Don't listen to Roach...he is the Minister of Propaganda of the Evil Empire!
By the way...Merry Christmas to you all, but...are the Klingons godless? Bah...ignorant and barbaric people!:P
The main evolution I always saw in the Federation was their tolerance for different cultures.
So, I think you would be a good Klingon. Join us today ;-P
The only faction that can match (and in some cases out-strip) the KDF in combat technology is the Dominion...
...are we counting the Berman/Braga era in which the deflector dish is your one-stop shop for all things defense- and mass-destruction related, to the point it makes one wonder why the Federation wastes time with phasers and torpedoes and would be better-suited building a ship that has nothing but deflector dishes?
I once made the joke the Federation should build a ship that has a deflector dish for each potential facing (fore, aft, port, starboard, dorsal and ventral) and a warp core launcher, and name it the U.S.S. Braga. It would be the meanest TRIBBLE in the galaxy.
Somebody getting uppity about canon? No problem! Just take a deep breath, and repeat after me:
It's up to you. You can drive a design that you like the look of and be less effective with your desired play style, or deal with a ship that you don't like the look of and be more effective.
I absolutely hate the look of the Garumba, but for what it can do, you can't beat it.
Nah, I just got a the steamrunner for my Engie and motted his assualt cruiser :-P
Doing normal quests with the AC is like leveling a healer priest in WoW
Damage is linear while defences use a [1-1/(1+x)] type of model to prevent reducing damage to zero. If resistances stacked in a linear fashion then you could conceivably reach 100% resistance and avoid all damage, regardless of how much an attacker buffed it. That's what you need to keep in mind, they are independent of each other. Attackers deal damage while defenders resist percentages. That's why it doesn't matter how high an attacker buffs their damage, a defender will always take a % of it. The higher the resistances the lower the % taken.
This type of damage mitigation is often favored in game design because it allows a lot of latitude without being limited by hard caps. Granted it gets hit with ridiculous DR at high defensive values and then it becomes a design balancing act as gear inflation takes place. I would even propose the reason we haven't seen ships really go up in power dramatically is an attempt to keep gear progression in check since they already know that defences are already hitting really high percentages if players really decide to go for it.
Edit: I agree that a mere +2 to turning would make cruisers a lot more fun to play and would even add their effectiveness since they could more reliably get to critical spots.
Also, I think its true that in the game's original design all ships did comparable damage and had comparable survivability... they would just go about it in different ways. I don't know WHY that plan was abandoned as it really would make the game more interesting.
All that said I think cruisers suffer the most from having poor pilots. Lets not kid ourselves, for a new player leveling in an escort or sci vessel is HARD. They don't know how to stay alive and deal damage so they gravitate towards cruisers that can easily carry anyone through the PvE levelling content without actually teaching anything about how to play. I know this because that's what I did. It wasn't until I saw someone being effective with a non cruiser that I started to look at HOW to build ships and use them properly. I would say a lot of the people complaining cruisers are drastically underpowered have noticed others playing well and instead of choosing to learn themselves prefer to complain. Perhaps they are a cruiser fan that desperately wants their favorite ships to be above all others in everything, perhaps they simply don't think they should be forced to learn a totally different game than the one they played while pve leveling in a cruiser (a valid complain actually), or maybe they are still in the process of learning and will understand how to get the most out of their ships eventually.
On the other hand if someone's complaint is that the way the ship roles have evolved into high dps/medium survivability, medium dps/high survivability, and High CC/medium survivability is not to their liking and has several flaws as a system... that can be valid. Honestly, at this point I'm not sure how to bring all ships to do equal DPS, while having equal survivability... except maybe making cruisers more like escorts? Lower their defences while adding a few points of turning and maybe switching an eng console to a tac one? Admittedly what I suggest is more or less making fed cruisers into KDF battlecruisers. Do KDF players feel their cruisers are underpowered too?
Okay took me awhile, but I think I get it.
So if my FDC had resistance 50% from consoles and the like and gets hit for 1000 damage it will block 500 hp of damage, but if I get hit for 2000 damage I block 1000 damage and if I got hit for 26,000 damage I'd only take 13,000 damage, blocking the other 13,000.
So an Escort attacking me with say a 100 percent damage bonus is actually dealing less then 50 percent of that bonus to me in damage. So if the escort deals 500 damage originally and with a hundred percent dealt an additional 500 damage I would block 250 from his original base damage and 250 from his bonus damage for 500 in total effectively negating his entire bonus even though his attack bonus is a 100 percent and my resist is only 50% because his bonus is based only on his base damage, while my resist is based his total damage dealt.
I think the simplest way of explaining the advantage of armour stacking is that points of damage blocked scales automatically with increases in damage dealt, but the reverse is not true.
Judeo jutisu, you use thier strength against them.
As for cruisers aside from the Borque or what ever its called, FDC are probably the closest the KDF has to Fed Cruisers and I fly one and honestly I've found I'm alot more survivable in it then my fed escort. How much my hanger has to do with that I don't know, although I have 250 more crew and .1 shield thingy and an extra ensign sci Boff over the Advanced Heavy Cruiser the closest the Feds have to comparing to my Dacoit. I'm a tact commander btw, grade 26. Same turn speed and hull though as the Advanced Heavy Cruiser.
...are we counting the Berman/Braga era in which the deflector dish is your one-stop shop for all things defense- and mass-destruction related, to the point it makes one wonder why the Federation wastes time with phasers and torpedoes and would be better-suited building a ship that has nothing but deflector dishes?
I once made the joke the Federation should build a ship that has a deflector dish for each potential facing (fore, aft, port, starboard, dorsal and ventral) and a warp core launcher, and name it the U.S.S. Braga. It would be the meanest TRIBBLE in the galaxy.
The Dominion is way more powerful then the Klingons. Think about it the only way the Klingons won against the Dominion was because the Dominion was bottle necked by the worm hole so the vast majority of thier resources were trapped back in Gamma Quadrant. They had to rely on what they snuck through the wormhole, the already wounded Cardassians and later the Breen as well as what they could build in a short matter of time and they still almost won against an alliance of the three most powerful empires of the Alpha/Beta Quaderants, the Romulans, the Federation, and the Klingons. Even then it was because Odo convinced the head female Changeling to sue for peace, even with the fall of Cardassia the Dominion could have retreated to Breen Space and areas of Cardassia space still in thier control and rebuilt thier fleets and troops and used thier abilities to find new suckers, er allies to help out. Think on this we only really saw a bit of the Gamma Quadrant and what the Dominion managed to sneak in past the worm hole and built in a short span of time. We don't know what sort of ships, troops, entire species of being both natural and created beings they had in reserve back in the Gamma Quadrant.
If the Dominion had access to tech that could create stabile artificial wormholes the Klingon Empire would be dust.
To the Alpha and Beta Quadrants the Dominion war was a huge war, to the Dominion the only threat came from a disease cook up by a rogue Agency, its Gamma Qaudrant territory were never at risk and to most member species of the Dominion would have had zero caulties.
To the Alpha and Beta Quadrants the Dominion war was a huge war, to the Dominion the only threat came from a disease cook up by a rogue Agency, its Gamma Qaudrant territory were never at risk and to most member species of the Dominion would have had zero caulties.
You are correct. The superiority of the Dominion is why Section 31 (greatest heroes of the Fedration!!) had to implement an assymetrical solution.
The Dominion ARE the Founders, and they were dying thanks to the disease. As the Founders grew weaker I think its pretty safe to assume their grip on power would quickly dwindle and the Dominion would collapse on itself. The Jem'Hadar are mighty, but even they could not hold the Dominion together as soon as the non engineered members of the Dominion realized the Founders were gone. Of course, you have to ask yourself, would the Jem'Hadar even bother if the Founders are gone? Their primary concern would be freeying themselves from the White rather than hold their former master's territory.
While their Gamma Quadrant holdings were never at risk, Its safe to assume Section 31's plague is the closest the Founders have to come to dying out.
Of course, you have to ask yourself, would the Jem'Hadar even bother if the Founders are gone? Their primary concern would be freeying themselves from the White rather than hold their former master's territory.
Actually based on what I have seen in Canon DS9 involving the Jem'hadar, it is more than likely that they would all commit suicide, having considered themselves failures for not being able to protect their gods/creators from this demise. There were a few episodes in DS9 where you saw whole crews of Jem'hadar kill themselves if a founder died on their watch. Usually the only ones then left were stranded Vorta.
Or they would go on berserk rampages of vengeance in the name of their dead masters. And after they ran out of things to kill, then they would all commit suicide.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
1) Fed' races do frequently bathe (Yeah, many of the weaker races do not have an agressive immune system. You all have to rely on medicine.)
2) We have hot Vulcan and Andorian babes (True and after a quick raid, so can we.)
3) Chuck Norris was a human, not a Klingon ( One of mankinds most redeeming qualities)
4) Most importantly I am in Starfleet, I make the uniform look good (the other one)
But seriously, Fed' cruisers do need a hair bit of a bump in game. Not as much as most people are arguing for but just a taste. Upping Beam Array and DBB damage a smidgen (maybe 5% would go a long way). Ships like the Bortas line could also take advantage of this bump as well.
I still support those ideas I've already supported before.
The first BoP was in service in 2153 and the events of ST:3 in 2285 are 132 years later. So chances are that particular BoP was 132 behind the current technology that Scottie had on the Enterprise.
I have a screwdriver that is technologically inferior to my electric version, does that make the hand held obsolete in function?
But I have more on this later........
Since the captured B'Rel was equipped with an integrated cloaking device, this feature makes it a much more recent version. Its plasma coil interface design flaw would later be exploited by the Enterprise-D in its final fight.
Which is why the KDF wished to acquire it.
We KDF invented the ChronoDeflector and yet we do not run around erasing everyone else from time.
That "grandfather paradox" doesn't work either from a quantum mechanics perspective. Erasing anyone from the current time line just puts the viewer into a divergent time line, while the original one goes on as if nothing happened.
And without the stolen cloaking technology from the KDF/Romulans/ whomever, the Federation would have never gotten there jump start into it iether.....
Other than we all owe a claoking debt to the Romulans, what is your point?
I too can pull examples of the greatness of almost any culture if I only wish to bask in thier greatness. It does not prove said greatness though.
There is no evidence that the Federation Pegasus phase cloak uses any Romulan / Klingon cloaking technology. The Klingons, on the other hand, got their prototype cloaks directly from the Romulans.
My angst when I wrote makes it sound snide. I apoligise for that. Though it is sound advice. Many Novels exist that cover the life and the average Klingon in the Empire and you may be surprised how the "warrior" is portrayed as being the end all be all, but it is just one part of a larger culture.
True, but the KDF as a multi-species organization only exists in STO. The Official canon KDF only has Klingons among its ranks.
yes and No. Secrecy from outsiders and rival houses -yes. Though technology and innovation do move through the Empire as any other society.
The KDF is not a communist society in how we saw such finction on Earth. As with the Utopian idea in ST works, the Socialist aspects of teh KDf work too.
Hell, look at China. Communists and functioning. Just different, not neccassirily better.
Warriors, Engineers, Scientists, Doctors is a good way to look at the hiearchy. Though we have Scientists just fine, otehrwise how would we learn the sciences needed to be a Space-faring race?
Yes, information does move through a government-regulated society, but only at a trickle's pace compared to a free-democracy's massive information river flow. There's a reason why the west enjoys such a technological advantage over its restricted info counterparts.
The only faction that can match (and in some cases out-strip) the KDF in combat technology is the Dominion, and that's only because Dominion ships were designed exclusively for combat (I think Weiyun (yeah, I probably spelled that wrong) even said that the founders designed their ships to match what was flying them, purely combat ships for purely soldiers). The Breen just have one ship design that was really combat oriented, and that's the Chel'gret, but it's a VERY capable, maneuverable, and nasty ship (not just in STO, but in canon as well).
The Klingons made the mistake of trying to conquer the Breen home world early in the 23rd century. They sent an entire fleet -- not one KDF ship ever returned from that fight. This gives you an idea of just how powerful the Breen are without Cryptic's poor handling of their IP content lol.
Since the captured B'Rel was equipped with an integrated cloaking device, this feature makes it a much more recent version. Its plasma coil interface design flaw would later be exploited by the Enterprise-D in its final fight.
All claoking devices are intregated into the shielding of a vessel. Thats why one can not have claoking and shields at the same time. As well the KDF acquired claoking technology in 2269 well before the events of 2285, so how do you know they KDF did not have integrated Claoking technology on that particular B'rel?
That "grandfather paradox" doesn't work either from a quantum mechanics perspective. Erasing anyone from the current time line just puts the viewer into a divergent time line, while the original one goes on as if nothing happened.
No doubt. the analogy was meant to show, like your example, that having a technology does not mean it will be used and to also show that the reason the feds did not run around Genesising all their Foes is the same as why the KDF did not go around erasing races from time.
It simply wasn't scripted that way as its against the ideology of SF/UFP and if the KDF had such easy to use Time-travel devices they would have conquered everyone they could. Both options would have ruined Star trek.
There is no evidence that the Federation Pegasus phase cloak uses any Romulan / Klingon cloaking technology. The Klingons, on the other hand, got their prototype cloaks directly from the Romulans.
No evidence suggests they did not "acquire" the technology from the Romulans or used the Technology from the captured B'rel of ST3.
Yes, we Klingons did get our first cloaks from the RSE-KDF alliance.
Still, whats the point?
True, but the KDF as a multi-species organization only exists in STO. The Official canon KDF only has Klingons among its ranks.
True. Though we do have Jeghpuwi as well. Still read the books and expand your ideas on the KDF. You may be surprised.
Yes, information does move through a government-regulated society, but only at a trickle's pace compared to a free-democracy's massive information river flow. There's a reason why the west enjoys such a technological advantage over its restricted info counterparts
Except the KDF is not a completely government-regulated society since its made of many free Houses working together and as many will demostrate unlike Communism in our RL, the Government of the KDF is a wanted commodity and enjoyed by the Klingon populace for the most part.
Your looking at the KDF from a skewed viewpoint.
All claoking devices are intregated into the shielding of a vessel. Thats why one can not have claoking and shields at the same time. As well the KDF acquired claoking technology in 2269 well before the events of 2285, so how do you know they KDF did not have integrated Claoking technology on that particular B'rel?
Not all cloaking devices are part of the ship. In TOS, Kirk stole the cloaking module from a Romulan K'Tinga and retrofitted it into the Enterprise shield system. Since the captured B'Rel had the cloaking device plasma coils that could not be corrected to prevent its cloak from being remote-activated by an enemy ship, this suggests that the cloak could not be swapped out since it was part of the original ship design. As a result, it can't be an older version since those had no cloaking devices.
No doubt. the analogy was meant to show, like your example, that having a technology does not mean it will be used and to also show that the reason the feds did not run around Genesising all their Foes is the same as why the KDF did not go around erasing races from time.
It simply wasn't scripted that way as its against the ideology of SF/UFP and if the KDF had such easy to use Time-travel devices they would have conquered everyone they could. Both options would have ruined Star trek.
No evidence suggests they did not "acquire" the technology from the Romulans or used the Technology from the captured B'rel of ST3.
Yes, we Klingons did get our first cloaks from the RSE-KDF alliance.
Still, whats the point?
True. Though we do have Jeghpuwi as well. Still read the books and expand your ideas on the KDF. You may be surprised.
Except the KDF is not a completely government-regulated society since its made of many free Houses working together and as many will demostrate unlike Communism in our RL, the Government of the KDF is a wanted commodity and enjoyed by the Klingon populace for the most part.
Your looking at the KDF from a skewed viewpoint.
All that I'm saying is that UFP does have superior research capabilities over the KDF due to its sheer number of member worlds along with their scientists and their respective technologies. The official KDF only has Klingon technologies as their sole source. Given this huge disparity, it is understandable that the UFP enjoys a technological advantage.
Please keep in mind that this only considers official Star Trek canon, not STO's unofficial game material.
I have to apologize for causing this derail. I answered a question challenging my assertion that the official KDF is not supposed to be as technologically advanced as the UFP, but it has lead to another topic tangent altogether.
Since we can't cite unofficial STO game material to challenge established canon, I suggest just figure out how to get cruisers on-par with other ship classes without tweaking their current in-game stats. I suggested cruiser-only long range weapons to give them a sniper-role, but we'll have to see what Cryptic comes up with.
I have to apologize for causing this derail. I answered a question challenging my assertion that the official KDF is not supposed to be as technologically advanced as the UFP, but it has lead to another topic tangent altogether.
Since we can't site unofficial STO game material to challenge established canon, I suggest just figure out how to get cruisers on-par with other ship classes without tweaking their current in-game stats. I suggested cruiser-only long range weapons to give them a sniper-role, but we'll have to see what Cryptic comes up with.
Ah no, it's actually quite amusing tbh XD. But there isn't really anything you can do to cruisers in this game without tweaking their stats.
It all comes down to these four facts (or opinions, take your pick):
1) Cruisers can't turn for ballz. Many cruisers captains are used to this and compensate for it, myself included, and we do alright.
2) Their main weapon of choice (as a direct result of their crappy turn rate), beam arrays, are horrendously weak and suck power like a TRIBBLE (to the point where most cruisers while doing a full broadside suffer at least -60 to their weapons power level, something you don't see on ANY other ship class). And I mean HORRENDOUSLY. They got nerfed hard a while ago (20% damage reduction or something along those lines I believe) due to insanity with BFAW in PvP, and were never restored after all ships got an increase in hull, shields, and defense. As a result, you now have high drain weapons that don't do a lot of damage, which makes cruisers seem weaker than they should be/actually are. Even though to be fair, my cruiser can sustain 725+ damage per hit with mk XI blue equipment and BOff abilities while running a 7/1 setup.
3) For the most part, many cruiser captains are incompetent Kirks who don't understand that their "hero ships" aren't god awful powerful like in the shows, and weren't meant to be that way (took me forever to realize that myself, and evidence of this exists on this forum XD), but they try to do it anyways. And as a result fail miserably. Amusingly, but miserably. Giving cruisers an even worse name.
4) Lastly, most PvE end-game content is DPS based. So any ship class that can't DPS hard loses out, and is considered bad by many. Not all mind you, but many.
XD
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
The only problem i see is that beams are currently not balanced. A crusier is supposed to broadside, however even with 6 beams a broadside sucks too much power. Reduce beam power drain, even if just on cruisers, and i think that'll be enough
Beams should get some of their former damage back, if only 50% of it (10% buff on what it is) but even without that the Fleet Excelsior with an eng at the helm can do Kang duty in CSE (Yes I am willing and able to prove it) so yeah... a small damage boost would be nice but is not essential
Beams do have...major issues right now. Lets say we have a ship with 6x BAs and a ship with 3x DHC/3x Turrets both at 125 power (yes i know you can over-cap ill get to that).
On a full volley the beam arrays will fire (6x4) 24 shots in roughly 4 seconds with a 1 second recharge.
1 @ 125 power
1 @ 115 power
1 @ 105 power
1 @ 95 power
1 @ 85 power
19 @ 75 power
By contrast a DHC/Turret combo will fire one shot per DHC every two seconds roughly.
1 @ 125 power
1 @ 113 power
1 @ 101 power
- turrets are not important
And then the weapons all reset and repeat the pattern, usually. Granted they have been adding ways to mitigate the power drain but still, that is bad especially when DHCs get an innate 2% crit boost.
Beams do have...major issues right now. Lets say we have a ship with 6x BAs and a ship with 3x DHC/3x Turrets both at 125 power (yes i know you can over-cap ill get to that).
On a full volley the beam arrays will fire (6x4) 24 shots in roughly 4 seconds with a 1 second recharge.
1 @ 125 power
1 @ 115 power
1 @ 105 power
1 @ 95 power
1 @ 85 power
19 @ 75 power
By contrast a DHC/Turret combo will fire one shot per DHC every two seconds roughly.
1 @ 125 power
1 @ 113 power
1 @ 101 power
- turrets are not important
And then the weapons all reset and repeat the pattern, usually. Granted they have been adding ways to mitigate the power drain but still, that is bad especially when DHCs get an innate 2% crit boost.
So what your saying is that the 6 Beam Arrays will fire 6 shots a second while 4 DHCs fire 1 shot in the same 1 second time span and that the drain for 6 beam arrays firing 4 times each in 4 seconds is too much compared to 4 DHCs firing 2 times each in four seconds?
That seems fine to me considering the that the beams fire twice as often as the DHC's. The higher drain is the byproduct of shooting more shots. More shots I add that do not require any movement to aim them at a target.
That seems fine to me considering the that the beams fire twice as often as the DHC's.
I see you conveniently left out the small detail that DHCs do about 2 times the dmg per hit of a beam array, Example below. (States from info window with items in inventory)
Phaser Dual Heavy Cannons Mk X [Acc] [Dmg]
Damage per hit: 365.4 (243.6 DPS)
-12 Weapon power when firing other weapons
2 Second recharge
+10% Critical severity
+10% Accuracy
Phaser Beam Array Mk X [Acc] [Dmg]
Damage per hit: 210 (168 DPS)
-10 Weapon power when firing other weapons
1 Second recharge
+10% Accuracy
Due to the recharge they do fire the same number of shots every beam cycle but when you put both weapons at 1km and leave them both unbuffed with the same power settings the DHC will do more damage. And Apparently they do have an inherent crit damage boost
I see you conveniently left out the small detail that DHCs do about 2 times the dmg per hit of a beam array, Example below. (States from info window with items in inventory)
Phaser Dual Heavy Cannons Mk X [Acc] [Dmg]
Damage per hit: 365.4 (243.6 DPS)
-12 Weapon power when firing other weapons
2 Second recharge
+10% Critical severity
+10% Accuracy
Phaser Beam Array Mk X [Acc] [Dmg]
Damage per hit: 210 (168 DPS)
-10 Weapon power when firing other weapons
1 Second recharge
+10% Accuracy
Due to the recharge they do fire the same number of shots every beam cycle but when you put both weapons at 1km and leave them both unbuffed with the same power settings the DHC will do more damage. And Apparently they do have an inherent crit damage boost
I did not leave it out becuase it was not relevant to the post. Bareel was showing the discrepancy in drain between the BA and DHCs.
The BA's drain more becuase they fire more shots from more weapons in the time span. Thus the drain is higher by a small margin before the cycle begins again. Had he tested 4 BA's against 4 DHCs, what do you think the drain numbers would look like?
Of course the Dual Heavy cannons do more damage than a single Beam Array. The DHC's are literally two heavy cannons linked into a single weapon while the BA is a single weapon at the lowest definition in its weapon classification.
If it was Dual heavy Beam Arrays tested against the DHC's then it would be a different story, possibly.
Stating that the Beam array does less damage than a DHC is like stating my .22 pistol does less damage than my 30-06 rifle. Its true and the reason why very is evident.
I want even begin to get into the differences in firing arcs being another big factor in why the damage is different.
I can see that as usual I did not illustrate my point properly so I will try again.
Assumption: 15 seconds of firing, no lag, no UI lag, and ignoring potential energy drain resists.
6x Beam Arrays will fire three cycles each lasting 4+1(cooldown) total seconds with 4 shots per cycle.
3 @ 125 power
3 @ 115 power
3 @ 105 power
3 @ 95 power
3 @ 85 power
57 @ 75 power
Vast majority of shots made at 75 power, giving a damage bonus of 1.5
3x DHCs & 3x Turrets will fire ten cycles each lasting .5+1(cooldown) total seconds with 1 shot per cycle per DHC, two per cycle per Turret.
10 DHC @ 125 power
10 DHC @ 113 power
10 DHC @ 101 power
10 Turret @ 93 power
10 Turret @ 85 power
40 Turret @ 77 power
Vast majority of shots with big guns, DHCs are at over 100 power and one third are at full bonus.
That is what makes DHCs so strong. All of their shots are fired at nearly full weapon power bonus. That is not the case for any other cannon, and beams suffer the most because of the length of their firing cycle.
That is what makes DHCs so strong. All of their shots are fired at nearly full weapon power bonus. That is not the case for any other cannon, and beams suffer the most because of the length of their firing cycle.
Becuase they fire less often at a higher drain with less weapons for more damage thier drain evens out to work better to thier own usage.
While Beam Arrays (a much weaker weapon) fire more shots from more weapons with slightly less drain per weapon but lose out becuase they are firing more shots overall.
Beams firing more often in the same time span gets more drain applied becuase there are more shots being fired which does not allow for any period of Pickup in weapons power.
The slow firing cycle of DHCs allows for this pickup. Fewer more but damaging shots for higher drain that is less in total due to the slow firing cycle of these weapons allow for the natural regen of weapons power.
So lower the drain on BA's to 8 and be done with it. The BA will still do less damage than a DHC but possibly the drain will be more manageble but given your still doing more shots from more weapons, I doubt it.
I mean at 4 shots per cycle per BA at 3 cycles each thats 72 cycles with 288 shots fired in that 15 seconds compared to the total (between DHCs and Turret) of 150 shots in the same 15 seconds.
Thats 2800 flat drain for all those BA shots overall.
Weapon Power drain is now instantly refunded at the end of a weapon’s firing cycle, instead of a slow return as was previously implemented. Multiple weapons being fired at the same time will still produce a significant drain and will affect their damage proportionately, but once the weapons stop firing, the weapon power level will immediately return to normal.
Simply put, the BA firing cycle is what kills its own power due to its long firing cycle meaning that power drain is applied longer before being refunded by the game.
For some odd reason my tactical Odyssey often ends up on first or second place in missions like Klingon Scout Force or Gorn Minefield.
I must be doing something wrong.
Small hint, 8 phaser arrays are not a viable weapon layout. (edited for accuracy)
Mine does that easily too. And it can get first in SB24. And if you're using 8 BAs, I weep for your ship.
Anyways... the arguments in the last couple posts were well informed and thought out. Gj guys. But now the Devil's Advocate must come into play.
BAs do horrendously low damage. They have a high weapon power drain due to their firing cycle and how many of them are usually going at once in a full broadside (believe me, I know this from my 7/1 Oddy setup... weapon power? what's that... -.-). BAs also do very low damage per shot and are MASSIVELY affected by power levels. Their only saving grace is that they instantly hit (no travel time for the shot), they only have a 40% damage loss as a result of range, and they have a 250 degree firing arc (something everyone here conveniently left out in their arguments).
DHCs do very high damage. They have a higher weapon power drain that is mitigated by a much slower firing cycle and the fact you can only have 4 of them firing at once (compared to 7 BAs), and that they have priority over turrets, and often only your opening salvo is a combination of turrets and DHCs, since they have somewhat different firing cycles, it's commonplace to have your second and third salvos have your turrets firing at different times from your DHCs. DHCs do high damage per hit, and are still affected by power drain, but due to what was listed above, it's almost a moot point (due also to overcap). Their weakness is that their shot has travel time, which gives the target time (albeit not much) to hit an EPtS, or some other defensive buff, they have MASSIVE damage loss due to range, and they only have a 45 degree firing arc (again something conveniently left out).
You also need to look at roles of weapons.
DHCs were designed for heavy up in your face burst damage and lower sustained DPS. They were designed to nuke a target's shields away and open up for a THY3 or TS3 on bare hull. But they don't make good harass, and you can't bombard a target effectively from 6-8k out with them. Also you have to constantly be pointed at your target and that limits your attack vectors and positioning severely.
BAs were designed for constant medium level pressure damage. They were designed to wear a targets shields down and keep constant damage on the target. They are a support weapon more than anything else (irony: cruisers are support craft as well... hm...) But they make up for this low damage by having this HUGE firing arc and a lower range damage reduction. So you CAN effectively bombard a target from 6-8k out, and the larger firing arc greatly reduces and almost removes the limits on both your attack vectors and your positioning.
Just a thought...
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
And DHCs in PvE content manage to ignore their intended 'weakness'. The firing arc of 45 degrees is not an issue, keeping a DHC on target is not an issue for a decent player. Yes your ship needs to be able to survive incoming enemy damage but because of the current 'tank' mechanics it does not matter if you can turn your ship or not. Either tac team + buffs are active and you can infact tank it or they are not and you esplode. Sole exception being hull tanking but then you still do not need to turn your ship. In addition the yo-yo maneuver allows you to avoid the negative defense issue.
While it is also true that cannon type weapons suffer a higher penalty at a longer range, their higher base damage combined with their higher efficiency with weapons power still allows them to put out the best sustained 'bombard' damage with the sole exception of specialized torpedo builds that can out perform them against hull targets.
PvP is a completely different ball game that I refuse to touch with a ten foot stick as far as balance goes, mainly because of the severe lack of it.
PvE content in general tends overcome its own intended handicaps as NPCs for the most part are hardly a challenge.
PvP is where DHCs suffer thier narrow firing arc.
Until the game offers more challenge than a DPS race the weapon that does the best damage is always gonna make it look easy.
The answer seems simple. Adjust the drain for beams to a more reasonable rate kept in line with the game but frankly the huge amount of shots fired from beam arrays is why they have such a bad drain.
PvE content in general tends overcome its own intended handicaps as NPCs for the most part are hardly a challenge.
PvP is where DHCs suffer thier narrow firing arc.
Until the game offers more challenge than a DPS race the weapon that does the best damage is always gonna make it look easy.
The answer seems simple. Adjust the drain for beams to a more reasonable rate kept in line with the game but frankly the huge amount of shots fired from beam arrays is why they have such a bad drain.
Yes it is pretty simple. And in a way that is what they are doing with the fifteen new ways of mitigating weapon drain released with season 7 but sadly this ... issue also effects standard dual cannons and regular cannons to a point.
But yeah, if they knocked beam array drain down to 9 tomorrow it would be a great adjustment. Or even if they released a new beam array for cruisers/some sci rear only with 9 drain that would be great. We can even get crazy and give it a built in 5% accuracy and it still wouldn't be OP especially since fire at will ignores your own accuracy rating last I checked.
Comments
The main evolution I always saw in the Federation was their tolerance for different cultures.
So, I think you would be a good Klingon. Join us today ;-P
...are we counting the Berman/Braga era in which the deflector dish is your one-stop shop for all things defense- and mass-destruction related, to the point it makes one wonder why the Federation wastes time with phasers and torpedoes and would be better-suited building a ship that has nothing but deflector dishes?
I once made the joke the Federation should build a ship that has a deflector dish for each potential facing (fore, aft, port, starboard, dorsal and ventral) and a warp core launcher, and name it the U.S.S. Braga. It would be the meanest TRIBBLE in the galaxy.
Spock's Brain.
Nah, I just got a the steamrunner for my Engie and motted his assualt cruiser :-P
Doing normal quests with the AC is like leveling a healer priest in WoW
Okay took me awhile, but I think I get it.
So if my FDC had resistance 50% from consoles and the like and gets hit for 1000 damage it will block 500 hp of damage, but if I get hit for 2000 damage I block 1000 damage and if I got hit for 26,000 damage I'd only take 13,000 damage, blocking the other 13,000.
So an Escort attacking me with say a 100 percent damage bonus is actually dealing less then 50 percent of that bonus to me in damage. So if the escort deals 500 damage originally and with a hundred percent dealt an additional 500 damage I would block 250 from his original base damage and 250 from his bonus damage for 500 in total effectively negating his entire bonus even though his attack bonus is a 100 percent and my resist is only 50% because his bonus is based only on his base damage, while my resist is based his total damage dealt.
I think the simplest way of explaining the advantage of armour stacking is that points of damage blocked scales automatically with increases in damage dealt, but the reverse is not true.
Judeo jutisu, you use thier strength against them.
As for cruisers aside from the Borque or what ever its called, FDC are probably the closest the KDF has to Fed Cruisers and I fly one and honestly I've found I'm alot more survivable in it then my fed escort. How much my hanger has to do with that I don't know, although I have 250 more crew and .1 shield thingy and an extra ensign sci Boff over the Advanced Heavy Cruiser the closest the Feds have to comparing to my Dacoit. I'm a tact commander btw, grade 26. Same turn speed and hull though as the Advanced Heavy Cruiser.
The Dominion is way more powerful then the Klingons. Think about it the only way the Klingons won against the Dominion was because the Dominion was bottle necked by the worm hole so the vast majority of thier resources were trapped back in Gamma Quadrant. They had to rely on what they snuck through the wormhole, the already wounded Cardassians and later the Breen as well as what they could build in a short matter of time and they still almost won against an alliance of the three most powerful empires of the Alpha/Beta Quaderants, the Romulans, the Federation, and the Klingons. Even then it was because Odo convinced the head female Changeling to sue for peace, even with the fall of Cardassia the Dominion could have retreated to Breen Space and areas of Cardassia space still in thier control and rebuilt thier fleets and troops and used thier abilities to find new suckers, er allies to help out. Think on this we only really saw a bit of the Gamma Quadrant and what the Dominion managed to sneak in past the worm hole and built in a short span of time. We don't know what sort of ships, troops, entire species of being both natural and created beings they had in reserve back in the Gamma Quadrant.
If the Dominion had access to tech that could create stabile artificial wormholes the Klingon Empire would be dust.
To the Alpha and Beta Quadrants the Dominion war was a huge war, to the Dominion the only threat came from a disease cook up by a rogue Agency, its Gamma Qaudrant territory were never at risk and to most member species of the Dominion would have had zero caulties.
You are correct. The superiority of the Dominion is why Section 31 (greatest heroes of the Fedration!!) had to implement an assymetrical solution.
The Dominion ARE the Founders, and they were dying thanks to the disease. As the Founders grew weaker I think its pretty safe to assume their grip on power would quickly dwindle and the Dominion would collapse on itself. The Jem'Hadar are mighty, but even they could not hold the Dominion together as soon as the non engineered members of the Dominion realized the Founders were gone. Of course, you have to ask yourself, would the Jem'Hadar even bother if the Founders are gone? Their primary concern would be freeying themselves from the White rather than hold their former master's territory.
While their Gamma Quadrant holdings were never at risk, Its safe to assume Section 31's plague is the closest the Founders have to come to dying out.
Actually based on what I have seen in Canon DS9 involving the Jem'hadar, it is more than likely that they would all commit suicide, having considered themselves failures for not being able to protect their gods/creators from this demise. There were a few episodes in DS9 where you saw whole crews of Jem'hadar kill themselves if a founder died on their watch. Usually the only ones then left were stranded Vorta.
Or they would go on berserk rampages of vengeance in the name of their dead masters. And after they ran out of things to kill, then they would all commit suicide.
Carry on.
R.I.P
Hyundai Motors is based in South Korea -.-
Since the captured B'Rel was equipped with an integrated cloaking device, this feature makes it a much more recent version. Its plasma coil interface design flaw would later be exploited by the Enterprise-D in its final fight.
That "grandfather paradox" doesn't work either from a quantum mechanics perspective. Erasing anyone from the current time line just puts the viewer into a divergent time line, while the original one goes on as if nothing happened.
There is no evidence that the Federation Pegasus phase cloak uses any Romulan / Klingon cloaking technology. The Klingons, on the other hand, got their prototype cloaks directly from the Romulans.
True, but the KDF as a multi-species organization only exists in STO. The Official canon KDF only has Klingons among its ranks.
Yes, information does move through a government-regulated society, but only at a trickle's pace compared to a free-democracy's massive information river flow. There's a reason why the west enjoys such a technological advantage over its restricted info counterparts.
The Klingons made the mistake of trying to conquer the Breen home world early in the 23rd century. They sent an entire fleet -- not one KDF ship ever returned from that fight. This gives you an idea of just how powerful the Breen are without Cryptic's poor handling of their IP content lol.
yAY! i LEARNED SOMETHING NEW.
All claoking devices are intregated into the shielding of a vessel. Thats why one can not have claoking and shields at the same time. As well the KDF acquired claoking technology in 2269 well before the events of 2285, so how do you know they KDF did not have integrated Claoking technology on that particular B'rel?
No doubt. the analogy was meant to show, like your example, that having a technology does not mean it will be used and to also show that the reason the feds did not run around Genesising all their Foes is the same as why the KDF did not go around erasing races from time.
It simply wasn't scripted that way as its against the ideology of SF/UFP and if the KDF had such easy to use Time-travel devices they would have conquered everyone they could. Both options would have ruined Star trek.
No evidence suggests they did not "acquire" the technology from the Romulans or used the Technology from the captured B'rel of ST3.
Yes, we Klingons did get our first cloaks from the RSE-KDF alliance.
Still, whats the point?
True. Though we do have Jeghpuwi as well. Still read the books and expand your ideas on the KDF. You may be surprised.
Except the KDF is not a completely government-regulated society since its made of many free Houses working together and as many will demostrate unlike Communism in our RL, the Government of the KDF is a wanted commodity and enjoyed by the Klingon populace for the most part.
Your looking at the KDF from a skewed viewpoint.
R.I.P
Not all cloaking devices are part of the ship. In TOS, Kirk stole the cloaking module from a Romulan K'Tinga and retrofitted it into the Enterprise shield system. Since the captured B'Rel had the cloaking device plasma coils that could not be corrected to prevent its cloak from being remote-activated by an enemy ship, this suggests that the cloak could not be swapped out since it was part of the original ship design. As a result, it can't be an older version since those had no cloaking devices.
All that I'm saying is that UFP does have superior research capabilities over the KDF due to its sheer number of member worlds along with their scientists and their respective technologies. The official KDF only has Klingon technologies as their sole source. Given this huge disparity, it is understandable that the UFP enjoys a technological advantage.
Please keep in mind that this only considers official Star Trek canon, not STO's unofficial game material.
I have to apologize for causing this derail. I answered a question challenging my assertion that the official KDF is not supposed to be as technologically advanced as the UFP, but it has lead to another topic tangent altogether.
Since we can't cite unofficial STO game material to challenge established canon, I suggest just figure out how to get cruisers on-par with other ship classes without tweaking their current in-game stats. I suggested cruiser-only long range weapons to give them a sniper-role, but we'll have to see what Cryptic comes up with.
Ah no, it's actually quite amusing tbh XD. But there isn't really anything you can do to cruisers in this game without tweaking their stats.
It all comes down to these four facts (or opinions, take your pick):
1) Cruisers can't turn for ballz. Many cruisers captains are used to this and compensate for it, myself included, and we do alright.
2) Their main weapon of choice (as a direct result of their crappy turn rate), beam arrays, are horrendously weak and suck power like a TRIBBLE (to the point where most cruisers while doing a full broadside suffer at least -60 to their weapons power level, something you don't see on ANY other ship class). And I mean HORRENDOUSLY. They got nerfed hard a while ago (20% damage reduction or something along those lines I believe) due to insanity with BFAW in PvP, and were never restored after all ships got an increase in hull, shields, and defense. As a result, you now have high drain weapons that don't do a lot of damage, which makes cruisers seem weaker than they should be/actually are. Even though to be fair, my cruiser can sustain 725+ damage per hit with mk XI blue equipment and BOff abilities while running a 7/1 setup.
3) For the most part, many cruiser captains are incompetent Kirks who don't understand that their "hero ships" aren't god awful powerful like in the shows, and weren't meant to be that way (took me forever to realize that myself, and evidence of this exists on this forum XD), but they try to do it anyways. And as a result fail miserably. Amusingly, but miserably. Giving cruisers an even worse name.
4) Lastly, most PvE end-game content is DPS based. So any ship class that can't DPS hard loses out, and is considered bad by many. Not all mind you, but many.
XD
On a full volley the beam arrays will fire (6x4) 24 shots in roughly 4 seconds with a 1 second recharge.
1 @ 125 power
1 @ 115 power
1 @ 105 power
1 @ 95 power
1 @ 85 power
19 @ 75 power
By contrast a DHC/Turret combo will fire one shot per DHC every two seconds roughly.
1 @ 125 power
1 @ 113 power
1 @ 101 power
- turrets are not important
And then the weapons all reset and repeat the pattern, usually. Granted they have been adding ways to mitigate the power drain but still, that is bad especially when DHCs get an innate 2% crit boost.
So what your saying is that the 6 Beam Arrays will fire 6 shots a second while 4 DHCs fire 1 shot in the same 1 second time span and that the drain for 6 beam arrays firing 4 times each in 4 seconds is too much compared to 4 DHCs firing 2 times each in four seconds?
That seems fine to me considering the that the beams fire twice as often as the DHC's. The higher drain is the byproduct of shooting more shots. More shots I add that do not require any movement to aim them at a target.
Since when did DHCs get an inherent 2% crit buff?
R.I.P
I see you conveniently left out the small detail that DHCs do about 2 times the dmg per hit of a beam array, Example below. (States from info window with items in inventory)
Phaser Dual Heavy Cannons Mk X [Acc] [Dmg]
Damage per hit: 365.4 (243.6 DPS)
-12 Weapon power when firing other weapons
2 Second recharge
+10% Critical severity
+10% Accuracy
Phaser Beam Array Mk X [Acc] [Dmg]
Damage per hit: 210 (168 DPS)
-10 Weapon power when firing other weapons
1 Second recharge
+10% Accuracy
Due to the recharge they do fire the same number of shots every beam cycle but when you put both weapons at 1km and leave them both unbuffed with the same power settings the DHC will do more damage. And Apparently they do have an inherent crit damage boost
I did not leave it out becuase it was not relevant to the post. Bareel was showing the discrepancy in drain between the BA and DHCs.
The BA's drain more becuase they fire more shots from more weapons in the time span. Thus the drain is higher by a small margin before the cycle begins again. Had he tested 4 BA's against 4 DHCs, what do you think the drain numbers would look like?
Of course the Dual Heavy cannons do more damage than a single Beam Array. The DHC's are literally two heavy cannons linked into a single weapon while the BA is a single weapon at the lowest definition in its weapon classification.
If it was Dual heavy Beam Arrays tested against the DHC's then it would be a different story, possibly.
Stating that the Beam array does less damage than a DHC is like stating my .22 pistol does less damage than my 30-06 rifle. Its true and the reason why very is evident.
I want even begin to get into the differences in firing arcs being another big factor in why the damage is different.
R.I.P
Assumption: 15 seconds of firing, no lag, no UI lag, and ignoring potential energy drain resists.
6x Beam Arrays will fire three cycles each lasting 4+1(cooldown) total seconds with 4 shots per cycle.
3 @ 125 power
3 @ 115 power
3 @ 105 power
3 @ 95 power
3 @ 85 power
57 @ 75 power
Vast majority of shots made at 75 power, giving a damage bonus of 1.5
3x DHCs & 3x Turrets will fire ten cycles each lasting .5+1(cooldown) total seconds with 1 shot per cycle per DHC, two per cycle per Turret.
10 DHC @ 125 power
10 DHC @ 113 power
10 DHC @ 101 power
10 Turret @ 93 power
10 Turret @ 85 power
40 Turret @ 77 power
Vast majority of shots with big guns, DHCs are at over 100 power and one third are at full bonus.
That is what makes DHCs so strong. All of their shots are fired at nearly full weapon power bonus. That is not the case for any other cannon, and beams suffer the most because of the length of their firing cycle.
Becuase they fire less often at a higher drain with less weapons for more damage thier drain evens out to work better to thier own usage.
While Beam Arrays (a much weaker weapon) fire more shots from more weapons with slightly less drain per weapon but lose out becuase they are firing more shots overall.
Beams firing more often in the same time span gets more drain applied becuase there are more shots being fired which does not allow for any period of Pickup in weapons power.
The slow firing cycle of DHCs allows for this pickup. Fewer more but damaging shots for higher drain that is less in total due to the slow firing cycle of these weapons allow for the natural regen of weapons power.
So lower the drain on BA's to 8 and be done with it. The BA will still do less damage than a DHC but possibly the drain will be more manageble but given your still doing more shots from more weapons, I doubt it.
I mean at 4 shots per cycle per BA at 3 cycles each thats 72 cycles with 288 shots fired in that 15 seconds compared to the total (between DHCs and Turret) of 150 shots in the same 15 seconds.
Thats 2800 flat drain for all those BA shots overall. Simply put, the BA firing cycle is what kills its own power due to its long firing cycle meaning that power drain is applied longer before being refunded by the game.
R.I.P
I must be doing something wrong.
Small hint, 8 phaser arrays are not the only viable weapon layout.
Mine does that easily too. And it can get first in SB24. And if you're using 8 BAs, I weep for your ship.
Anyways... the arguments in the last couple posts were well informed and thought out. Gj guys. But now the Devil's Advocate must come into play.
BAs do horrendously low damage. They have a high weapon power drain due to their firing cycle and how many of them are usually going at once in a full broadside (believe me, I know this from my 7/1 Oddy setup... weapon power? what's that... -.-). BAs also do very low damage per shot and are MASSIVELY affected by power levels. Their only saving grace is that they instantly hit (no travel time for the shot), they only have a 40% damage loss as a result of range, and they have a 250 degree firing arc (something everyone here conveniently left out in their arguments).
DHCs do very high damage. They have a higher weapon power drain that is mitigated by a much slower firing cycle and the fact you can only have 4 of them firing at once (compared to 7 BAs), and that they have priority over turrets, and often only your opening salvo is a combination of turrets and DHCs, since they have somewhat different firing cycles, it's commonplace to have your second and third salvos have your turrets firing at different times from your DHCs. DHCs do high damage per hit, and are still affected by power drain, but due to what was listed above, it's almost a moot point (due also to overcap). Their weakness is that their shot has travel time, which gives the target time (albeit not much) to hit an EPtS, or some other defensive buff, they have MASSIVE damage loss due to range, and they only have a 45 degree firing arc (again something conveniently left out).
You also need to look at roles of weapons.
DHCs were designed for heavy up in your face burst damage and lower sustained DPS. They were designed to nuke a target's shields away and open up for a THY3 or TS3 on bare hull. But they don't make good harass, and you can't bombard a target effectively from 6-8k out with them. Also you have to constantly be pointed at your target and that limits your attack vectors and positioning severely.
BAs were designed for constant medium level pressure damage. They were designed to wear a targets shields down and keep constant damage on the target. They are a support weapon more than anything else (irony: cruisers are support craft as well... hm...) But they make up for this low damage by having this HUGE firing arc and a lower range damage reduction. So you CAN effectively bombard a target from 6-8k out, and the larger firing arc greatly reduces and almost removes the limits on both your attack vectors and your positioning.
Just a thought...
While it is also true that cannon type weapons suffer a higher penalty at a longer range, their higher base damage combined with their higher efficiency with weapons power still allows them to put out the best sustained 'bombard' damage with the sole exception of specialized torpedo builds that can out perform them against hull targets.
PvP is a completely different ball game that I refuse to touch with a ten foot stick as far as balance goes, mainly because of the severe lack of it.
PvP is where DHCs suffer thier narrow firing arc.
Until the game offers more challenge than a DPS race the weapon that does the best damage is always gonna make it look easy.
The answer seems simple. Adjust the drain for beams to a more reasonable rate kept in line with the game but frankly the huge amount of shots fired from beam arrays is why they have such a bad drain.
R.I.P
Yes it is pretty simple. And in a way that is what they are doing with the fifteen new ways of mitigating weapon drain released with season 7 but sadly this ... issue also effects standard dual cannons and regular cannons to a point.
But yeah, if they knocked beam array drain down to 9 tomorrow it would be a great adjustment. Or even if they released a new beam array for cruisers/some sci rear only with 9 drain that would be great. We can even get crazy and give it a built in 5% accuracy and it still wouldn't be OP especially since fire at will ignores your own accuracy rating last I checked.