If you're broadsiding, you're effectively sacrificing any chance of bringing projectile weapons to bear. Contrary to popular belief, more guns =/= more firepower.
You don't HOLD a broadside. You torp, then turn to broadside and keep turning to torp again before you do more broadside.
This argument would be more persuasive if it weren't the fact that the highest DPS weapons, the ones with the smallest firing arcs and shortest effective range, weren't the exclusive domain of the most agile ship class; to whom range and firing arc mean the least.
Is it? *points to KDF Battlecruisers* I think firing arcs mean something to them too, does anyone know if its common practice to sacrifice engi consoles to fit in RCS ones in KDF Battlecruisers?
Is it? *points to KDF Battlecruisers* I think firing arcs mean something to them too, does anyone know if its common practice to sacrifice engi consoles to fit in RCS ones in KDF Battlecruisers?
I think many do use at least 1 RCS on them. I don't use any on my Fleet Torkaht, I just rely on high engine power settings, and max impulse thrusters and engine performance skill and don't have much of a problem using DHC in pvp with it. You probably do need 1 if both of those skills aren't max or close to max and your engine power isn't around 67/50.
Is it? *points to KDF Battlecruisers* I think firing arcs mean something to them too, does anyone know if its common practice to sacrifice engi consoles to fit in RCS ones in KDF Battlecruisers?
I do, but in STFs I remove it for armor. also alot of KDF ships have better turn rates so they make better use of the cannons
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!
SHHHH!! You don't talk about the Uber-Escort Club!!
The Akira, and the upcoming Ambassador I reckon, are effectively ships that look like cruisers (hell, in canon, they were cruisers!) with escort stats.
Amongst the many problems of the game is that the Ensign and Lt healing skills are too effective. They should be shifted towards LtC, with cooldowns closer to system, and heal for a lot more. Maybe even Commander skills that super heal enough to withstand concentrated cannon fire.
This would create the situation where a sci or a cruiser can with enough skill, just withstand cannons, and escorts can be destroyed by beams. I think that's a start towards fixing the system.
"Last Engage! Magical Girl Origami-san" is in print! Now with three times more rainbows.
You don't HOLD a broadside. You torp, then turn to broadside and keep turning to torp again before you do more broadside.
You're comparing the damage of a single torpedo against the damage of an entire salvo of beam fire (possibly TWO salvos if you've got one of the gratuitously slow cruisers). The only way to make this worthwhile is to have tactical abilities that greatly amplify the power of your torpedo launch. And guess what cruisers don't have a lot of: tactical abilities. Attack pattern beta is almost always the best choice if you only have a LT tactical, since it boosts *all* of your weapon damage by a nice amount.
Is it? *points to KDF Battlecruisers* I think firing arcs mean something to them too, does anyone know if its common practice to sacrifice engi consoles to fit in RCS ones in KDF Battlecruisers?
And KDF battlecruisers work great. They have decent mobility, decent firepower, and decent survivability. They're real workhorses. I don't know about anybody else but my criticisms of cruisers are almost entirely leveled at Federation cruisers, which are pathetic by comparison.
A cruiser using doffs to keep EPTS3 up constantly can be too powerful also, good thing we have DHC to help break throught that.
If one player builds their ship entirely for offense and another player builds their ship entirely for defense, and both are equally skilled in their respective play styles, who should win?
Answer: stalemate.
To say that the attacker should always win is to devalue the entire concept of defense.
You're comparing the damage of a single torpedo against the damage of an entire salvo of beam fire (possibly TWO salvos if you've got one of the gratuitously slow cruisers). The only way to make this worthwhile is to have tactical abilities that greatly amplify the power of your torpedo launch. And guess what cruisers don't have a lot of: tactical abilities. Attack pattern beta is almost always the best choice if you only have a LT tactical, since it boosts *all* of your weapon damage by a nice amount.
And KDF battlecruisers work great. They have decent mobility, decent firepower, and decent survivability. They're real workhorses. I don't know about anybody else but my criticisms of cruisers are almost entirely leveled at Federation cruisers, which are pathetic by comparison.
If one player builds their ship entirely for offense and another player builds their ship entirely for defense, and both are equally skilled in their respective play styles, who should win?
Answer: stalemate.
To say that the attacker should always win is to devalue the entire concept of defense.
1: not my point. I was simply explaining my personal technique for using a broadside with torpedos. Knock down the shields, torp, repeat. nothing more.
2: Feds get heavy cruisers which are not really the same thing. Heavy Cruisers are slow and ponderous compared to battle cruisers, but a lot tougher.
I think its more of an issue with beams being too inefficient than cannons being too powerful. They need to reduce the cycling "work" time or power cost of beams. You can rig beam damage to be respectable by using certain powers and gear to have excess weapon power, but thats not really the way you should have to go about it.
What is with all these beams v cannons/cruisers v escort threads? I guess its the F2P people who don't try out different ships to learn the other side.
Fact is, beams are very powerful as they are. They are better DPS than cannons in most realistic situations. Cannons have great burst potential, AND yes, if the stars align and the escort can just sit there and fire endlessly at whatever its shooting at, at close range, yes cannons are more damage. Yet, if you know what you are doing with beams and/or are a tac captain, you can definitely push the damage with beams alone.
Cannons have severe damage dropoff with range. Past 7k or so, beams do more damage than cannons, with none of the arc limitations. Lets not forget how long it may take the escort to close the range.
Cannons also have a very limited firing arc, which if you are getting shot at means you often have to break off because your shields are gone before your CRF cycle is done. The maneuverability of escorts is highly overrated compared to this limited arc. You lose a lot of DPS every time you have to turn away, because you're not getting back on target for multiple weapon cycles, and possibly not at all until your shields are back up. I have always run 2x RCS consoles on my escorts because I actually have a sense of just how slow escorts actually move and how much damage is lost from the firing arc and limited maneuverability.
So just because escorts are the most maneuverable does not at all mean they can somehow magically keep their cannons on target 90% of the time. If they are getting shot at, 50% might be more accurate, even less if they're the kind in STFs who die constantly from normal damage (the OP invisible torpedoes in elite mode are just unavoidable).
Power drain is highly overstated as a problem, especially by people who don't seem to know how to use the engineering boff slots on cruisers to mitigate it. Hint, cruisers can continually cycle between 4 emergency power buffs giving 100% uptime on say EPTW and EPTS.
Beams need no buff, because they are plenty powerful, moreso than cannons often enough, and cruisers already do some very good dps if the player has a clue. But more important than that, this is not a trivial calculation, something you can estimate by comparing raw weapon stats. To do that is to be utterly clueless about the myriad factors involved in it all.
Is it? *points to KDF Battlecruisers* I think firing arcs mean something to them too, does anyone know if its common practice to sacrifice engi consoles to fit in RCS ones in KDF Battlecruisers?
Funny how those "Escort-like turn speed BattleCruisers" seem to only be escort turn capable after stacking some RCS consoles to do so......... Its not funny how that fact is over looked quite often in the "turn rate/cruisers" debate.
What else is not funny is how the Escort is often attacked in the forums for being to speedy and able to turn so well when many players stack RCS consoles on them as well to enhance that already high turn rate.
It seems many things are convienently overlooked for the sake of trying to make a point in one favor of ones desires by almost everyone.
Funny how those "Escort-like turn speed BattleCruisers" seem to only be escort turn capable after stacking some RCS consoles to do so......... Its not funny how that fact is over looked quite often in the "turn rate/cruisers" debate.
What else is not funny is how the Escort is often attacked in the forums for being to speedy and able to turn so well when many players stack RCS consoles on them as well to enhance that already high turn rate.
It seems many things are convienently overlooked for the sake of trying to make a point in one favor of ones desires by almost everyone.
It doesn't fit their agenda so it's immediately discarded or ignored.
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.
I want to add something to this discussion beyond the raw data. The thing is, that everyone who wants to deal the most damage need to go DHCs.
Someone, who will equip his multivector escort with BEAMS - like it would be canon - will do much less damage than someone who equip cannons. In fact, the only larger scale UFP ship that used cannons were the Defaint.
Though the USS Prometheus was clearly designed as a battle ship easily capable to deal with multiple attackers, it used BEAMS not CANNONS, but seem to be quite effective in that.
So, imho the damage capabilities should not base on which weapon type (cannon or beam) you go. All this cannon spam feels very Un-Trek.
There would be a simple solution for beams.
1: remove dual beam banks from the game.
2: add a new type of beam array: heavy beam array (only equipable in the front slot), which damage is based on the firing arch.
- In the region of 0 to 90 ?, they deal the same damage as dual beam banks now.
- from 90 to 180 ? they deal slightly less damage than normal cannons.
- from 90 to 270? they deal the damage of beam banks as now.
I like it Dual Heavy there are trade offs to each weapons in the game you just got to learn them.Between Beams and Cannons and Dual Heavy the Dual heavy is the best way to do the massive damage.Regular cannons are a little bit weaker then Dual heavy but they have a faster fire rate.So there is a trade off to each weapon in game you just got to learn how to build what you want like if you to be power full tac officer or a mindless healing drone or a tank there are different ways to go about this.If you are aggressive like me then i would go as either as a tank or a Power tac officer.Every thing depends on your playing style.:D
I use these be low.And i love them.
[Polarized Disruptor Dual Heavy Cannons Mk XII [Acc]x2]x3
[Photon Torpedo Launcher Mk XII [CrtD]x2 [Dmg]]
[Polarized Disruptor Turret Mk XII [Dmg]x2]x4
I am all ways shooting even if your be hind me.
The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.
Comments
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?
My character Tsin'xing
Is it? *points to KDF Battlecruisers* I think firing arcs mean something to them too, does anyone know if its common practice to sacrifice engi consoles to fit in RCS ones in KDF Battlecruisers?
I think many do use at least 1 RCS on them. I don't use any on my Fleet Torkaht, I just rely on high engine power settings, and max impulse thrusters and engine performance skill and don't have much of a problem using DHC in pvp with it. You probably do need 1 if both of those skills aren't max or close to max and your engine power isn't around 67/50.
I do, but in STFs I remove it for armor. also alot of KDF ships have better turn rates so they make better use of the cannons
SHHHH!! You don't talk about the Uber-Escort Club!!
I came to the same conclusion a while ago. I actually would support making cruiser skins available to escorts just to make them happy.
Amongst the many problems of the game is that the Ensign and Lt healing skills are too effective. They should be shifted towards LtC, with cooldowns closer to system, and heal for a lot more. Maybe even Commander skills that super heal enough to withstand concentrated cannon fire.
This would create the situation where a sci or a cruiser can with enough skill, just withstand cannons, and escorts can be destroyed by beams. I think that's a start towards fixing the system.
"Last Engage! Magical Girl Origami-san" is in print! Now with three times more rainbows.
Support the "Armored Unicorn" vehicle initiative today!
Thanks for Harajuku. Now let's get a real "Magical Girl" costume!
You're comparing the damage of a single torpedo against the damage of an entire salvo of beam fire (possibly TWO salvos if you've got one of the gratuitously slow cruisers). The only way to make this worthwhile is to have tactical abilities that greatly amplify the power of your torpedo launch. And guess what cruisers don't have a lot of: tactical abilities. Attack pattern beta is almost always the best choice if you only have a LT tactical, since it boosts *all* of your weapon damage by a nice amount.
And KDF battlecruisers work great. They have decent mobility, decent firepower, and decent survivability. They're real workhorses. I don't know about anybody else but my criticisms of cruisers are almost entirely leveled at Federation cruisers, which are pathetic by comparison.
If one player builds their ship entirely for offense and another player builds their ship entirely for defense, and both are equally skilled in their respective play styles, who should win?
Answer: stalemate.
To say that the attacker should always win is to devalue the entire concept of defense.
Apparently so... hence I stopped posting here *Sits back and grabs the popcorn*
2: Feds get heavy cruisers which are not really the same thing. Heavy Cruisers are slow and ponderous compared to battle cruisers, but a lot tougher.
3: Agreed.
My character Tsin'xing
Fact is, beams are very powerful as they are. They are better DPS than cannons in most realistic situations. Cannons have great burst potential, AND yes, if the stars align and the escort can just sit there and fire endlessly at whatever its shooting at, at close range, yes cannons are more damage. Yet, if you know what you are doing with beams and/or are a tac captain, you can definitely push the damage with beams alone.
Cannons have severe damage dropoff with range. Past 7k or so, beams do more damage than cannons, with none of the arc limitations. Lets not forget how long it may take the escort to close the range.
Cannons also have a very limited firing arc, which if you are getting shot at means you often have to break off because your shields are gone before your CRF cycle is done. The maneuverability of escorts is highly overrated compared to this limited arc. You lose a lot of DPS every time you have to turn away, because you're not getting back on target for multiple weapon cycles, and possibly not at all until your shields are back up. I have always run 2x RCS consoles on my escorts because I actually have a sense of just how slow escorts actually move and how much damage is lost from the firing arc and limited maneuverability.
So just because escorts are the most maneuverable does not at all mean they can somehow magically keep their cannons on target 90% of the time. If they are getting shot at, 50% might be more accurate, even less if they're the kind in STFs who die constantly from normal damage (the OP invisible torpedoes in elite mode are just unavoidable).
Power drain is highly overstated as a problem, especially by people who don't seem to know how to use the engineering boff slots on cruisers to mitigate it. Hint, cruisers can continually cycle between 4 emergency power buffs giving 100% uptime on say EPTW and EPTS.
Beams need no buff, because they are plenty powerful, moreso than cannons often enough, and cruisers already do some very good dps if the player has a clue. But more important than that, this is not a trivial calculation, something you can estimate by comparing raw weapon stats. To do that is to be utterly clueless about the myriad factors involved in it all.
An Engineer cruiser captain with beams can manage power drain better than other captain types, which is an element to the balance design, I think.
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?
Funny how those "Escort-like turn speed BattleCruisers" seem to only be escort turn capable after stacking some RCS consoles to do so......... Its not funny how that fact is over looked quite often in the "turn rate/cruisers" debate.
What else is not funny is how the Escort is often attacked in the forums for being to speedy and able to turn so well when many players stack RCS consoles on them as well to enhance that already high turn rate.
It seems many things are convienently overlooked for the sake of trying to make a point in one favor of ones desires by almost everyone.
R.I.P
It doesn't fit their agenda so it's immediately discarded or ignored.
Al Rivera hates Klingons
Star Trek Online: Agents of Jack Emmert
All cloaks should be canon.
Someone, who will equip his multivector escort with BEAMS - like it would be canon - will do much less damage than someone who equip cannons. In fact, the only larger scale UFP ship that used cannons were the Defaint.
Though the USS Prometheus was clearly designed as a battle ship easily capable to deal with multiple attackers, it used BEAMS not CANNONS, but seem to be quite effective in that.
So, imho the damage capabilities should not base on which weapon type (cannon or beam) you go. All this cannon spam feels very Un-Trek.
There would be a simple solution for beams.
1: remove dual beam banks from the game.
2: add a new type of beam array: heavy beam array (only equipable in the front slot), which damage is based on the firing arch.
- In the region of 0 to 90 ?, they deal the same damage as dual beam banks now.
- from 90 to 180 ? they deal slightly less damage than normal cannons.
- from 90 to 270? they deal the damage of beam banks as now.
I use these be low.And i love them.
[Polarized Disruptor Dual Heavy Cannons Mk XII [Acc]x2]x3
[Photon Torpedo Launcher Mk XII [CrtD]x2 [Dmg]]
[Polarized Disruptor Turret Mk XII [Dmg]x2]x4
I am all ways shooting even if your be hind me.