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........
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 ........
Its almost like....ships with cannons are "meant" to do more damage than ships with Beam Arrays??!! ZOMG!! Stop the presses!!
Ships with Beam arrays are meant to deal less damage and not be primary damage dealers, this is by design. If you really wish a ship that is a primary damage dealer I suggest you stop raging against the way Fed cruisers were designed (this includes teh way beams work, all part of the design) and understand that Escorts/Raptors and KDF Battlecruisers are meant as primary damage dealers.
Do KDF Battlecruisers come out ahead of Fed Cruisers in practical terms (as oppossed to the spreadsheet balance they are weighted against)? Probably. The flipside is that most people claiming to know both sides agree that Fed Escorts are usually better than KDF Raptors.
Seriously, there's no need for you to point out the WHY and the HOW of things. Cruisers are MEANT to deal less damage while tanking anything and everything the game can throw at it.
Another alternative:
Romulan Prototype Plasma BA. It uses NO energy when fired with other weapons. Granted you can only have one, but imagine that with 6 other BAs, you only suffer 60 power drain instead of 70. Something I plan on trying btw, the mk XII romulan BAs (6 of them), and the prototype BA. Should be interesting.
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.
Its almost like....ships with cannons are "meant" to do more damage than ships with Beam Arrays??!! ZOMG!! Stop the presses!!
Ships with Beam arrays are meant to deal less damage and not be primary damage dealers, this is by design. If you really wish a ship that is a primary damage dealer I suggest you stop raging against the way Fed cruisers were designed (this includes teh way beams work, all part of the design) and understand that Escorts/Raptors and KDF Battlecruisers are meant as primary damage dealers.
Do KDF Battlecruisers come out ahead of Fed Cruisers in practical terms (as oppossed to the spreadsheet balance they are weighted against)? Probably. The flipside is that most people claiming to know both sides agree that Fed Escorts are usually better than KDF Raptors.
Seriously, there's no need for you to point out the WHY and the HOW of things. Cruisers are MEANT to deal less damage while tanking anything and everything the game can throw at it.
When the only role in the game that exists is DPS then it becomes a problem.
An Escort can TANK anything and everything the game can throw at it 90% of the time. Why should 2/3rds of the ships in the game Fed side be sub-optimal 90% of the time? Why do you consider that a 'good thing'?
When I join an ESTF I literally count the number of DHC packing ships to figure out just how quickly it will get steamrolled. Why spend twelve minutes doing something that can be done in five?
And what on earth makes you thing cruisers are the best tanks? They are not. They are the best 'self tanks' but the moment you bust out the TRUE TRINITY and I'm talking from the perspective of an old EQ vet where it was a warrior tank and cleric healer or go home because your sub-optimal, the escort has the same mitigation ability with a higher avoidance capability making the science vessel healer more efficient.
People keep saying 'cruisers tank' and I say 'tank what and why?' followed with 'its not like a heal works any better on your cruiser than it does my escort, worse actually if your not packing EPTS 3'.
Another alternative:
Romulan Prototype Plasma BA. It uses NO energy when fired with other weapons. Granted you can only have one, but imagine that with 6 other BAs, you only suffer 60 power drain instead of 70. Something I plan on trying btw, the mk XII romulan BAs (6 of them), and the prototype BA. Should be interesting.
Yes and I do intent on flying a plasma beam boat and it shows Cryptic does not think adding a beam array without any power drain to the game would not be overpowered. Yet instead of fixing the underlying issue now it will just be plasma or go home for me with beams.
The only catch there being that this will be rather weak in PvP because so many end-game shields are especially resistant to plasma, which is where the balance kicks in.
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.
I think, beams can be boosted in its effect without raising its damage.
Cannons, like disruptors, are always meant to bring pure and raw destruction. Beams are more like chirugical weapons. Very accurate, more designed to attack strategic points on a star ship.
This is currently resembled by the skills like Beam: target engines, or weapons etc. However, these skills are quite ineffective. I don't know if someone bother even to use it. These skills should be much more effective, making beam user more like battlefield controllers than raw damage dealers.
I think, beams can be boosted in its effect without raising its damage.
Cannons, like disruptors, are always meant to bring pure and raw destruction. Beams are more like chirugical weapons. Very accurate, more designed to attack strategic points on a star ship.
This is currently resembled by the skills like Beam: target engines, or weapons etc. However, these skills are quite ineffective. I don't know if someone bother even to use it. These skills should be much more effective, making beam user more like battlefield controllers than raw damage dealers.
I use subsystem targetting all the time. On my science ship. XP
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.
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.
Ok, I admit I failed dismally to make my point and I forget what I was on at the time so I wont bother trying again (especially considering it was an entire page back) so moving forward to the point at hand about power drain...
One of the things people have not mentioned (and I forget where I read/watched/heard it) beam arrays are the most widely used weapons in the trek universe for a reason (ok it was probably because it didn't take much to draw in reality, but) they are supposedly the most efficient weapons ever made, they were also made with varying effective ranges, which are two things they missed out when they made the game. I'd ask for a 5% damage boost on beams with 2 point drain reduction to capture that efficiency.
Talking about DHCs and how they avoid their drawbacks most of the time perhaps give them a 5 point drain to fire 1 DHC (As they are DUAL Heavy Cannons) and have them drain total 15 when fired with other weapons just so that they have a drawback that is unavoidable.
Another idea would be to make escort tanking less effective by making heals percentage based (a concept I have explained previously) making heals equally effective on all ships (with the exception of sci ships due to their high aux power) but at the same time making heals on escorts less effective than they presently are. I think with a little tweaking of the power suggestions I made all of these can be balanced and implemented.
Ok, I admit I failed dismally to make my point and I forget what I was on at the time so I wont bother trying again (especially considering it was an entire page back) so moving forward to the point at hand about power drain...
One of the things people have not mentioned (and I forget where I read/watched/heard it) beam arrays are the most widely used weapons in the trek universe for a reason (ok it was probably because it didn't take much to draw in reality, but) they are supposedly the most efficient weapons ever made, they were also made with varying effective ranges, which are two things they missed out when they made the game. I'd ask for a 5% damage boost on beams with 2 point drain reduction to capture that efficiency.
Talking about DHCs and how they avoid their drawbacks most of the time perhaps give them a 5 point drain to fire 1 DHC (As they are DUAL Heavy Cannons) and have them drain total 15 when fired with other weapons just so that they have a drawback that is unavoidable.
Another idea would be to make escort tanking less effective by making heals percentage based (a concept I have explained previously) making heals equally effective on all ships (with the exception of sci ships due to their high aux power) but at the same time making heals on escorts less effective than they presently are. I think with a little tweaking of the power suggestions I made all of these can be balanced and implemented.
I agree with heals being % based, or atleast being based on the user's attributes. A Transfer Shield Strength for example should base its flat heal on the caster's max shields and the heal over time aspect on the casters regeneration.
As for the weapons and power drains I really think they should just remove the entire concept or redesign it from scratch to be much less...clunkly. It tends to have unintended ripple effects that cannot really be repaired within the current design. But no matter what beams should either a) only drain 8-9 per and/or b) have built in accuracy bonus. On that end though I kind of always wished that cannons even if it required their damage to be lowered had a built in penetration ability. By that they would say ignore a percentage of the enemies resistances in the damage roll.
That would make beams the accurate weapon, and cannons the piercing weapons.
I agree with heals being % based, or atleast being based on the user's attributes. A Transfer Shield Strength for example should base its flat heal on the caster's max shields and the heal over time aspect on the casters regeneration.
Well that was thinking of something like that, the example I used was Aux2SIF looking something like:
Max hull=W
X% of W=Y
Insert Aux power mech here to reach Z
Heal Z every second for 10 seconds
I know its very basic suedo coding but it makes the point and you can aplyy that exact formula to most of the games heals (Leaving out the Aux mech here appropriate), the thing is escorts would have to lose some of their shields and cruisers would need a hull boost to make it work.
As for the weapons and power drains I really think they should just remove the entire concept or redesign it from scratch to be much less...clunkly. It tends to have unintended ripple effects that cannot really be repaired within the current design. But no matter what beams should either a) only drain 8-9 per and/or b) have built in accuracy bonus. On that end though I kind of always wished that cannons even if it required their damage to be lowered had a built in penetration ability. By that they would say ignore a percentage of the enemies resistances in the damage roll.
I agree the power system (like the crew system) needs looking at and possibly rebuilding and on your point about cannons ignoring a percentage of resists i think rather than that have a built in 5% bleedthrough to shields meaning a resiliant shield attacked by cannons (of any type) would let 10% through
That would be wonderful and solve so many ... annoyances in the game and add consistency. Right now any weapon enhancing ability (say FaW or CRF, or even APO) has it's damage increase determined by the current damage potential of the ship it is used on. The fact that healing/resists/etc do not is what leads to the current issue of either all ships are tanky or none are.
A defiant should be easier to get killed in, but the moment the bump up the difficulty to the point where my defiant will pop the vast majority (not all but most) of player's cruisers will also be exploding left and right.
Lets assume you DO get your improvements to beams and you do substancially more damage. Would you also be willing to give up an equally substancial amount of survivability?
Lets assume you DO get your improvements to beams and you do substancially more damage. Would you also be willing to give up an equally substancial amount of survivability?
You spelled "substantially" wrong.
And as for adamkafei and bareel, it comes down to this: cruisers are healers and tanks. Get over it. You want to deal damage with them, you sacrifice your survivability. I was given a hard lesson in this today in a PvP round where I had 2 bugs and a regent on me. If I was in tank mode I would have been fine. I could have done without the sub-nuke as well. But since I was in offensive mode (ltcmdr tac instead of engi or sci), I got killed. Not quickly mind you (killing a properly built oddy always takes time), but I was still killed.
That is balance. You have to sacrifice to gain. I was easily doing twice as much damage as any cruiser out there (was able to destroy a vesta by my lonesome lol), but I was a terrible healer and not a very good tank as a result. You can't have it all, so stop trying to get it all.
You will NEVER deal as much damage as an escort. That's their job. Damage dealer. You are a cruiser. A support craft. That's your job. Healer/pressure damage. An escort will NEVER be able to take the beating your cruiser can. That's not it's job. That's yours. -.-
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.
You will NEVER deal as much damage as an escort. That's their job. Damage dealer. You are a cruiser. A support craft. That's your job. Healer/pressure damage. An escort will NEVER be able to take the beating your cruiser can. That's not it's job. That's yours. -.-
And as Bareel, yourself and many others, have pointed out if you build an escort right you can tank anything and everything in the game, I've taken my Excelsior up against some bugs and they tank better than your Oddy. So I think we can have a little more damage, I have never said I want to deal escort level damage but if they can compete with us when it comes to tanking I think we can be allowed to compete in damage terms, not doing their level of damage but to be able to compete.
Even with the changes we proposed we still couldn't do escort level damage due to boffs so please stop exaggerating my proposals
Lets assume you DO get your improvements to beams and you do substantially more damage. Would you also be willing to give up an equally substantial amount of survivability?
The power drain reduction of 1 or 2 points and/or a damage improvement of 5% and Acc being accounted for in FAW is not a substantial boost to beam damage and yes I would be giving up that same amount of survivability, in case you haven't noticed most NPCs use BAs and 2 of the 3 fed side ship classes use BAs.
Also changing the way healing is done making it percentage based will make the higher stats on the cruiser actually mean something, as Bareel mentioned all damage boosts are based on your current stats yet healing is based on an arbitrarily chosen number in an attempt to find a healing balance between the ships which can never be met by this method but a percentage based system would provide that balance.
In closing I ask you both if escorts are allowed to tank like cruisers and lets face it we've all seen escorts tanking gates, cube etc, you two have said that your escorts can tank said enemies why shouldn't cruisers be able to compete on the damage scene?
In closing I ask you both if escorts are allowed to tank like cruisers and lets face it we've all seen escorts tanking gates, cube etc, you two have said that your escorts can tank said enemies why shouldn't cruisers be able to compete on the damage scene?
This x10.
As for PvP balance until certain premade steamroll options (subnuke doffs/P2W console spams) are removed or fixed along with some other stupid silly broken combos (tric bombing timeships) are fixed I see no reason at all to care about so called 'balance' in PvP. Sorry if this offends anyone but last tornie thread had the entire PvP community going tooth and nail at one another on what is broken and what isn't. Not to mention the premade hate going on over some specific combos.
In closing I ask you both if escorts are allowed to tank like cruisers and lets face it we've all seen escorts tanking gates, cube etc, you two have said that your escorts can tank said enemies why shouldn't cruisers be able to compete on the damage scene?
Escorts are not allowed to tank like Cruisers. They learned how to do it from Hilbert and the variuos ideas that exist on resist stacking. Basically someone figured out the best method of enhancing survival and its now the norm for all ships.
Its not like its a great secret to cycle two EPTS1's for the uptime and resists, or to enhance it even more with HE, TSS, PH, or A2Sif.
Those Escorts though, learned how to tank using the rules and abilities that already existed, so why can't the Cruiser learn how to do damage the same way as many methods exist to increase the damage of Beams on Cruisers.
I still think a Beam Rapid Fire BOff ability could help her without being a direct buff to beams or Cruiser for a perceived "tankyness" that Escorts never recieved but discovered how to put into effect.
Escorts are not allowed to tank like Cruisers. They learned how to do it from Hilbert and the variuos ideas that exist on resist stacking. Basically someone figured out the best method of enhancing survival and its now the norm for all ships.
Its not like its a great secret to cycle two EPTS1's for the uptime and resists, or to enhance it even more with HE, TSS, PH, or A2Sif.
Those Escorts though, learned how to tank using the rules and abilities that already existed, so why can't the Cruiser learn how to do damage the same way as many methods exist to increase the damage of Beams on Cruisers.
I still think a Beam Rapid Fire BOff ability could help her without being a direct buff to beams or Cruiser for a perceived "tankyness" that Escorts never recieved but discovered how to put into effect.
Two big comments on this.
1) The escort 'class' has very little inherent penalty to becoming tanky beyond a lower max HP and a slightly lower innate shield regeneration and hull restore. No abilities, gear, or anything take these factors into account when determining their effects as far as defense goes. The escort's only true limitation from a defense perspective are her boff slot arrangements. Let me just say the Timeship escorts can infact out 'self tank' the majority of cruisers thanks to her uni boff slots and defense bonus. Just like the Tholian ships can perform better as 'healers' because of the same reason.
Survival Time = (Base HP + Healed HP) * resists * avoidance Note that most ships healed HP will exceed base HP in about 30 seconds and does not factor in the base HP when determined
2) The beam array does have penalties that stick beyond boff abilities. First off is the power drain we have already covered but does have methods of mitigating. But beyond that because every offensive ability takes the base weapon into account and multiplies its values combined with the lower innate values of the beam array it will never be able too.
Damage Output = (Base Weapon + Bonus Damage) * ASpeed Mod * Crit Mod * Armor Mod * Damage Mod Note that even bonus damage takes the base weapon into account.
Although in closing cruisers can in fact put out decent DPS. But not to the same degree as an escort can have decent tank if that makes sense. In addition you only need enough tank to survive, anything extra in PvE is simply inefficient similar to a premade PvP escort that packs too much of it's own tank instead of relying on the healer to keep him alive will have less spike/burst than he should.
The core root of the problem is the way things scale. DHC+turret scales better than BAs with more weapons. Attack patterns, weapon abilities, and the like also scale better than heals do, but not better than resistances. They are doing things to mitigate this with the new gear but the game would have a much healthier long term balance if they solved it from the mechanics side.
Cruisers are just ok, but currently except for the reason "i like how it looks" there is no reason to choose a cruiser over an escort. Unless you are in a premade pvp match escorts do what a cruiser can do.
Lowering beam power drain will help. Cruisers are supposed to pack 6 beams and broadside. But weapon drain makes this inefficient.
Tie heals to crew size or to base hull/shiled hp. This will take away scorts tankiness while adding more usefullness to cruisers.
Cruisers are just ok, but currently except for the reason "i like how it looks" there is no reason to choose a cruiser over an escort.
Reading what you'v said right here makes me think the real problem is that a lot of people WANT to play escorts but feel forced (presumably by their love of the show's big ships) to play cruisers. Of course other simply want to have a nearly stationary invincible gun battery. I suspect this is why so many people clamor for the Typhon Battleship, they hope it'd be just that.
Cruisers have a certain playstyle that is wholly different than escorts, they are not meant to play the same way at all, nor do the exact same damage, nor move the same way, nor tank the same. That said, which cruiser you fly makes a huge difference. Ships like the Galaxy and the Starcruiser are very, VERY engi and sci leaning, so much so that they are practically gimped before you even get them in your hangar IMHO! If you feel that your tactical oriented cruiser is not pulling its weight then something is definitely wrong though, and probably with you and not the ship.
Of course, it could also be a matter of focus. Players really need to understand that Escorts destroy one target at a time while cruisers are masters of the furball. I take my engi cruiser to Starbase 24 all the time and assuming no disconnects or lag outs I usually come in first or second, a feat my escort could never hope to accomplish.
So basically it still boils down to Beam arrays are too costly and do too low damage for it and need to be buffed and bit. We really need something comparable to the DHCs in effeciency and damage-wise that wouldn't be bad too.
Cruisers are to slow and don't do enough damage which needs to be buffed somehow, but tank fine though the escorts still make it look easy fast littel TRIBBLE. So hard to hi.......
Anyways, the escence of the gripe hasn't changed.
So I'll say what I always say.
Heavy Beam arrays = basically the DHC's of beams. Yeah, thier still a 60 degree FA but what does one expect on a beam weapon that has lower degridation over range, does DHC similiar damage and can be buffed by BO3? A cruiser is not an escort though such an FA should be fine and balance the weapon with the game. Now the Cruiser can spike like the Escort.
Changes the existing FA's on all Beam and Cannon weapon to thus,
Beam Arrays = 270 FA. They keep same stats. BA remain the "easy weapon" choice in STO. (as an additon lower thier drain to 8)
Single cannon = 250' FA. Much media has talked on how cannon would be mounted down the length on KDF ships so why does the single cannon suffer as a broad side weapon? It has lower DPV than a Beam Array and even at Mk12 its DPS is not outstanding. Why is this weapon this bad?
Dual Beam Banks = Open them up to 180 Degree's but keep all other stats the same. They already do way more than a Dual cannon on any day say why would they need a damage buff?
Dual Cannons = open them to 90' FA. Buff thier damage to 200 DPV. Keep DPS the same. They suck under a 45 FA for the shytte damage they do.
Heavy Beams = see above. Basically though at Mk 12 they are the same as DHCs but the stats look something like this for a white { 420 DPV / 200 DPS }. It keeps with the beams are high DPV/low DPS concept.
Dual Heavy Cannons = They stay the same, as they are perfect.
Quad cannons = Need help, as I think they lack the credentials to be considered a completely viable weapon.
In additon add a form of Beam turrets to the game. What would it hurt?
Then add a few more BOff abilities to help the Cruisers perform better and that the avertage cannon wielding escort will most likely only dabble in;
Fire For Effect = The Beam version of Cannon rapid fire but set its start at Ensign and cap out at LTC. If one can't take basically the focused version of CRF for beams and make it work to really good damage then I do not know what to say or do at this point. Its a direct damage buff for beams in addition to BO.
Cannon Overload = Name needs work but basically the cannon version of Beam Overload, inluding ridiculus drain.
Otherwise I can't agree wth half the stuff I see in these threads as it all quickly devolves into fan built-up wants that leave baalnce behind for te most part.
Frankly put, its theage of the Escort in STO. Don't fear it though as it was once the age of teh Cruiser and the Science vessel at one time and the Age of the Escort will pass too.
I just don't want the game to roll back into the other three again and just start the cycle all over again so in 9-12 months having the Escort/Tacs complaining about balance etc.
They cant balance anything by continually putting the next "class" in the limelight.
Reading what you'v said right here makes me think the real problem is that a lot of people WANT to play escorts but feel forced (presumably by their love of the show's big ships) to play cruisers. Of course other simply want to have a nearly stationary invincible gun battery. I suspect this is why so many people clamor for the Typhon Battleship, they hope it'd be just that.
Cruisers have a certain playstyle that is wholly different than escorts, they are not meant to play the same way at all, nor do the exact same damage, nor move the same way, nor tank the same. That said, which cruiser you fly makes a huge difference. Ships like the Galaxy and the Starcruiser are very, VERY engi and sci leaning, so much so that they are practically gimped before you even get them in your hangar IMHO! If you feel that your tactical oriented cruiser is not pulling its weight then something is definitely wrong though, and probably with you and not the ship.
Of course, it could also be a matter of focus. Players really need to understand that Escorts destroy one target at a time while cruisers are masters of the furball. I take my engi cruiser to Starbase 24 all the time and assuming no disconnects or lag outs I usually come in first or second, a feat my escort could never hope to accomplish.
It's not limited to just STO. MMO's in general glamorize DPS over all other functions which the novices and recount monkeys eat up. Is there anything wrong with DPS? Nope. Many of us have performed all of the roles at one point or another. You do little DPS when you're dead but self preservation and support offer little glamor.
Jack Emmert: "Starfleet and Klingon. ... So two factions, full PvE content." Al Rivera hates Klingons Star Trek Online: Agents of Jack Emmert All cloaks should be canon.
[QUOTE=bitemepwe;7305841Heavy Beam arrays = basically the DHC's of beams. Yeah, thier still a 60 degree FA but what does one expect on a beam weapon that has lower degridation over range, does DHC similiar damage and can be buffed by BO3? A cruiser is not an escort though such an FA should be fine and balance the weapon with the game. Now the Cruiser can spike like the Escort.[/QUOTE]
60 deg FA? You are kidding right? That is just silly, we're looking to make cruisers a little more competent, not create a completely useless weapon, DHCs have the same FA as DCs with more DPS... oh and no drawback
Give DBBs a 180 FA and the problem of cruisers being weak on damage is solved.
Then you make Single Cannons completely worthless in the process. Heck I thought single cannons were the bridge between beam arrays and dbb in the dps area.
60 deg FA? You are kidding right? That is just silly, we're looking to make cruisers a little more competent, not create a completely useless weapon, DHCs have the same FA as DCs with more DPS... oh and no drawback
So you want near DHC damage AND wide firing arcs of beams? Yeah thats balanced.
The harder the punch the narrower the FA.
Those DHCs still have be aimed. Its one of the prices for using them.
A 60' FA is blessing compared to 45, even on cruiser.
So you want near DHC damage AND wide firing arcs of beams? Yeah thats balanced.
I want my 6 beams to compete with 4DhC/3Turret ships yes hence I suggested what I did. (5% dmg boost to all beams, -1 or 2 drain and accuracy returned to FAW) Giving a 6 beam broadside damage that competes with 4 DHCs but does not out do it
The harder the punch the narrower the FA.
Those DHCs still have be aimed. Its one of the prices for using them.
In all my experience the only aiming involved in DHCs is point the front of you ship at something (Slightly harder than pressing the "fire" button) and pressing the "fire" button.
Nobody uses DCs because DHCs are better, both beams and DCs need something DHCs don't
I want my 6 beams to compete with 4DhC/3Turret ships yes hence I suggested what I did. (5% dmg boost to all beams, -1 or 2 drain and accuracy returned to FAW) Giving a 6 beam broadside damage that competes with 4 DHCs but does not out do it
In all my experience the only aiming involved in DHCs is point the front of you ship at something (Slightly harder than pressing the "fire" button) and pressing the "fire" button.
Nobody uses DCs because DHCs are better, both beams and DCs need something DHCs don't
Basically you want a -now comes a german expression- "eierlegende Wollmilchsau", which is basically a combination of hen, cow,pig and sheep, giving milk and wool, laying eggs, as well as giving huge amounts of meet.
Here you just want a imba ship, capable of tanking as hell and firing like theres no tomorrow. Thats just imbalanced. A cruiser can tank two escorts, a escorts cant do that. With your suggestion a tank could not only tank two escorts, but also destroy them. That is ridiculous! Cruiser are not meant to be the damage dealers. But with the right build you can. Not as much as escorts, but than again, you have a way better defence.
I want my 6 beams to compete with 4DhC/3Turret ships yes hence I suggested what I did. (5% dmg boost to all beams, -1 or 2 drain and accuracy returned to FAW) Giving a 6 beam broadside damage that competes with 4 DHCs but does not out do it
In all my experience the only aiming involved in DHCs is point the front of you ship at something (Slightly harder than pressing the "fire" button) and pressing the "fire" button.
Nobody uses DCs because DHCs are better, both beams and DCs need something DHCs don't
Fine, we'll reduce the firing arc to match that of DHC. Enjoy never achieving a firing solution on your Heavy Beam Bank slug.
Jack Emmert: "Starfleet and Klingon. ... So two factions, full PvE content." Al Rivera hates Klingons Star Trek Online: Agents of Jack Emmert All cloaks should be canon.
A cruiser can tank two escorts, a escorts cant do that. With your suggestion a tank could not only tank two escorts, but also destroy them.
And I've seen escorts tank multiple cruisers AND destroy them, if it's balanced for an escort to do that to cruisers then it's balanced for a cruiser to do the same to escorts.
And I've seen escorts tank multiple cruisers AND destroy them, if it's balanced for an escort to do that to cruisers then it's balanced for a cruiser to do the same to escorts.
Eye witness accounts are the least effective and most scrutinized forms of defense/prosecution.
Do you have screenshots of this?
When did you happen upon this battle?
Did you check the system for cloaked ships or recently disengaged vessels?
What skill specs were each Captain using?
What specific ships were used?
What were the loadouts of the ships involved?
What length of time was required for this battle?
What was the overall experience of all players involved relating to piloting those specific vessels and battling the specific vessels in question?
Jack Emmert: "Starfleet and Klingon. ... So two factions, full PvE content." Al Rivera hates Klingons Star Trek Online: Agents of Jack Emmert All cloaks should be canon.
Comments
Its almost like....ships with cannons are "meant" to do more damage than ships with Beam Arrays??!! ZOMG!! Stop the presses!!
Ships with Beam arrays are meant to deal less damage and not be primary damage dealers, this is by design. If you really wish a ship that is a primary damage dealer I suggest you stop raging against the way Fed cruisers were designed (this includes teh way beams work, all part of the design) and understand that Escorts/Raptors and KDF Battlecruisers are meant as primary damage dealers.
Do KDF Battlecruisers come out ahead of Fed Cruisers in practical terms (as oppossed to the spreadsheet balance they are weighted against)? Probably. The flipside is that most people claiming to know both sides agree that Fed Escorts are usually better than KDF Raptors.
Seriously, there's no need for you to point out the WHY and the HOW of things. Cruisers are MEANT to deal less damage while tanking anything and everything the game can throw at it.
Romulan Prototype Plasma BA. It uses NO energy when fired with other weapons. Granted you can only have one, but imagine that with 6 other BAs, you only suffer 60 power drain instead of 70. Something I plan on trying btw, the mk XII romulan BAs (6 of them), and the prototype BA. Should be interesting.
When the only role in the game that exists is DPS then it becomes a problem.
An Escort can TANK anything and everything the game can throw at it 90% of the time. Why should 2/3rds of the ships in the game Fed side be sub-optimal 90% of the time? Why do you consider that a 'good thing'?
When I join an ESTF I literally count the number of DHC packing ships to figure out just how quickly it will get steamrolled. Why spend twelve minutes doing something that can be done in five?
And what on earth makes you thing cruisers are the best tanks? They are not. They are the best 'self tanks' but the moment you bust out the TRUE TRINITY and I'm talking from the perspective of an old EQ vet where it was a warrior tank and cleric healer or go home because your sub-optimal, the escort has the same mitigation ability with a higher avoidance capability making the science vessel healer more efficient.
People keep saying 'cruisers tank' and I say 'tank what and why?' followed with 'its not like a heal works any better on your cruiser than it does my escort, worse actually if your not packing EPTS 3'.
Yes and I do intent on flying a plasma beam boat and it shows Cryptic does not think adding a beam array without any power drain to the game would not be overpowered. Yet instead of fixing the underlying issue now it will just be plasma or go home for me with beams.
Cannons, like disruptors, are always meant to bring pure and raw destruction. Beams are more like chirugical weapons. Very accurate, more designed to attack strategic points on a star ship.
This is currently resembled by the skills like Beam: target engines, or weapons etc. However, these skills are quite ineffective. I don't know if someone bother even to use it. These skills should be much more effective, making beam user more like battlefield controllers than raw damage dealers.
I use subsystem targetting all the time. On my science ship. XP
Ok, I admit I failed dismally to make my point and I forget what I was on at the time so I wont bother trying again (especially considering it was an entire page back) so moving forward to the point at hand about power drain...
One of the things people have not mentioned (and I forget where I read/watched/heard it) beam arrays are the most widely used weapons in the trek universe for a reason (ok it was probably because it didn't take much to draw in reality, but) they are supposedly the most efficient weapons ever made, they were also made with varying effective ranges, which are two things they missed out when they made the game. I'd ask for a 5% damage boost on beams with 2 point drain reduction to capture that efficiency.
Talking about DHCs and how they avoid their drawbacks most of the time perhaps give them a 5 point drain to fire 1 DHC (As they are DUAL Heavy Cannons) and have them drain total 15 when fired with other weapons just so that they have a drawback that is unavoidable.
Another idea would be to make escort tanking less effective by making heals percentage based (a concept I have explained previously) making heals equally effective on all ships (with the exception of sci ships due to their high aux power) but at the same time making heals on escorts less effective than they presently are. I think with a little tweaking of the power suggestions I made all of these can be balanced and implemented.
I agree with heals being % based, or atleast being based on the user's attributes. A Transfer Shield Strength for example should base its flat heal on the caster's max shields and the heal over time aspect on the casters regeneration.
As for the weapons and power drains I really think they should just remove the entire concept or redesign it from scratch to be much less...clunkly. It tends to have unintended ripple effects that cannot really be repaired within the current design. But no matter what beams should either a) only drain 8-9 per and/or b) have built in accuracy bonus. On that end though I kind of always wished that cannons even if it required their damage to be lowered had a built in penetration ability. By that they would say ignore a percentage of the enemies resistances in the damage roll.
That would make beams the accurate weapon, and cannons the piercing weapons.
Well that was thinking of something like that, the example I used was Aux2SIF looking something like:
Max hull=W
X% of W=Y
Insert Aux power mech here to reach Z
Heal Z every second for 10 seconds
I know its very basic suedo coding but it makes the point and you can aplyy that exact formula to most of the games heals (Leaving out the Aux mech here appropriate), the thing is escorts would have to lose some of their shields and cruisers would need a hull boost to make it work.
I agree the power system (like the crew system) needs looking at and possibly rebuilding and on your point about cannons ignoring a percentage of resists i think rather than that have a built in 5% bleedthrough to shields meaning a resiliant shield attacked by cannons (of any type) would let 10% through
It would be nice but I would much prefer to see acc mods accounted for in FAW
A defiant should be easier to get killed in, but the moment the bump up the difficulty to the point where my defiant will pop the vast majority (not all but most) of player's cruisers will also be exploding left and right.
Lets assume you DO get your improvements to beams and you do substancially more damage. Would you also be willing to give up an equally substancial amount of survivability?
You spelled "substantially" wrong.
And as for adamkafei and bareel, it comes down to this: cruisers are healers and tanks. Get over it. You want to deal damage with them, you sacrifice your survivability. I was given a hard lesson in this today in a PvP round where I had 2 bugs and a regent on me. If I was in tank mode I would have been fine. I could have done without the sub-nuke as well. But since I was in offensive mode (ltcmdr tac instead of engi or sci), I got killed. Not quickly mind you (killing a properly built oddy always takes time), but I was still killed.
That is balance. You have to sacrifice to gain. I was easily doing twice as much damage as any cruiser out there (was able to destroy a vesta by my lonesome lol), but I was a terrible healer and not a very good tank as a result. You can't have it all, so stop trying to get it all.
You will NEVER deal as much damage as an escort. That's their job. Damage dealer. You are a cruiser. A support craft. That's your job. Healer/pressure damage. An escort will NEVER be able to take the beating your cruiser can. That's not it's job. That's yours. -.-
And as Bareel, yourself and many others, have pointed out if you build an escort right you can tank anything and everything in the game, I've taken my Excelsior up against some bugs and they tank better than your Oddy. So I think we can have a little more damage, I have never said I want to deal escort level damage but if they can compete with us when it comes to tanking I think we can be allowed to compete in damage terms, not doing their level of damage but to be able to compete.
Even with the changes we proposed we still couldn't do escort level damage due to boffs so please stop exaggerating my proposals
The power drain reduction of 1 or 2 points and/or a damage improvement of 5% and Acc being accounted for in FAW is not a substantial boost to beam damage and yes I would be giving up that same amount of survivability, in case you haven't noticed most NPCs use BAs and 2 of the 3 fed side ship classes use BAs.
Also changing the way healing is done making it percentage based will make the higher stats on the cruiser actually mean something, as Bareel mentioned all damage boosts are based on your current stats yet healing is based on an arbitrarily chosen number in an attempt to find a healing balance between the ships which can never be met by this method but a percentage based system would provide that balance.
In closing I ask you both if escorts are allowed to tank like cruisers and lets face it we've all seen escorts tanking gates, cube etc, you two have said that your escorts can tank said enemies why shouldn't cruisers be able to compete on the damage scene?
This x10.
As for PvP balance until certain premade steamroll options (subnuke doffs/P2W console spams) are removed or fixed along with some other stupid silly broken combos (tric bombing timeships) are fixed I see no reason at all to care about so called 'balance' in PvP. Sorry if this offends anyone but last tornie thread had the entire PvP community going tooth and nail at one another on what is broken and what isn't. Not to mention the premade hate going on over some specific combos.
Escorts are not allowed to tank like Cruisers. They learned how to do it from Hilbert and the variuos ideas that exist on resist stacking. Basically someone figured out the best method of enhancing survival and its now the norm for all ships.
Its not like its a great secret to cycle two EPTS1's for the uptime and resists, or to enhance it even more with HE, TSS, PH, or A2Sif.
Those Escorts though, learned how to tank using the rules and abilities that already existed, so why can't the Cruiser learn how to do damage the same way as many methods exist to increase the damage of Beams on Cruisers.
I still think a Beam Rapid Fire BOff ability could help her without being a direct buff to beams or Cruiser for a perceived "tankyness" that Escorts never recieved but discovered how to put into effect.
R.I.P
Two big comments on this.
1) The escort 'class' has very little inherent penalty to becoming tanky beyond a lower max HP and a slightly lower innate shield regeneration and hull restore. No abilities, gear, or anything take these factors into account when determining their effects as far as defense goes. The escort's only true limitation from a defense perspective are her boff slot arrangements. Let me just say the Timeship escorts can infact out 'self tank' the majority of cruisers thanks to her uni boff slots and defense bonus. Just like the Tholian ships can perform better as 'healers' because of the same reason.
Survival Time = (Base HP + Healed HP) * resists * avoidance
Note that most ships healed HP will exceed base HP in about 30 seconds and does not factor in the base HP when determined
2) The beam array does have penalties that stick beyond boff abilities. First off is the power drain we have already covered but does have methods of mitigating. But beyond that because every offensive ability takes the base weapon into account and multiplies its values combined with the lower innate values of the beam array it will never be able too.
Damage Output = (Base Weapon + Bonus Damage) * ASpeed Mod * Crit Mod * Armor Mod * Damage Mod
Note that even bonus damage takes the base weapon into account.
Although in closing cruisers can in fact put out decent DPS. But not to the same degree as an escort can have decent tank if that makes sense. In addition you only need enough tank to survive, anything extra in PvE is simply inefficient similar to a premade PvP escort that packs too much of it's own tank instead of relying on the healer to keep him alive will have less spike/burst than he should.
The core root of the problem is the way things scale. DHC+turret scales better than BAs with more weapons. Attack patterns, weapon abilities, and the like also scale better than heals do, but not better than resistances. They are doing things to mitigate this with the new gear but the game would have a much healthier long term balance if they solved it from the mechanics side.
Lowering beam power drain will help. Cruisers are supposed to pack 6 beams and broadside. But weapon drain makes this inefficient.
Tie heals to crew size or to base hull/shiled hp. This will take away scorts tankiness while adding more usefullness to cruisers.
Thank you
Reading what you'v said right here makes me think the real problem is that a lot of people WANT to play escorts but feel forced (presumably by their love of the show's big ships) to play cruisers. Of course other simply want to have a nearly stationary invincible gun battery. I suspect this is why so many people clamor for the Typhon Battleship, they hope it'd be just that.
Cruisers have a certain playstyle that is wholly different than escorts, they are not meant to play the same way at all, nor do the exact same damage, nor move the same way, nor tank the same. That said, which cruiser you fly makes a huge difference. Ships like the Galaxy and the Starcruiser are very, VERY engi and sci leaning, so much so that they are practically gimped before you even get them in your hangar IMHO! If you feel that your tactical oriented cruiser is not pulling its weight then something is definitely wrong though, and probably with you and not the ship.
Of course, it could also be a matter of focus. Players really need to understand that Escorts destroy one target at a time while cruisers are masters of the furball. I take my engi cruiser to Starbase 24 all the time and assuming no disconnects or lag outs I usually come in first or second, a feat my escort could never hope to accomplish.
R.I.P
It's not limited to just STO. MMO's in general glamorize DPS over all other functions which the novices and recount monkeys eat up. Is there anything wrong with DPS? Nope. Many of us have performed all of the roles at one point or another. You do little DPS when you're dead but self preservation and support offer little glamor.
Al Rivera hates Klingons
Star Trek Online: Agents of Jack Emmert
All cloaks should be canon.
60 deg FA? You are kidding right? That is just silly, we're looking to make cruisers a little more competent, not create a completely useless weapon, DHCs have the same FA as DCs with more DPS... oh and no drawback
Then you make Single Cannons completely worthless in the process. Heck I thought single cannons were the bridge between beam arrays and dbb in the dps area.
So you want near DHC damage AND wide firing arcs of beams? Yeah thats balanced.
The harder the punch the narrower the FA.
Those DHCs still have be aimed. Its one of the prices for using them.
A 60' FA is blessing compared to 45, even on cruiser.
R.I.P
Sure, when they upgrade the FA of single cannons to 250' making them more than useless.
R.I.P
I want my 6 beams to compete with 4DhC/3Turret ships yes hence I suggested what I did. (5% dmg boost to all beams, -1 or 2 drain and accuracy returned to FAW) Giving a 6 beam broadside damage that competes with 4 DHCs but does not out do it
In all my experience the only aiming involved in DHCs is point the front of you ship at something (Slightly harder than pressing the "fire" button) and pressing the "fire" button.
Nobody uses DCs because DHCs are better, both beams and DCs need something DHCs don't
Basically you want a -now comes a german expression- "eierlegende Wollmilchsau", which is basically a combination of hen, cow,pig and sheep, giving milk and wool, laying eggs, as well as giving huge amounts of meet.
Here you just want a imba ship, capable of tanking as hell and firing like theres no tomorrow. Thats just imbalanced. A cruiser can tank two escorts, a escorts cant do that. With your suggestion a tank could not only tank two escorts, but also destroy them. That is ridiculous! Cruiser are not meant to be the damage dealers. But with the right build you can. Not as much as escorts, but than again, you have a way better defence.
Fine, we'll reduce the firing arc to match that of DHC. Enjoy never achieving a firing solution on your Heavy Beam Bank slug.
Al Rivera hates Klingons
Star Trek Online: Agents of Jack Emmert
All cloaks should be canon.
And I've seen escorts tank multiple cruisers AND destroy them, if it's balanced for an escort to do that to cruisers then it's balanced for a cruiser to do the same to escorts.
Eye witness accounts are the least effective and most scrutinized forms of defense/prosecution.
Do you have screenshots of this?
When did you happen upon this battle?
Did you check the system for cloaked ships or recently disengaged vessels?
What skill specs were each Captain using?
What specific ships were used?
What were the loadouts of the ships involved?
What length of time was required for this battle?
What was the overall experience of all players involved relating to piloting those specific vessels and battling the specific vessels in question?
Al Rivera hates Klingons
Star Trek Online: Agents of Jack Emmert
All cloaks should be canon.