test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Shouldn't Torpedos be a bit more affective against shields?

lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,902 Arc User
I mean shouldn't they?

You never heard Picard say lock phasers and hold quantum torpedo's till their shields are down? Janeway definitely would of hoarded every single photon torpedo unless she knew they were going to hit bare hull when they had a limited supply.

I'm definitely not saying they should be as or nearly as affective as a energy weapon or everyone with a decent turn rate would be flying torp/mine boats and that would be just the opposite end of the problem we have now.

There was hardly a ship that didn't have some type of torpedo and heck even some shuttles could be equipped with them.

I'll still use them even if it does hurt me sometimes...but I just wish they were a bit more affective...
Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
Post edited by lianthelia on
«1

Comments

  • wolfexile1wolfexile1 Member Posts: 63 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    lianthelia wrote: »
    I mean shouldn't they?

    You never heard Picard say lock phasers and hold quantum torpedo's till their shields are down? Janeway definitely would of hoarded every single photon torpedo unless she knew they were going to hit bare hull when they had a limited supply.

    I'm definitely not saying they should be as or nearly as affective as a energy weapon or everyone with a decent turn rate would be flying torp/mine boats and that would be just the opposite end of the problem we have now.

    There was hardly a ship that didn't have some type of torpedo and heck even some shuttles could be equipped with them.

    I'll still use them even if it does hurt me sometimes...but I just wish they were a bit more affective...

    I agree, They need to have a little more "Umph" Against shields.

    But then again, If everything here was exactly how it was in the movies, Battles would last seconds, A single torpedo could destroy a lightly shielded vessel, And there would barely even be any female ferengi traders, And they would mostly (if not all) Be in the nude.
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    wolfexile1 wrote: »
    ...And there would barely even be any female ferengi traders, And they would mostly (if not all) Be in the nude.

    And the issue here being...
    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. B)
  • cmdrskyfallercmdrskyfaller Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    torpedoes should prevent shield balancing for 2 seconds ...only tac team should override it.

    that alone is enough of a balancing act for their low damage on shields.
  • mneinthmneinth Member Posts: 22 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Would suggest a higher bleed through damage for all projectiles,or something like the borg thing where it puts your skills on a small timer.
  • woodwhitywoodwhity Member Posts: 2,636 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Torpedos are fine as they are, they are doing enough damage even with shields up.
  • dalnar83dalnar83 Member Posts: 2,420 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Photons should do more dmg to shields to make them interesting alternative to quantums.
    "Cryptic Studio’s Jack Emmert (2010): Microtransactions are the biggest bunch of nonsense. I like paying one fee and not worrying about it – like my cellphone. The world’s biggest MMO isn’t item based, even though the black market item GDP is bigger than Russia … microtransactions make me want to die.”
  • rakija879rakija879 Member Posts: 646 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    woodwhity wrote: »
    Torpedos are fine as they are, they are doing enough damage even with shields up.


    LoL :D They are so much used :eek: most of the captains dont even use energy wep is that right :P
  • edited February 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,902 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    woodwhity wrote: »
    Torpedos are fine as they are, they are doing enough damage even with shields up.

    If they are doing so well then why is it common place for most ships to use nothing but energy weapons?
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • seekerkorhilseekerkorhil Member Posts: 472
    edited February 2013
    The "energy weapons for shields, torpedoes for hull" is an overused and downright stupid idea with no grounds in canon or any decent game.

    Quite simply they should remove the fact that 90% of kinetic damage delt to shields disappears altogether and go from there.

    If they did that lets think what would happen. Torps would become good cos they would deal their full dps to the target without worrying about weapon drain. They would still be out dpsed by cannon escorts though. However they would remain balanced because of the global cooldown all torp launchers have meaning they would still only fire one every second at most. More with spread / high yield ofc but not unbalancing. 4x photon launchers would still only be 1 torpedo every second and that would STILL be significantly less dps than a beam cruiser.

    Let torps do full damage to shields.
  • twamtwam Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    http://www.ninja-creative.com/images/affect-vs-effect.png

    Pet peeve out of the way, I'd say maybe a 10% boost to torpedo shield damage, but not much more than that. They are meant to be used in conjunction with energy weapons, not instead of them, after all.

    Now, what would be interesting is if energy weapons were to be somewhat less effective against bare hull. That way, the synergy between energy weapons and torpedo's is increased and tactical use of weapons stimulated. Not likely to happen, as it would be perceived as a nerf to escorts, a buff for cruisers and a reduction of gameplay speed, but an interesting thought experiment, nonetheless.
  • cmdrskyfallercmdrskyfaller Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    twam wrote: »
    http://www.ninja-creative.com/images/affect-vs-effect.png

    Pet peeve out of the way, I'd say maybe a 10% boost to torpedo shield damage, but not much more than that. They are meant to be used in conjunction with energy weapons, not instead of them, after all.

    Now, what would be interesting is if energy weapons were to be somewhat less effective against bare hull. That way, the synergy between energy weapons and torpedo's is increased and tactical use of weapons stimulated. Not likely to happen, as it would be perceived as a nerf to escorts, a buff for cruisers and a reduction of gameplay speed, but an interesting thought experiment, nonetheless.

    Or it would be an even better idea if torpedo damage was also determined by weapon power and they drained -10 per launcher. Now the launcher would not drain power when it fired but rather it drains power just from being equipped. So a ship with 2 torps equipped would be running at -20 power permanently.

    That way the torpedoes could in principle receive a big damage boost from wep power like guns do except that firing them after or with guns means the gun energy drain will lower the torpedo damage.

    Aka 50 wep power = the torp damage we have now. 125= +50% dmg bonus. If at 25 wep power the torps would to 1/3rd the damage they do now.
  • causalityeffectcausalityeffect Member Posts: 178 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    No.

    Unless Cryptic implemented an expendable torpedo system where you can run out then the current system works just fine. The only torpedoes that really should be more effective against shields is Transphasic and thats mainly because they give up their damage to do so.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • kamiyama317kamiyama317 Member Posts: 1,295 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    twam wrote: »
    http://www.ninja-creative.com/images/affect-vs-effect.png

    Pet peeve out of the way, I'd say maybe a 10% boost to torpedo shield damage, but not much more than that. They are meant to be used in conjunction with energy weapons, not instead of them, after all.

    Now, what would be interesting is if energy weapons were to be somewhat less effective against bare hull. That way, the synergy between energy weapons and torpedo's is increased and tactical use of weapons stimulated. Not likely to happen, as it would be perceived as a nerf to escorts, a buff for cruisers and a reduction of gameplay speed, but an interesting thought experiment, nonetheless.

    Even if they did consider buffing torpedo damage against shields, I think a 10% boost should be the limit. I think torpedoes are doing fine as they are.

    However a damage reduction of energy weapons against hull is something I agree with. In every TV series Federation Starships had both phasers and torpedoes. Using only energy weapons on your ship is popular in STO only because they work equally well against both shields and hull. Giving hull an innate energy damage resistance would make combat more strategic, and would encourage players to use both energy weapons and torps on their ships, which would be more in line with canon.

    So I agree I think that's a great idea.
  • davidfloresiidavidfloresii Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I agree with the weapon power thing, but think that It should be powered by aux instead. There by making cannons a tac option, torps a science option, and eng a mix for both.

    add-on: Though that last idea may be the best, with increase of hull energy resistance thus making torps more practical.
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Or it would be an even better idea if torpedo damage was also determined by weapon power and they drained -10 per launcher. Now the launcher would not drain power when it fired but rather it drains power just from being equipped. So a ship with 2 torps equipped would be running at -20 power permanently.

    That way the torpedoes could in principle receive a big damage boost from wep power like guns do except that firing them after or with guns means the gun energy drain will lower the torpedo damage.

    Aka 50 wep power = the torp damage we have now. 125= +50% dmg bonus. If at 25 wep power the torps would to 1/3rd the damage they do now.

    No. One of a torpedo bay's primary bonuses is that it isn't tied to weapon power. You want to tell every cruiser and science vessel captain that their damage is being reduced on one of their few heavy hitters?
  • squatsaucesquatsauce Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    In theory torpedo/energy weapons relationship works great. Having energy weapons to drain shields and projectiles to take advantage of gaps helps improve the depth of the game's tactical combat and emphasizes positioning as an important part of play.

    This is most apparent at lower levels of play, where a well-timed photon torpedo launch can seriously hobble if not outright destroy an enemy ship. Unfortunately, those times pass quickly and most folks tend to linger for months or years at high-level PvE play where the game's inconsistent damage/hull scaling drastically skews things. The way that damage bonuses accumulate tends to favor energy weapons as primary damage dealers with projectile weapons tending to be added in as an afterthought, especially on escorts. At this point they can absolutely feel underwhelming. Your energy weapon's damage output is boosted by well over 125% of their base DPS while your quantums only do a useful amount of damage every 15-30 seconds if you bothered to invest in appropriate torpedo skills at all.

    Torpedoes themselves are fine. Maybe they could use a boost to base damage at higher levels but, honestly, the real "fix" for torpedoes will probably come from addressing the damage scaling/resistances at high levels of play.
  • davidfloresiidavidfloresii Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    If your only game play is on pve, then yeah it makes on difference. But don't come crying when you come to pvp and find that those same tricks don't work. The idea is to make torps relevant in all game play. Not just against a laughable pve AI.
  • cmdrskyfallercmdrskyfaller Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I agree with the weapon power thing, but think that It should be powered by aux instead. There by making cannons a tac option, torps a science option, and eng a mix for both.

    add-on: Though that last idea may be the best, with increase of hull energy resistance thus making torps more practical.

    That could work too. Both of them. If torps get aux power bonuses and hulls get lots more energy resists that would make things quite balanced for all ship classes. an escort would have to assign at least 50 power to aux to get the torp damage they get now for free.
  • zeuxidemus001zeuxidemus001 Member Posts: 3,357 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    The B'rel is a prime example of why this game needs to have a torp balance done in this regard. All I've heard the past two years from the fed only crowd is that it would make the b'rel too OP but offering no information to back up their claims. I just think with all the negative side effects that can be thrown at a b'rel in this regard Cryptic needs to start throwing in some incentives to use the b'rel because myself I love the ship but like a lot of iconic ships in this game have hit the dust collection rack of ships that are just nothing more than something pretty to look at :(
  • ocp001ocp001 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Why not give the player the ability to reconfigure the warhead yields on torpedoes? Reconfigure to do more shield damage, or hull damage. Throw a slider or a couple presets like we do with ship power levels. Further mechanics could be added too such as shield penetration etc...
  • squatsaucesquatsauce Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    ocp001 wrote: »
    Why not give the player the ability to reconfigure the warhead yields on torpedoes? Reconfigure to do more shield damage, or hull damage. Throw a slider or a couple presets like we do with ship power levels. Further mechanics could be added too such as shield penetration etc...

    Those aren't bad ideas, actually. I'd really like to see the game's current internal math brought up to snuff first to make sure that overall balance is where it needs to be, but if that's ever enacted, then the additional control mechanic might be interesting.
  • corgatagcorgatag Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    For me, the main frustration is that a sliver of shields can negate an entire torpedo spread.

    Here are my ideas:

    1) Increase the speed of (non-destructible) torpedos significantly

    2) Make shield redistribution less smooth (e.g. 5000 every 5 seconds instead of 1000 every 1
    second)

    3) Torpedos do full damage against shield facings less than 25%

    4) Torpedos do increasing damage the lower the shield facing
  • thisslerthissler Member Posts: 2,055 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I hope this helps. It may not, but I hope it does.

    Torpedoes are DEVASTATING against hull. They truly truly are. This is how I experience Torpedoes.

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAAgaD-zbotq2By_2-8qqIg Landing Torps on Hull isn't overly hard.

    Okay for the rest of you. Torpedoes also mess up crew. And crew were SUPPOSED to be really really good to have on a starship. And I think this never really panned out the way the original designers meant it to happen. In short, being pounded on the shields was the equivalant of scrambling an egg inside the shell. Not pleasant for the egg. Very tasty for you.

    So what I'm saying is that Torpedoes WERE intended to be KILLERS on hulls, but even on shields they were intended to wreck the crew to the point where repairs and other vital ship functions became problematic. I don't believe that second functionality was ever realized.

    Okay. Why do I say this. It's plain that torpedoes kill crew. It's on the tooltip, you can watch them die. Do you EVER use biofunction or emergency force fields? No. Why? Because even at zero crew your ship works just dandy. So that's the basis for my argument there.

    And if you ONLY use energy weps that's ok. There's no solid reason to do so beyond an inablility to time your attacks, so if you practice you can change that. Changing one DHC for a torpedo is a HUGE increase in burst damage. So practice and you'll get it.
  • resoundingenvoyresoundingenvoy Member Posts: 439
    edited February 2013
    I'd like to see torpedo have their own unique slots and ammo based.

    Not only would it make a little more sense see starship have septate systems for each, it would encourage better use then spamming them. In addition you could get away with something like tricobolt mega hits (seeing no one seems to want to nerf the skills that let them hit for 40-80K a hit) because you could only have two or three of them total.

    Them having a 360 firing arc would also be nice. (Maybe a variable range or their range calculated from a point in front or behind the ship.)

    They are independently seeking mutations. They shouldn't have be aim at a target. They should have to be told what to seek, and set loose.
  • xcom43xcom43 Member Posts: 723 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    If you get Photon [Photon Torpedo Launcher Mk XII [CrtD]x2 [Dmg]] These do massive damage with torpedo spread.As soon as i drop your shields i could bring your hull down 10% to 30% with a critical buff attack.I have seen my torpedoes do 20k in damage so trust me torpedoes are not weak i have taken out Borg Bird of Prey in Cure Space Elite with these.:D
    The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.
  • logicalspocklogicalspock Member Posts: 836 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    They made torpedoes behave this way for gameplay reasons, so there was a distinction between energy weapons and torpedoes and players had the choice of what balance they would like to achieve.

    I see no good reason to change that. It is all about strategy and choices.

    For instance, you can use phasers, wait until the proc disables shields, and then blow a buffed quantum torpedo straight into the hull. That is a lot more interesting in terms of possible strategy than simply having phasers and quantums do equal damage to shields and hull.
  • thepantspartythepantsparty Member Posts: 431 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Yup. Gameplay and balance trump canon.
  • fovrelfovrel Member Posts: 1,448 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I have talked about this earlier in a thread of myself. The thing is, you can equip a ship all with cannon and that will do fine ( escorts will do very fine). Then you can equip a ship all with beams, this will also do fine, although you have to consider the energy drain. With doing fine, I mean, you do damage against shields and hull in a way that destroys the target in a reasonable time.

    If you equip your ship with only torpedoes, a considerabley deal of your damage potential is wasted. So I suggested a torpedo, a tachyon torpedo, that damage shields and nothing more. I must say that I never thought about the crew killing aspect of torpedoes. I don't know if that is an important factor for your combat abillity.
  • istvaanshogaatsuistvaanshogaatsu Member Posts: 134 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I like Torpedoes *just* the way they are. Unpopular, rarely used, abandoned in favor of cannons etc.

    It gives me something obscure to specialize in, and that's a type of gameplay I treasure. When I joined STO, all the tactical pros advised cannon builds... instead, I slapped 3 fore/3 aft Quantum torps on a fleet tac escort retrofit along with a single fore dual beam bank. Now I'm pretty regularly the top DPSer in elite Hive Onslaught (all that delicious Borg hull to bust up) and hold my own in PVP against klinks who don't realize that battle-cloaking with a bunch of quantums on your tail is suicide. With 3 purple projectile doffs, I fire one a second - the game limit for projectiles - which gives me *significantly* higher DPS than photons fired at the same rate.
Sign In or Register to comment.