In my opinion the biggest problem with Cruisers is... why not fly a Science ship?
The Cruiser might tank even better, yes, but that's the only thing it does better and a Science ships tank (even with a Tac pilot) is sufficient for most situations.
screws it more. And then screws it more. Downside? Slightly less damage per shot, slightly higher energy drain. Cannon Scatter Volley? You basically blast everything in a large cone in front of you. Downside? Only 70% damage per shot.
I'm not disagreeing, I just wanted to add one factor that can affect the dispute; namely that beam abilities require lower ranks than cannon ones. Specifically, you can load rank I abilities into any ensign slot. It doesn't seem like much it can really limit your access to higher rank cannon abilities depending on your build, especially if those spaces are competing with torpedo abilities, so beams are actually easier to fit. That said, with science ships getting "free" subsystem targeting such things are probably best left to them. It is however possible to build a ship to take full advantage of beam overload, and to reduce the recovery time, so it can still be a very useful ability.
Currently I'm running an escort with two dual heavy cannons, a torpedo launcher, and a beam array on the front, with three turrets on the back. I mostly added the beam array because I'm currently saving my pennies for the romulan prototype (the one with zero power drain and a "free" beam overload ability if you take the rest of the set), and I wanted to see how the single beam could perform. Since my build is otherwise all cannons I didn't really have a lot to stick on the ensign ability slots, so I took tactical team (with borg shields it's practically a must) and target shields, and I'm finding I get pretty good mileage out of it. It means that when a target isn't in my front arc I can still do decent damage since the beam array can still hit most things that my turrets can, and while the shield targeting mode has only a 20% chance to disable shields entirely, it still drains shields regardless so it's worth using it anyway.
I do agree on fire at will though; while I like the ability for point defence, it's horrible in PvE as it aggros enemies quickly, too quickly for even an escort with good durability. However, that's kind of a plus point for beam-heavy cruisers since forcing enemies to shoot at you is exactly what you want for team actions.
Ok, dude. Escorts are nimble, but it's not infinite.
My main is a tac/escort in a tactical escort retrofit. THE most nimble Fed ship there is, and gives BOP a run for their money.
Cannons have an optimal range of about 3-4km.
Even with two freakin' RCS, trying to keep a target on point at 3-4 km without slowing down? Is next to impossible -- your best bet is swooping strafe attacks.
And if you slow down or stop to keep a target in your fire, you become incredibly vulnerable to being smooshed like a bug.
A cruiser, on the other hand, doesn't rely on speed for defense AND has weapons that are easy to keep on-target. Once the cruiser rolls up within 10 km, it can put on the pressure indefinitely.
This translates to a difference in attack styles -- escorts excel at incredible alpha attacks and bombing runs (BO3 on the approach, drop a tricobalt mine or something as you fly over or something). Cruisers excel at surviving as they just burn a ship in a battle of attrition.
Campaign: The Fenwick Cycle NWS-DKR9GB7KH
Wicks and Things: NW-DI4FMZRR4 : The Fenwick merchant family has lost a caravan! Can you help?
Beggar's Hollow: NW-DR6YG4J2L : Someone, or something, has stolen away many of the Fenwicks' children! Can you find out what happened to them?
Into the Fen Wood: NW-DL89DRG7B : Enter the heart of the forest. Can you discover the secret of the Fen Wood?
Getting rid of any class or ship type uniqueness would be horrible game design. Why not just have everyone fly the exact same ship with the exact same weapons and the exact same skills? If you buff escorts to have the durability of cruisers and utility of science, buff cruisers to have the damage of escorts and the utility of science, and buff science to have the damage of escorts and durability of cruisers... why even have the 3 types of ship?!?!
Try to provide to different play style choices?
We wouldn't be buffing everything to the same standard, if you want the escort to survive like a cruiser you'd be forced to dodge-scort...
Cruisers, yes they would do a little bit better damage, again, oh noes... people might be able to have a cruiser do damage at the cost of a little defensive and support power...
and sci ships... well, the only change they really need is for their powers to be redone...
But of course that makes every ship equally good for the content but using different play styles, skill sets but still keeping the class based individuality.
We wouldn't be buffing everything to the same standard, if you want the escort to survive like a cruiser you'd be forced to dodge-scort...
Cruisers, yes they would do a little bit better damage, again, oh noes... people might be able to have a cruiser do damage at the cost of a little defensive and support power...
and sci ships... well, the only change they really need is for their powers to be redone...
But of course that makes every ship equally good for the content but using different play styles, skill sets but still keeping the class based individuality.
Sure, take away two engineering console slots, two device slots, a chunk of hull, a chunk of shield, commander engineer boff slots and it would be fine to increase cruiser damage.
Then again... at that point you'd have a slow and lumbering escort. Which would of course lead to (as is elsewhere repeatedly asked for) a request to buff cruiser turn rate.
Then you would have a giant escort. Why not just go fly an escort if that is what you want?
Coincidentally, if you don't think that some cruisers, especially assault cruisers and yes even those with Engineering captains can put out significant DPS you should work on your builds, they deffinatly can. Will they ever cannon scatter volley/alpha strike/TSIII a group of enemies into dust in a single pass? No, but over time they can pile on a great deal of damage none the less.
Personally speaking, I think cannons should be done away with, except maybe turrets and leave cannons available for the fighters and small ships like Defiant & Jemmy.
Cannons just don't feel very Trek, it doesn't feel right to be firing cannons on a MVAM Escort or Escort Carrier. Don't get me wrong I love the DPS, but I'd rather trade off for being able to access more powerful beam arrays etc, I'd prefer them to introduce Heavy Beam Arrays or something to that effect, or heck maybe just more weapon slots on ships, especially tactical ships or have them give a larger boost to weapons.
I always preferred the power management system when setting up your ship weapons, engines etc in Starfleet Command, something to that effect would be nice. At the moment though I don't think the weapon balance is too bad, if you've got the right setup you can withstand a good onslaught from a TAC with DHC.
Don't DHCs fire MORE shots per cycle, though? Plus, their damage is already higher than a Beam Array's.
Nope, they fire half as much as Beam Arrays. Thats why they are efficient. They fire then rest fire then rest, regaining weapon power faster to maintain a higher average weapon power.
They do more damage becuase a Beam Array is the base of the Beam weapons while a DHC is near the top of cannon weapons, hence Dual Heavy Cannons = 2 heavy cannons linked.
A beam Array is a single array.
Fix the drain issue with Beam Arrays and they would not choke thier on weapons power rating into the basement under heavy fire.
Create a Beam rapid Fire BOff ability for tacticals that ranges from T1 to T3.
Sure, take away two engineering console slots, two device slots, a chunk of hull, a chunk of shield, commander engineer boff slots and it would be fine to increase cruiser damage.
Then again... at that point you'd have a slow and lumbering escort. Which would of course lead to (as is elsewhere repeatedly asked for) a request to buff cruiser turn rate.
Then you would have a giant escort. Why not just go fly an escort if that is what you want?
Coincidentally, if you don't think that some cruisers, especially assault cruisers and yes even those with Engineering captains can put out significant DPS you should work on your builds, they deffinatly can. Will they ever cannon scatter volley/alpha strike/TSIII a group of enemies into dust in a single pass? No, but over time they can pile on a great deal of damage none the less.
To be fair, most of this can be dealt with simply by increasing the amount of Light Cruiser / Battlecruiser options available to both sides. The Breen-mobile is an excellent example of a considerably less durable (relatively speaking) cruiser that trades in staying power for offensive punch and maneuverability.
The middle ground between Cruiser and Escort is a fun one to play in, but at present there are very limited options to do so (Breen-mobile and Armitage, with possibly the Vor'Cha are about the only ships I'd put in that category right now).
Personally speaking, I think cannons should be done away with, except maybe turrets and leave cannons available for the fighters and small ships like Defiant & Jemmy.
Cannons just don't feel very Trek, it doesn't feel right to be firing cannons on a MVAM Escort or Escort Carrier. Don't get me wrong I love the DPS, but I'd rather trade off for being able to access more powerful beam arrays etc, I'd prefer them to introduce Heavy Beam Arrays or something to that effect, or heck maybe just more weapon slots on ships, especially tactical ships or have them give a larger boost to weapons.
I always preferred the power management system when setting up your ship weapons, engines etc in Starfleet Command, something to that effect would be nice. At the moment though I don't think the weapon balance is too bad, if you've got the right setup you can withstand a good onslaught from a TAC with DHC.
They could always leave them to the KDF. We use cannons quite often as has been demostrated in the IP.
If you're taking orders, I'll have a Cannon Overload ability that fires one cycle of overcharged bolts, then drains weapon power after the fact.
Not that it'll ever happen...
Yep, another ability I would like to see and one I've brought up before.
Basically with a BRF ability and a fix to beam power drain, Beam Arrays would become what they where meant to be - Death by a thousand cuts - and DHCs can remain what they are meant to be - the sledgehammer of Doom.
Everybody can be happy again. The Cruiser or Science vessel becomes the Attrition combat vessel again and the Escort remains theAlpha strike vessel.
Another thing they could do is look at the Movement protection given by ApO. Cycling ApO is great for escorts (and should be a viable option for them) but the near constant uptime on the Movement protection has effectively removed the one handicap Escorts where prone to suffer - being held and having thier Bonus Defense lowered temporarily to allow more hits on them. Half the perception that Escorts tank betetr than cruisers is thier high bonus defense coupled with the fact its now difficult to catch one long enough to shoot it.
Another thing they could do is look at the Movement protection given by ApO. Cycling ApO is great for escorts (and should be a viable option for them) but the near constant uptime on the Movement protection has effectively removed the one handicap Escorts where prone to suffer - being held and having thier Bonus Defense lowered temporarily to allow more hits on them. Half the perception that Escorts tank betetr than cruisers is thier high bonus defense coupled with the fact its now difficult to catch one long enough to shoot it.
The only way I see that being solved is a complete rework of the way holds (specifically tractor beams) work in space. As it is right now, they're basically an all or nothing thing, very unlike the IP where we very commonly see various levels of affect when a ship is hit with another vessel's TB.
Unless and untill TBs become a % based speed/turn debuff based on relative mass (using the inertia modifier perhaps?), power level and skill the APO immunity won't be able to be reworked into a % based immunity/resist.
To be fair, most of this can be dealt with simply by increasing the amount of Light Cruiser / Battlecruiser options available to both sides. The Breen-mobile is an excellent example of a considerably less durable (relatively speaking) cruiser that trades in staying power for offensive punch and maneuverability.
The middle ground between Cruiser and Escort is a fun one to play in, but at present there are very limited options to do so (Breen-mobile and Armitage, with possibly the Vor'Cha are about the only ships I'd put in that category right now).
I like this idea, and I agree that hybrid ships are a great idea. They provide another option and varied playstyles. This is vastly different than requesting nerfs/buffs to various weapon types, which no matter how you try to spin it if you understand good ship builds at all is invariably tied to certain ship types. Having been defeated at every turn in requesting cruisers buffs with numerical evidence, we now see a myriad of attacks on weapon types, or even weapon power levels a few threads down in a round about way to win through requesting nerfs for others and buffs for themselves on the forums.
Another thing they could do is look at the Movement protection given by ApO. Cycling ApO is great for escorts (and should be a viable option for them) but the near constant uptime on the Movement protection has effectively removed the one handicap Escorts where prone to suffer - being held and having thier Bonus Defense lowered temporarily to allow more hits on them. Half the perception that Escorts tank betetr than cruisers is thier high bonus defense coupled with the fact its now difficult to catch one long enough to shoot it.
Near constant uptime? ApO has a cooldown of 60s and provides 15s of not entirely reliable although good movement protection. Is 50% your definition of "near constant" up-time?
Cruisers running TWO sets of Emergency Power abilities back to back, now that is constant uptime. 100% of the time having the bonus power to weapons and shields, that is constant uptime...
Near constant uptime? ApO has a cooldown of 60s and provides 15s of not entirely reliable although good movement protection. Is 50% your definition of "near constant" up-time?
Cruisers running TWO sets of Emergency Power abilities back to back, now that is constant uptime. 100% of the time having the bonus power to weapons and shields, that is constant uptime...
Doffs exist that, when applied properly, cut the cooldown on APO, APB and (I think) APD in half.
Near constant uptime? ApO has a cooldown of 60s and provides 15s of not entirely reliable although good movement protection. Is 50% your definition of "near constant" up-time?
Cruisers running TWO sets of Emergency Power abilities back to back, now that is constant uptime. 100% of the time having the bonus power to weapons and shields, that is constant uptime...
Cycle it with itself or another attack pattern ability. Use AtB builds to decrease the CD reduction. If a tac toon use TI to further decrease the CD. If you use DOffs, the Attack Pattern DOffs further reduce the CD.
Before you know it, you sitting really close to the GCD rating and have a near (as in not quite, but close) constant uptime.
If your going old school, one could even use Photonic Officer (but I find it wasteful for the slot it takes up and its long CD)
Basically it looks like this;
ApO- cooks off and hits its normal CD
2nd ApX - hits 15 second GCD
Hit TI - ApO's CD is reduced by a small amount.
AtB - cooks off- ALL BOff abilites have thier CD reduced by up to 30%
ApX Doffs - Proc and further reduce ApO.
Been using this on a PegHu (minus the ApX DOffs) and I've never had to wait for the 60s CD on ApO. Its not perfect and if you pay attention you will see a momentary stutter in speed but its near constant enough to be effective.
To be fair, most of this can be dealt with simply by increasing the amount of Light Cruiser / Battlecruiser options available to both sides. The Breen-mobile is an excellent example of a considerably less durable (relatively speaking) cruiser that trades in staying power for offensive punch and maneuverability.
The Chel Grett isn't a cruiser. Its highest bridge stations are tactical and science, its console layout favors tactical, and it doesn't have the shield and hull strength a cruiser would which is just as well considering it's 40% more maneuverable than a Vor'cha. It is basically a Fleet upgrade to the MVAE that trades a point of turning for an extra gun mount.
Personally speaking, I think cannons should be done away with, except maybe turrets and leave cannons available for the fighters and small ships like Defiant & Jemmy.
Cannons just don't feel very Trek, it doesn't feel right to be firing cannons on a MVAM Escort or Escort Carrier. Don't get me wrong I love the DPS, but I'd rather trade off for being able to access more powerful beam arrays etc, I'd prefer them to introduce Heavy Beam Arrays or something to that effect, or heck maybe just more weapon slots on ships, especially tactical ships or have them give a larger boost to weapons.
I always preferred the power management system when setting up your ship weapons, engines etc in Starfleet Command, something to that effect would be nice. At the moment though I don't think the weapon balance is too bad, if you've got the right setup you can withstand a good onslaught from a TAC with DHC.
Well the Feds having cannons is strictly a result of the Defiant. The way they set up the classes in this game shoved a lot of ships into that mold. The Prometheus is supposed to be more advanced and deadly that the Defiant, and it was covered in beam arrays. Not a cannon on it that I saw. The same for the Akira, the Saber, Norway, and the Steamrunner. The Defiant is the only canon Federation ship to come equipped with cannons. And none of those ships were less effective for not having them. And the Sovereign, Starfleet's premier battlecruiser had not a cannon on it. Klingons on the other hand it was hard to find anything that wasn't a cannon.
So I'd support the heavy beam array, though I like the idea of both fixing the power drain on beam arrays and enhanced threat generation. Frankly the fact that it's a cruiser or battlecruiser should mean automatic threat generation. Think about it, the Bird of Prey isn't the most dangerous ship on the field, you're worried about the Scimitar.
I also like the idea of cruisers having some innate abilities. Cruisers and engineers get the most power from their warp cores, which is great, but we get the least to do with them. For instance say an innate tactical team, if Cruisers are supposed to be the tanks. We shouldn't be forced to cycle through a half dozen abilities to stay alive if we're supposed to be damage sponges in the first place.
And while I understand the need for class distinction, even in class distinction there needs to be flexibility. Especially in modern game design customization is more important than ever. While the devs and many people would argue that the flexibility comes from the Boffs, even those are restricted. It's not like all ships are like Bird's of Prey with universal slots. Take Mass Effect for instance where there were the big three classes and then three more inbetween. And no, putting different careers in different ships doesn't count as you're rarely anywhere near as effective. Not saying it can't be done, but it rarely works as well. Which is what one would think the rear admiral ships are. You get a choice of two ships that start to tap into what the other ship classes are all about. But with Lt slots instead of LtC, it is more meh than anything else. (One of the primary reasons I'm buying a Regent...well played Cryptic)
But nerfing the cannons isn't the answer. Making the cruisers pressure damage meaningful is. That's why removing the severe power drain on BAs is important. It allows a cruiser to do consistent meaningful damage over time, while the escort excels at burst damage.
I'd also like to see a FAW that can do a single target out of a crowd.
And as far as canon goes, the Defiant technically should be a tank. And a Hull tank at that. Ablative Hull Armor let that ship take naked shieldless shot from the Jem'Hadar on several occasions.
"Rise like Lions after slumber, In unvanquishable number, Shake your chains to earth like dew, Which in sleep had fallen on you-Ye are many they are few"
The Chel Grett isn't a cruiser. Its highest bridge stations are tactical and science, its console layout favors tactical, and it doesn't have the shield and hull strength a cruiser would which is just as well considering it's 40% more maneuverable than a Vor'cha. It is basically a Fleet upgrade to the MVAE that trades a point of turning for an extra gun mount.
I refer to it as a Light Cruiser, given the weapon loadout, hull strength, shield strength, engine capabilites, device slotting and console selection. Which is not an inaccurate description.
Quibble over the verbiage if you will, it doesn't change the fact that it exists in the spectrum between pure zippy pew pew escorts and pure lumbering survival based cruisers.
Sure, take away two engineering console slots, two device slots, a chunk of hull, a chunk of shield, commander engineer boff slots and it would be fine to increase cruiser damage.
There you go again blowing it completely out of proportion, I said "a little more damage" not "Escort level damage", if I wanted escort level damage I'D PULL MY DAMNED TAC/SCORT OUT! But no. I prefer my Excelsior which FYI handles BoPs solo in CSE, still wanna to L2P?
I'm sorry but one does not see this many threads about imbalance when there is nothing wrong.
The best uptime that can be achieved for APO is 50%, because it has a 30s global cooldown. Doesn't matter how many copies you run or DOffs you throw at it, it will still be off at least as much as it is on. There is no near constant up time, rather there is a window lasting at least 15s after APO expires where it will not be available.
_________________________ TRIBBLE | -Show Me Your Critz- Svarog | Veles | et al.
There you go again blowing it completely out of proportion, I said "a little more damage" not "Escort level damage", if I wanted escort level damage I'D PULL MY DAMNED TAC/SCORT OUT! But no. I prefer my Excelsior which FYI handles BoPs solo in CSE, still wanna to L2P?
I'm sorry but one does not see this many threads about imbalance when there is nothing wrong.
Yes, I know that you feel if you and your cruiser buddies can create a critical mass of forum whining you will get the buff you want or nerf on others. Unfortunately the devs have succumb to this sort of complaining hysteria before so it encourages this sort of behavior.
Fortunately I think we have been down this road enough times before that the devs are happy with the general overall balance of the classes and ship types. I understand you feel your time is better spent waging a forum campaign for a, say 5% damage increase than saving up to get the console 2% better than whatever you are using (or if you do have all mk xii purps maybe this is all that is left for you.)
Regardless - as you said you can solo elite BoPs in your cruiser, so why do you need a damage buff?
The only way I see that being solved is a complete rework of the way holds (specifically tractor beams) work in space. As it is right now, they're basically an all or nothing thing, very unlike the IP where we very commonly see various levels of affect when a ship is hit with another vessel's TB.
Unless and untill TBs become a % based speed/turn debuff based on relative mass (using the inertia modifier perhaps?), power level and skill the APO immunity won't be able to be reworked into a % based immunity/resist.
I would have problem with Hold like TB working on the mas of the vessel using it.
The best uptime that can be achieved for APO is 50%, because it has a 30s global cooldown. Doesn't matter how many copies you run or DOffs you throw at it, it will still be off at least as much as it is on. There is no near constant up time, rather there is a window lasting at least 15s after APO expires where it will not be available.
NEAR CONSTANT- NEAR. There is a negliable stutter only under the right conditions.
I even use such ideas on my BortasQu (using the LTC as Tac slot) and have seen vast improvement in movement, turn, etc. yeah its still hits a small spot of "nothing buffed" but its negliable.
Does it make my Bortie fly like a escort- no- but it does perform much better than it does under older less effcient builds.
I'm sorry but one does not see this many threads about imbalance when there is nothing wrong.
Very few are saying nothing wrong. Its some of the aproaches to fix the issue that players like myself are against. Aproaches that do not fix the issue fairlybut just flip the problem around to be some other classes problem are not a flip.
For example, Removing cannons. Why? The KDf uses a lot of cannons on thier Warships. Would they have to stop if cannons are removed becuase some find them unbalanced and further can't use them on their favorite ships?
Such an idea would not be a good fix anymore than some of the other ideas put forth in these threads.
This can't be achieved if we keep getting flipped-out responses from some based on Ego and a faulty examples of performance given by the IP that are not consistant across the IP.
Uh, no. I just noticed something about cannons that I thought was odd and defied most gaming design conventions.
Your observation was flawed or disingenuous. You looked at the least significant factor ("rate of fire") while ignoring firing arcs and range drop-off.
The OP's complaint can be solved in three easy steps. As can all of these weekly "waaaa, I want my cruiser to be an escort!" threads.
1. Start a tac captain.
2. Get yourself an escort.
3. Equip it with cannons.
If you want a ship that has what an escort has and can do what an escort does get yourself a damned escort. It's not an exclusive club, you don't have to know people in high places, anybody can have one...for free even!
Very few are saying nothing wrong. Its some of the aproaches to fix the issue that players like myself are against. Aproaches that do not fix the issue fairlybut just flip the problem around to be some other classes problem are not a flip.
For example, Removing cannons. Why? The KDf uses a lot of cannons on thier Warships. Would they have to stop if cannons are removed becuase some find them unbalanced and further can't use them on their favorite ships?
Such an idea would not be a good fix anymore than some of the other ideas put forth in these threads.
This can't be achieved if we keep getting flipped-out responses from some based on Ego and a faulty examples of performance given by the IP that are not consistant across the IP.
And I agree with you but there are those (whom I am arguing with) who do insist nothing is wrong
The OP's complaint can be solved in three easy steps. As can all of these weekly "waaaa, I want my cruiser to be an escort!" threads.
1. Start a tac captain.
2. Get yourself an escort.
3. Equip it with cannons.
If you want a ship that has what an escort has and can do what an escort does get yourself a damned escort. It's not an exclusive club, you don't have to know people in high places, anybody can have one...for free even!
Unfortunately many players just want to fly a cruiser because it seems most canon to them etc... but they want the gameplay of an escort.
Unfortunately many players just want to fly a cruiser because it seems most canon to them etc... but they want the gameplay of an escort.
and these players need to understand that sto is not canon. If it was most of the escorts would be classed as cruisers. to me it would kill the game if they gave cruisers the fire power of an escort. besides there are hybrids out there like the breen ship, D'kora, galx. that all hold the ability to use DHC and still have a good tanking roll.
next people wil start wanting sci ships with 4 fore 4 aft weapons and still have a 1.43 shield mod :rolleyes:
Comments
The Cruiser might tank even better, yes, but that's the only thing it does better and a Science ships tank (even with a Tac pilot) is sufficient for most situations.
He's dead, Jim.
Currently I'm running an escort with two dual heavy cannons, a torpedo launcher, and a beam array on the front, with three turrets on the back. I mostly added the beam array because I'm currently saving my pennies for the romulan prototype (the one with zero power drain and a "free" beam overload ability if you take the rest of the set), and I wanted to see how the single beam could perform. Since my build is otherwise all cannons I didn't really have a lot to stick on the ensign ability slots, so I took tactical team (with borg shields it's practically a must) and target shields, and I'm finding I get pretty good mileage out of it. It means that when a target isn't in my front arc I can still do decent damage since the beam array can still hit most things that my turrets can, and while the shield targeting mode has only a 20% chance to disable shields entirely, it still drains shields regardless so it's worth using it anyway.
I do agree on fire at will though; while I like the ability for point defence, it's horrible in PvE as it aggros enemies quickly, too quickly for even an escort with good durability. However, that's kind of a plus point for beam-heavy cruisers since forcing enemies to shoot at you is exactly what you want for team actions.
Game Balance - Ship Size and Wingmates
My main is a tac/escort in a tactical escort retrofit. THE most nimble Fed ship there is, and gives BOP a run for their money.
Cannons have an optimal range of about 3-4km.
Even with two freakin' RCS, trying to keep a target on point at 3-4 km without slowing down? Is next to impossible -- your best bet is swooping strafe attacks.
And if you slow down or stop to keep a target in your fire, you become incredibly vulnerable to being smooshed like a bug.
A cruiser, on the other hand, doesn't rely on speed for defense AND has weapons that are easy to keep on-target. Once the cruiser rolls up within 10 km, it can put on the pressure indefinitely.
This translates to a difference in attack styles -- escorts excel at incredible alpha attacks and bombing runs (BO3 on the approach, drop a tricobalt mine or something as you fly over or something). Cruisers excel at surviving as they just burn a ship in a battle of attrition.
Wicks and Things: NW-DI4FMZRR4 : The Fenwick merchant family has lost a caravan! Can you help?
Beggar's Hollow: NW-DR6YG4J2L : Someone, or something, has stolen away many of the Fenwicks' children! Can you find out what happened to them?
Into the Fen Wood: NW-DL89DRG7B : Enter the heart of the forest. Can you discover the secret of the Fen Wood?
Try to provide to different play style choices?
We wouldn't be buffing everything to the same standard, if you want the escort to survive like a cruiser you'd be forced to dodge-scort...
Cruisers, yes they would do a little bit better damage, again, oh noes... people might be able to have a cruiser do damage at the cost of a little defensive and support power...
and sci ships... well, the only change they really need is for their powers to be redone...
But of course that makes every ship equally good for the content but using different play styles, skill sets but still keeping the class based individuality.
Sure, take away two engineering console slots, two device slots, a chunk of hull, a chunk of shield, commander engineer boff slots and it would be fine to increase cruiser damage.
Then again... at that point you'd have a slow and lumbering escort. Which would of course lead to (as is elsewhere repeatedly asked for) a request to buff cruiser turn rate.
Then you would have a giant escort. Why not just go fly an escort if that is what you want?
Coincidentally, if you don't think that some cruisers, especially assault cruisers and yes even those with Engineering captains can put out significant DPS you should work on your builds, they deffinatly can. Will they ever cannon scatter volley/alpha strike/TSIII a group of enemies into dust in a single pass? No, but over time they can pile on a great deal of damage none the less.
Cannons just don't feel very Trek, it doesn't feel right to be firing cannons on a MVAM Escort or Escort Carrier. Don't get me wrong I love the DPS, but I'd rather trade off for being able to access more powerful beam arrays etc, I'd prefer them to introduce Heavy Beam Arrays or something to that effect, or heck maybe just more weapon slots on ships, especially tactical ships or have them give a larger boost to weapons.
I always preferred the power management system when setting up your ship weapons, engines etc in Starfleet Command, something to that effect would be nice. At the moment though I don't think the weapon balance is too bad, if you've got the right setup you can withstand a good onslaught from a TAC with DHC.
Nope, they fire half as much as Beam Arrays. Thats why they are efficient. They fire then rest fire then rest, regaining weapon power faster to maintain a higher average weapon power.
They do more damage becuase a Beam Array is the base of the Beam weapons while a DHC is near the top of cannon weapons, hence Dual Heavy Cannons = 2 heavy cannons linked.
A beam Array is a single array.
Fix the drain issue with Beam Arrays and they would not choke thier on weapons power rating into the basement under heavy fire.
Create a Beam rapid Fire BOff ability for tacticals that ranges from T1 to T3.
R.I.P
To be fair, most of this can be dealt with simply by increasing the amount of Light Cruiser / Battlecruiser options available to both sides. The Breen-mobile is an excellent example of a considerably less durable (relatively speaking) cruiser that trades in staying power for offensive punch and maneuverability.
The middle ground between Cruiser and Escort is a fun one to play in, but at present there are very limited options to do so (Breen-mobile and Armitage, with possibly the Vor'Cha are about the only ships I'd put in that category right now).
They could always leave them to the KDF. We use cannons quite often as has been demostrated in the IP.
R.I.P
If you're taking orders, I'll have a Cannon Overload ability that fires one cycle of overcharged bolts, then drains weapon power after the fact.
Not that it'll ever happen...
Yep, another ability I would like to see and one I've brought up before.
Basically with a BRF ability and a fix to beam power drain, Beam Arrays would become what they where meant to be - Death by a thousand cuts - and DHCs can remain what they are meant to be - the sledgehammer of Doom.
Everybody can be happy again. The Cruiser or Science vessel becomes the Attrition combat vessel again and the Escort remains theAlpha strike vessel.
Another thing they could do is look at the Movement protection given by ApO. Cycling ApO is great for escorts (and should be a viable option for them) but the near constant uptime on the Movement protection has effectively removed the one handicap Escorts where prone to suffer - being held and having thier Bonus Defense lowered temporarily to allow more hits on them. Half the perception that Escorts tank betetr than cruisers is thier high bonus defense coupled with the fact its now difficult to catch one long enough to shoot it.
R.I.P
The only way I see that being solved is a complete rework of the way holds (specifically tractor beams) work in space. As it is right now, they're basically an all or nothing thing, very unlike the IP where we very commonly see various levels of affect when a ship is hit with another vessel's TB.
Unless and untill TBs become a % based speed/turn debuff based on relative mass (using the inertia modifier perhaps?), power level and skill the APO immunity won't be able to be reworked into a % based immunity/resist.
I like this idea, and I agree that hybrid ships are a great idea. They provide another option and varied playstyles. This is vastly different than requesting nerfs/buffs to various weapon types, which no matter how you try to spin it if you understand good ship builds at all is invariably tied to certain ship types. Having been defeated at every turn in requesting cruisers buffs with numerical evidence, we now see a myriad of attacks on weapon types, or even weapon power levels a few threads down in a round about way to win through requesting nerfs for others and buffs for themselves on the forums.
Near constant uptime? ApO has a cooldown of 60s and provides 15s of not entirely reliable although good movement protection. Is 50% your definition of "near constant" up-time?
Cruisers running TWO sets of Emergency Power abilities back to back, now that is constant uptime. 100% of the time having the bonus power to weapons and shields, that is constant uptime...
Doffs exist that, when applied properly, cut the cooldown on APO, APB and (I think) APD in half.
Cycle it with itself or another attack pattern ability. Use AtB builds to decrease the CD reduction. If a tac toon use TI to further decrease the CD. If you use DOffs, the Attack Pattern DOffs further reduce the CD.
Before you know it, you sitting really close to the GCD rating and have a near (as in not quite, but close) constant uptime.
If your going old school, one could even use Photonic Officer (but I find it wasteful for the slot it takes up and its long CD)
Basically it looks like this;
ApO- cooks off and hits its normal CD
2nd ApX - hits 15 second GCD
Hit TI - ApO's CD is reduced by a small amount.
AtB - cooks off- ALL BOff abilites have thier CD reduced by up to 30%
ApX Doffs - Proc and further reduce ApO.
Been using this on a PegHu (minus the ApX DOffs) and I've never had to wait for the 60s CD on ApO. Its not perfect and if you pay attention you will see a momentary stutter in speed but its near constant enough to be effective.
R.I.P
The Chel Grett isn't a cruiser. Its highest bridge stations are tactical and science, its console layout favors tactical, and it doesn't have the shield and hull strength a cruiser would which is just as well considering it's 40% more maneuverable than a Vor'cha. It is basically a Fleet upgrade to the MVAE that trades a point of turning for an extra gun mount.
Well the Feds having cannons is strictly a result of the Defiant. The way they set up the classes in this game shoved a lot of ships into that mold. The Prometheus is supposed to be more advanced and deadly that the Defiant, and it was covered in beam arrays. Not a cannon on it that I saw. The same for the Akira, the Saber, Norway, and the Steamrunner. The Defiant is the only canon Federation ship to come equipped with cannons. And none of those ships were less effective for not having them. And the Sovereign, Starfleet's premier battlecruiser had not a cannon on it. Klingons on the other hand it was hard to find anything that wasn't a cannon.
So I'd support the heavy beam array, though I like the idea of both fixing the power drain on beam arrays and enhanced threat generation. Frankly the fact that it's a cruiser or battlecruiser should mean automatic threat generation. Think about it, the Bird of Prey isn't the most dangerous ship on the field, you're worried about the Scimitar.
I also like the idea of cruisers having some innate abilities. Cruisers and engineers get the most power from their warp cores, which is great, but we get the least to do with them. For instance say an innate tactical team, if Cruisers are supposed to be the tanks. We shouldn't be forced to cycle through a half dozen abilities to stay alive if we're supposed to be damage sponges in the first place.
And while I understand the need for class distinction, even in class distinction there needs to be flexibility. Especially in modern game design customization is more important than ever. While the devs and many people would argue that the flexibility comes from the Boffs, even those are restricted. It's not like all ships are like Bird's of Prey with universal slots. Take Mass Effect for instance where there were the big three classes and then three more inbetween. And no, putting different careers in different ships doesn't count as you're rarely anywhere near as effective. Not saying it can't be done, but it rarely works as well. Which is what one would think the rear admiral ships are. You get a choice of two ships that start to tap into what the other ship classes are all about. But with Lt slots instead of LtC, it is more meh than anything else. (One of the primary reasons I'm buying a Regent...well played Cryptic)
But nerfing the cannons isn't the answer. Making the cruisers pressure damage meaningful is. That's why removing the severe power drain on BAs is important. It allows a cruiser to do consistent meaningful damage over time, while the escort excels at burst damage.
I'd also like to see a FAW that can do a single target out of a crowd.
And as far as canon goes, the Defiant technically should be a tank. And a Hull tank at that. Ablative Hull Armor let that ship take naked shieldless shot from the Jem'Hadar on several occasions.
I refer to it as a Light Cruiser, given the weapon loadout, hull strength, shield strength, engine capabilites, device slotting and console selection. Which is not an inaccurate description.
Quibble over the verbiage if you will, it doesn't change the fact that it exists in the spectrum between pure zippy pew pew escorts and pure lumbering survival based cruisers.
There you go again blowing it completely out of proportion, I said "a little more damage" not "Escort level damage", if I wanted escort level damage I'D PULL MY DAMNED TAC/SCORT OUT! But no. I prefer my Excelsior which FYI handles BoPs solo in CSE, still wanna to L2P?
I'm sorry but one does not see this many threads about imbalance when there is nothing wrong.
TRIBBLE | -Show Me Your Critz-
Svarog | Veles | et al.
Yes, I know that you feel if you and your cruiser buddies can create a critical mass of forum whining you will get the buff you want or nerf on others. Unfortunately the devs have succumb to this sort of complaining hysteria before so it encourages this sort of behavior.
Fortunately I think we have been down this road enough times before that the devs are happy with the general overall balance of the classes and ship types. I understand you feel your time is better spent waging a forum campaign for a, say 5% damage increase than saving up to get the console 2% better than whatever you are using (or if you do have all mk xii purps maybe this is all that is left for you.)
Regardless - as you said you can solo elite BoPs in your cruiser, so why do you need a damage buff?
I would have problem with Hold like TB working on the mas of the vessel using it.
R.I.P
NEAR CONSTANT- NEAR. There is a negliable stutter only under the right conditions.
I even use such ideas on my BortasQu (using the LTC as Tac slot) and have seen vast improvement in movement, turn, etc. yeah its still hits a small spot of "nothing buffed" but its negliable.
Does it make my Bortie fly like a escort- no- but it does perform much better than it does under older less effcient builds.
R.I.P
Very few are saying nothing wrong. Its some of the aproaches to fix the issue that players like myself are against. Aproaches that do not fix the issue fairlybut just flip the problem around to be some other classes problem are not a flip.
For example, Removing cannons. Why? The KDf uses a lot of cannons on thier Warships. Would they have to stop if cannons are removed becuase some find them unbalanced and further can't use them on their favorite ships?
Such an idea would not be a good fix anymore than some of the other ideas put forth in these threads.
This can't be achieved if we keep getting flipped-out responses from some based on Ego and a faulty examples of performance given by the IP that are not consistant across the IP.
R.I.P
1. Start a tac captain.
2. Get yourself an escort.
3. Equip it with cannons.
If you want a ship that has what an escort has and can do what an escort does get yourself a damned escort. It's not an exclusive club, you don't have to know people in high places, anybody can have one...for free even!
And I agree with you but there are those (whom I am arguing with) who do insist nothing is wrong
Unfortunately many players just want to fly a cruiser because it seems most canon to them etc... but they want the gameplay of an escort.
and these players need to understand that sto is not canon. If it was most of the escorts would be classed as cruisers. to me it would kill the game if they gave cruisers the fire power of an escort. besides there are hybrids out there like the breen ship, D'kora, galx. that all hold the ability to use DHC and still have a good tanking roll.
next people wil start wanting sci ships with 4 fore 4 aft weapons and still have a 1.43 shield mod :rolleyes:
MY FLEET:http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=498091