have become and frankly I'm tired of the silly back in forth this game has on balance that flip/flops everytime somebody thinks thier favorite "thing" is lackluster compared to others.
I must agree. Hull gamewide is somewhat useless unless you are a master of Hull and/or resist stacking.
It is too easily destroyed and too quickly destroyed. Hull should be hard to hurt and slow to heal in my opinion.
How many times have we seen a Cruiser or other vessel in canon still functioning with whole decks exposed to space due to being attacked. Kirk made a carreer out of it.
R.I.P
Perhaps instead of increased hitpoints...what about giving cruisers "hull plating" and "armor reinforcements" points?
http://www.stowiki.org/Skill:_Starship_Hull_Plating
http://www.stowiki.org/Skill:_Starship_Armor_Reinforcements
This would make them more resistant without the need to increase their HP in any way.
I'd also suggest that the less maneuverable the ship is, the more bonus points it should get.
This way "sluggish" ships would benefit more, making them more attractive.
QFT.
You always saw ships slowly loosing their shields during battle in the shows and movies, but I don't think I ever saw them recovering until afterwards.
I'd actually like to see both damage and healing toned down to make resistances and base heals (like shield regen rate) more relevant. Fighting would be much more strategic, and intense, if you knew that your shield levels and hull damage were going to persist for extended periods rather then recovering instantly.
I disagree, it would only serve to make burst damage (escorts) even more effective...
At the moment an cruiser is a hard target for an escort, now strip them of their ability to heal up quickly from that and it's the easiest thing in the game to take down as they can't escape the overwhelming force of DHCs, even a science ship would last longer...
I did suggest damage be reduced, and it would have to depend on how it's balanced. I'm not talking dropping damage by 1 or 2 percent here, but extending a fight so it takes 2-3 times longer for the average player to loose (or take down) shields.
If done properly escorts would STILL do the most damage, but would also have the least amount of HP and DR skills. Being able to position your escort and staying out of the different weapon arcs would actually be necessary again, rather then sitting in one place and opening up with DHCs for the entire time.
R.I.P
I don't think it's possible to explain anything to the likes of bareel. For every argument you produce, he has an army of strawmen to assail.
Nobody could keep up with the ludicrous statements made in these threads: afterall, it's much easier to make a silly claim ("Escorts are better tanks than Cruisers!" than to refute it.
So yeah, you guys keep believing that a Ship with 350%-400% of an Escort's survivability, ~60%-75% of an Escort's damage and potentially a bit of control (EWP) is UP compared to said Escort.
If Cryptic is wise enough not to listen, good; if they aren't, we'll just all play Cruisers Online.
The idea that escorts are just as effective/better tanks as cruisers comes not from the fact that escorts are tanks in the same sense that cruisers are, but that they can more effectively tank in PvE combat thanks to a number of skills that enhance escort survivability in combination with a number of high level, no drawback damage boosting skills that punt the escort's damage up to the point that cookie cutter cannon-build escorts can in many cases park their asses right in the face of a target and soak more than enough damage to utterly destroy said target before dying...and do it in such a small fraction of the time it takes for a cruiser to kill the target that even if it moves off between kills and waits until hull and shields are fully regenerated without heals that it can still make better time in clearing out enemies than a cruiser that's fitted out with hull and shield heals and dives into combat without any rest.
It's not true 100% of the time, especially when you're fighting the larger bosses that really do take multiple people working on it to kill in any sort of appreciable time frame, but it holds true for enough of the game that it is a valid argument for "Escorts are overpowered when compared to the other ships." Again, this is a generalization, but can you honestly tell me you can't solo a cube with an escort and kill it in less time than a cruiser or science vessel could?
This is where the idea that escorts are better tanks come from.
Though I wonder, where the hell did you get the idea that a cruiser can manage ~60-75% of an escorts damage output from? Because as far as I could tell this thread was about Federation cruisers, not Klingon Battle cruisers.
Oh yes, and personal attacks do such a good job of making people see your point.
R.I.P
However now that we have reached, I hope, that consensus their is a wide variety of options available depending on the direction one wants to push the game. There is the equal but different style and then there is the ship role style mostly exemplified in PvP. I am a fan of the equal but different style myself so that is the direction my suggestions will go.
Offensive Capability
Cruisers get eight weapon slots but can realistically only use 6 or 7 with a typical setup because of weapon drain mechanics. The obvious solution to that problem is to introduce rear mount only torpedo weapons with the same firing arc as standard cannons. Another potential fix would be to give them an innate weapon energy drain resistance although that could interact in an odd way with some builds. But I will rant about weapon design later on in the post.
Defensive Capability
Because this game focuses more on sustainability than it does raw health that is what should be increased. An escort avoids more damage and a science vessel regenerates faster so the obvious solution is for the cruiser to resist more damage. A flat 10% resist all that operates outside of normal diminishing returns to all damage would be rock solid.
And on weapons, why is weapon balance designed soley upon their firing arc instead of how a ships complete weapon layout will be in practice other than cryptic expected us to keep a beam array on our cannon build escorts? This annoys me.
Instead they should be taken (and balanced) as pairs or units taking into account how the front weapon and rear weapon arcs will overlap.
edit addon
If this is really the case why didn't cryptic set equip limits for dual cannons/dual heavy cannons?
They lack the tech. The only items they can put equip limits on are unique items.
Although they could simply tac on something like how the old torpedo system worked but it is far too late for such a game sweeping modification.
I have to admit I do not understand why you feel forced to play any type of ship. The beauty of the STO space combat system is that you don't NEED to be anything in particular to get through content, either Elite or Normal. What I do is have several alts, something I'm sure mot players already have. While I usually play my Tac Escort the most sometimes I prefer to fly my Engi Cruiser and tank like nobody's business. Others I try to get my new Sci captain in a Recon to work like I want it to... using grav wells of DOOM and kinetic only weapons (ok, ok, maybe my sci ship isn't as good yet, i'm trying to make a working sci powers/torp/mine build and its not going so well lol).
My suggestion to you all is to have different alts that do different things. With the way the game works if you REALLY want to grind you are better off using several alts anyway, so why not make them all play and feel very different? I guarantee the variety will make things less grindy.
R.I.P
Hull period is under powered in STO. Its not just a Cruiser thing.
But on further rereading I found the idea made sense, a passive Hull resist buff dependent on Aux power levels similiar to what Shields does for shield resists.
such would be a huge boon to Cruiser since they more than escort can run Multiple copies of EPTA and EPTS on thier builds to keep both power levels as maxed as possible.
Though it will not take some player too long to figure how to do almost the same on other ships through non-direct methods.
R.I.P
Bareel, Bareel, Bareel. First off, why isn't your name Barrel? I kept wanting to type that. And before any of your discussion can take place YOU must agree that a hull type (ie. cruiser) will and should always be underpowered when its not used according to its design intent. Clearly a sportscar is overpowered compared to a pickup truck in a race... but the question is why are you racing against a sportscar with a pickup truck
Just a few minutes ago I took my Engi cruiser for a spin. I parked its phat cruiser a$$ next to a gate and tanked it and some spheres, then I sat on a Tac cube tanking it. I know from personal experience that my better equipped escort can't hope to do that. Not even close. If you don't want to tank or heal, don't fly a cruiser without understanding that you will not be as good as everything else at THEIR specialization. Why insist on suffering with a type of ship you clearly don't want to fly? Why do that to yourself? If you think escorts are really so much better then fly one and have fun.
A properly-built Engie snoozer will outtank a Taxscort by an order of magnitude. Your run-of-the-mill escort simply doesn't have the BOff slots or the skill spec to complement real high-end tanking or healing.
vids and guides and stuff
[9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
And I do fly escorts and battlecruisers because from a PvE standpoint they are optimal. However I have exhausted my build options in them and would like to use other hulls for variety sake but their current underpowered state annoys me. As does the concept of the holy trinity being used in a star trek MMO while in space.
Incorrect, with a dedicated healer the escort is a stronger tank because they can both hit resistance caps, get the same numeric amount of healing, but the escort avoids more raw damage and can better position themselves.
R.I.P