Power drain is the problem, without any doubt about it. I went from doing 4.5k in CSE with a ship to 7.5k in the same mission with the same ship but equipping the romulan set, which ends up reducing the power drain, thats a pretty significant change. I've been averaging 9k in ISE with an eng cruiser.
The real problem is the only current way to make a cruiser do that kind of damage is to go plasma, which shouldn't be the case.
You do know that ships are supposed to equip both, energy weapons and torpedoes?
Tnx. Mr. obvious I welcome your comment on this. You have inspired everyone, and brought knowledge of torpedo existence "ultimate dmg weapon" in this game to all of us noobs. :P
You do know that ships are supposed to equip both, energy weapons and torpedoes?
1.) I have never heard it officially said that ships are "supposed" to have any particular loadout.
2.) Torpedoes have a small firing arc which is completely exclusive of beam broadside firing arc. You cannot shoot beam arrays and torpedoes at the same time with any kind of efficiency.
3.) Torpedo launchers have pathetic DPS output. Even less than drain-crippled beam fire. This wouldn't be an issue if torpedoes did enough spike damage to justify taking your beams off target for a kill shot, but only way to even come close to having a torpedo strike be a kill shot is to massively buff it with tactical captain and boff abilities. Guess which ships are not typically used by tactical captains and have few tactical boff options?
The problem with beam arrays, are that they cannot be linked. There should be just way to shoot one beam instead three with 3 beam arrays, if you link them. You would have reduced chance for procs, but increased base dmg, hence higher crits.
I'm not sure that would solve the power drain issue, but I'd still agree with this. Not only would it make combat less cluttered, and look more like it did in the shows, but it would make BO the hammer blow I always got the sense it was supposed to be but never really was.
You could even make it a toggle or have weapons link individually (a bit like putting them on auto-fire), so that it needs to be actively managed. This would introduce a tactical element; as having all your beams rolled into one would make Fire at Will less effective at spam clearance, while making Beam Overload more effective at dealing damage to a single target. This, in turn, would introduce a new tactical element to carrier play; as someone who is running mega-beams is going to be ill prepared to deal with fighter swarms.
It might even make beam escorts competitive, thus increasing play style diversity.
3.) Torpedo launchers have pathetic DPS output. Even less than drain-crippled beam fire. This wouldn't be an issue if torpedoes did enough spike damage to justify taking your beams off target for a kill shot, but only way to even come close to having a torpedo strike be a kill shot is to massively buff it with tactical captain and boff abilities. Guess which ships are not typically used by tactical captains and have few tactical boff options?
Considering a correctly setup ship can have somewhere between 3.3 to 10k dps with dual launchers alone (without any tactical abilities being used), I reject this premise.
Escorts shouldn't be able to tank like a Cruiser. Cruisers shouldn't be able to blast like an Escort. Science ships shouldn't try to do either. All should work well together, but no single type does "it" just like another type.
First off the OP test is at max range, please tell me you understand range effects damage.
Beam dps is all about maximum time on target. Meaning you should be on target more than a 45 degree arc DHC ship. And beams get less of a distance penalty than cannons. Everybody seems to compare a cannon ship that is stationary at <2km range from its target the entire time. So yes you need to fly your broadside ship appropriately to give you optimum distance and for transitioning targets.
There are so many ways to deal with drain, if you havent figured out set weapons to 100, then stack EPtW, 2-piece borg, Maco Shield (or equivalent), plasmonic leech, Aux2Bat (specific builds). Run 5 or 6 beams depending if you are KDF or not, Cutting beam, Rom Beam, and the 180 torp if Fed. Fly a ship with enough Tac slots 4+, unless you are using Aux2Bat build. You dont need a million healing skills, you need less than a handful. Make sure you have APB, preferably back to back.
You should be able to parse in STFs nearly the same dps as most escorts and much more than escorts if in a beam carrier. Escorts will still have more burst, but your sustained dps should be close. And hopefully you are nice enough to have threat control and actually do damage and be a viable tank.
None of this matters because later today I will get into an STF where all 4 other player will never even break 2.5k dps, regardless if they are in an escort or cruiser.
First off the OP test is at max range, please tell me you understand range effects damage.
Beam dps is all about maximum time on target. Meaning you should be on target more than a 45 degree arc DHC ship. And beams get less of a distance penalty than cannons. Everybody seems to compare a cannon ship that is stationary at <2km range from its target the entire time. So yes you need to fly your broadside ship appropriately to give you optimum distance and for transitioning targets.
There are so many ways to deal with drain, if you havent figured out set weapons to 100, then stack EPtW, 2-piece borg, Maco Shield (or equivalent), plasmonic leech, Aux2Bat (specific builds). Run 5 or 6 beams depending if you are KDF or not, Cutting beam, Rom Beam, and the 180 torp if Fed. Fly a ship with enough Tac slots 4+, unless you are using Aux2Bat build. You dont need a million healing skills, you need less than a handful. Make sure you have APB, preferably back to back.
You should be able to parse in STFs nearly the same dps as most escorts and much more than escorts if in a beam carrier. Escorts will still have more burst, but your sustained dps should be close. And hopefully you are nice enough to have threat control and actually do damage and be a viable tank.
None of this matters because later today I will get into an STF where all 4 other player will never even break 2.5k dps, regardless if they are in an escort or cruiser.
The amount of damage the OP was doing is not the point; the point is that damage gain from boosting weapon power was not working as advertised. Range is irrelevant.
You will also note the chained EPtW and Plasmonic Leech were both included in the test.
ive stoped useing cruisers because a heavy escort can tank nearly as good + better turn rate and a hell of a lot more dmg i still use duel beam and one beam arry at the back, but other wise i dont see thae point in a beam ship in this game its all about DPS at the moment a team of 5 people all with ships with cannons can do ISE with 7 mins left on the clock no probs. today my fleet did CSE 4 of us and one pug 5 mins left on the clock no even died
The amount of damage the OP was doing is not the point; the point is that damage gain from boosting weapon power was not working as advertised. Range is irrelevant.
On the contrary, his point was that existing drain mechanics, specifically the power inefficient nature of non-DHC weapons, are not fully counterable by existing anti-drain capabilities.
Power boosting and weapon drain countering abilities work, they're just not strong enough to deal with 7 beams firing concurrently
On the contrary, his point was that existing drain mechanics, specifically the power inefficient nature of non-DHC weapons, are not fully counterable by existing anti-drain capabilities.
Power boosting and weapon drain countering abilities work, they're just not strong enough to deal with 7 beams firing concurrently
Well not quite, because Nadion Inversion, which was also included in the test, would count as an existing method. Why have a single ability that lets you do it once in a blue moon, when you still have to try to make those weapons work the rest of the time through inadequate means.
You make it sound like we aren't supposed to be able to run 7 beams at once; but then why do we have the means, and why do we have that one ability that lets it work on occasion? There is a case to be made that it is not working as intended.
Well not quite, because Nadion Inversion, which was also included in the test, would count as an existing method. Why have a single ability that lets you do it once in a blue moon, when you still have to try to make those weapons work the rest of the time through inadequate means.
Please elaborate on how an existing anti drain ability not being powerful enough to counter existing weapon drain mechanics on a macro scale clashes with the statement that existing anti drain mechanics are not currently strong enough to counter existing weapon drains.
You make it sound like we aren't supposed to be able to run 7 beams at once; but then why do we have the means, and why do we have that one ability that lets it work on occasion? There is a case to be made that it is not working as intended.
You'll notice I made zero quality judgements about whether you should or should not be forced into a specific loadout.
A possible tweak would be to make beam array power scale down as more beams are added, up to a fixed amount (like 6). Then a cruiser could load up on them and wont suffer such a severe power draw.
Please elaborate on how an existing anti drain ability not being powerful enough to counter existing weapon drain mechanics on a macro scale clashes with the statement that existing anti drain mechanics are not currently strong enough to counter existing weapon drains.
You'll notice I made zero quality judgements about whether you should or should not be forced into a specific loadout.
...
What?
I just pointed out that one of the existing anti-drain mechanics that was tested did in fact produce a decent amount of damage gain; and therefore your statement about the purpose of the OP was not entirely accurate.
I also said nothing about being forced into builds. I just pointed out that the argument could be made, that if something can be done, but can't be done well, then perhaps it isn't working right. It would certainly be grounds to re-examine it.
I just pointed out that one of the existing anti-drain mechanics that was tested did in fact produce a decent amount of damage gain; and therefore your statement about the purpose of the OP was not entirely accurate.
On the contrary, his point was that existing drain mechanics, specifically the power inefficient nature of non-DHC weapons, are not fully counterable by existing anti-drain capabilities.
Emphasis mine, since you clearly didn't see it the first time. I chose my words carefully.
I also said nothing about being forced into builds. I just pointed out that the argument could be made, that if something can be done, but can't be done well, then perhaps it isn't working right. It would certainly be grounds to re-examine it.
You make it sound like we aren't supposed to be able to run 7 beams at once; but then why do we have the means, and why do we have that one ability that lets it work on occasion? There is a case to be made that it is not working as intended.
Again, emphasis mine.
If you're going to contest a point, please be consistent.
In addition, simply because something can be done, doesn't mean it should inherently be able to be done well. You can make a balloon out of lead, or a plane out of concrete, but it doesn't mean they're going to work better than a plane or balloon of different design or implementation.
Ok, the reason why the OP saw such a huge improvement with NI, as opposed to such a small improvement with EPTW/manifolds/leech, is because even at 160ish weapon power he was still dipping below 125 while firing. With NI, he had almost no dip.
Look folks, I'm going to be bluntly honest, beams work fine. I have 2 engineers, one fed one klingon, Fleet Ambassador/ Fleet Vor'Cha respectfully. I average 6-7k dps parsed Infected elite runs. Ive run literally hundreds of Infecteds since starting to play STO, so my pool of test run are more than sufficent.
Beams lack only one thing that DHC's have, big burst. Knowing beams as well as I do, I took my tac officer in a Fleet Defiant and built a pve broadside beamscort. Bfaw3 + Omega 3 and APA is nothing to sneeze at, toss in a couple torp spreads, and I am pulling 11-13k dps parsed dps infected elite.
Is it fair to have to overstack power for beams compared to DHC's, no. But if you do, you're not going to have a problem pulling you're own weight and then some in PvE
This is sort of like a scientist demanding gravity take it easy because it pulls too hard. That gravity might actually listen in this case doesn't make it a less shoddy approach to problem solving. So you've hooked up eighty beams and created some hideous Frankenstein monster and it doesn't work and now you're upset.
Well? Who said it would work in the first place? Part of experimenting with those sorts of exotic weapons loadouts is going to be trial and error. So okay, that wacky idea didn't work. Now you try something else. If everything worked and every unique snowflake loadout doled out an equal amount of DPS then the game would be even less involved than it already is, and experimenting with weapons setups wouldn't be fun because everybody gets a cookie and every paper gets an A.
3.) Torpedo launchers have pathetic DPS output. Even less than drain-crippled beam fire. This wouldn't be an issue if torpedoes did enough spike damage to justify taking your beams off target for a kill shot, but only way to even come close to having a torpedo strike be a kill shot is to massively buff it with tactical captain and boff abilities. Guess which ships are not typically used by tactical captains and have few tactical boff options?
I have to interject on this point...I have seen and experienced the "business end" of a Chel Grett armed with nothing but transphasic, rapid-reload transphasic, and Breen transphasic cluster torpedos, and ship gear that enhances torpedos, mines and shield penetration. The build in question put ZERO POINTS in any energy weapon captain skill, allowing those points to be spent elsewhere for survivability. They fly at the minimum energy weapon power of 25 in every power mode.
And the captain in question is an Engineer.
Their damage output is through the roof. To say that torpedo launchers have pathetic DPS output is wrong...the man is getting it DONE.
Emphasis mine, since you clearly didn't see it the first time. I chose my words carefully.
Again, emphasis mine.
If you're going to contest a point, please be consistent.
In addition, simply because something can be done, doesn't mean it should inherently be able to be done well. You can make a balloon out of lead, or a plane out of concrete, but it doesn't mean they're going to work better than a plane or balloon of different design or implementation.
You are twisting my words. Again, I never said anything about being forced into builds. You are making an assumption that running 7 beams is meant to result in these problems; I am not making that assumption. I don't know whether it is or not; I think there is a case to be made for re-examining the issue to make sure the results are the ones the devs intended. That is all.
To think, I only can in here to point out that range has nothing to do with the matter at hand...
I'd honestly think you are doing something wrong. I've got 6 Phaser beam array's, the Omega Plasma Torpedo, and the Borg Cutting Beam on my Galaxy-X, and from that distance (Assuming the target has no shields) I can do easy 700 to 900 damage per beam. If i'm within 5K of the target it's easy 1100 or better. With full shields the Phasers don't seem to have much trouble stripping them off, so I can't really say there's anything wrong with them. They seem to function as I would expect them to, but i'm usually broadsiding things like crazy, so dps, and shield stripping is fairly easy to do with 6 beams.
Of course i'm flying the X with my Engineer, so power really isn't a problem for me. I did fly an Excelsior with Disruptor beams for a good while, and damage was just though the roof on that thing, but it's been a while since I did anything with that captain. I'd say look at your spec points and what type of beams you are using. I've got XI purple Acc CritD and CritH phaser beams arrays on my X, so i'd imagine the Disruptor beams would be as good if not better damage considering the procs.
Beams are fine. If you're trying to match cannon DPS, you're doing it wrong. Beams =/= cannons. Larger firing arc = lesser damage output. It's really that simple.
Beams will never achieve the same damage output of cannons. If you want that much damage, start flying a ship that can load cannons.
problem with that logic: escorts turn on a dime so firing arc is irrelevant. A cruiser or sci ship bringing to bear 8 or 6 beams should be competitive vs a 4 fore cannon escort (before buffs of course).
I think the real problem is that beams do not have enough benefit over cannons to be competitive.
Its not a power drain issue though. I think its a niche/utility issue.
Beams can be made more useful by:
1- Increasing effective max damage range. For example, have beams do max damage out to 6km and have up to 20% loss of damage by 10km. Cannons oth, should have noticeable damage loss by 6km (40% dmg loss) and be near useless at 10km. Full dmg 2km and under.
2- Beam weapons should have higher chance to proc effects than cannons. Why? They're lasing the target not peppering it all over with cannon rounds. More focused energy=better chance of triggering effect. Rather than 2.5% make it 10%. There is precedence to this with the mission-acquirable 10% proc chance beam array. Not only does this make a ton of sense, it also works with cruiser and sci ship reliance on non-dps to achieve their weapon roles.
Cosmetic change but vital: Rather than a beam firing 4 or 5 pulses per cycle, have it fire just one or two beams long duration beams for the duration of the attack and have those beams 'pulse' like a lance weapon does. Not only would it make it look more canon and helps reduce FPS loss.
Comments
The real problem is the only current way to make a cruiser do that kind of damage is to go plasma, which shouldn't be the case.
Completed Starbase, Embassy, Mine, Spire and No Win Scenario
Nothing to do anymore.
http://dtfleet.com/
Visit our Youtube channel
Tnx. Mr. obvious I welcome your comment on this. You have inspired everyone, and brought knowledge of torpedo existence "ultimate dmg weapon" in this game to all of us noobs. :P
1.) I have never heard it officially said that ships are "supposed" to have any particular loadout.
2.) Torpedoes have a small firing arc which is completely exclusive of beam broadside firing arc. You cannot shoot beam arrays and torpedoes at the same time with any kind of efficiency.
3.) Torpedo launchers have pathetic DPS output. Even less than drain-crippled beam fire. This wouldn't be an issue if torpedoes did enough spike damage to justify taking your beams off target for a kill shot, but only way to even come close to having a torpedo strike be a kill shot is to massively buff it with tactical captain and boff abilities. Guess which ships are not typically used by tactical captains and have few tactical boff options?
Completed Starbase, Embassy, Mine, Spire and No Win Scenario
Nothing to do anymore.
http://dtfleet.com/
Visit our Youtube channel
This is what always breaks this game.
If you think cannons are better, switch to cannons. Not doing it in a Cruiser? Buy an Escort.
I mount a Dual beam bank among my DHCs for and a Beam array aft to take advantage of BA:O III.
I am also an Engineer with a Red Matter Capacitor flying a Destroyer.
The only time my weapon power drops is after the Phaser Lotus fires, it regenerates rapidly as I fly away to set up for the next attack run.
I'm not sure that would solve the power drain issue, but I'd still agree with this. Not only would it make combat less cluttered, and look more like it did in the shows, but it would make BO the hammer blow I always got the sense it was supposed to be but never really was.
You could even make it a toggle or have weapons link individually (a bit like putting them on auto-fire), so that it needs to be actively managed. This would introduce a tactical element; as having all your beams rolled into one would make Fire at Will less effective at spam clearance, while making Beam Overload more effective at dealing damage to a single target. This, in turn, would introduce a new tactical element to carrier play; as someone who is running mega-beams is going to be ill prepared to deal with fighter swarms.
It might even make beam escorts competitive, thus increasing play style diversity.
Could be a fun thing to try.
Considering a correctly setup ship can have somewhere between 3.3 to 10k dps with dual launchers alone (without any tactical abilities being used), I reject this premise.
I'm ok with this equation.
Beam dps is all about maximum time on target. Meaning you should be on target more than a 45 degree arc DHC ship. And beams get less of a distance penalty than cannons. Everybody seems to compare a cannon ship that is stationary at <2km range from its target the entire time. So yes you need to fly your broadside ship appropriately to give you optimum distance and for transitioning targets.
There are so many ways to deal with drain, if you havent figured out set weapons to 100, then stack EPtW, 2-piece borg, Maco Shield (or equivalent), plasmonic leech, Aux2Bat (specific builds). Run 5 or 6 beams depending if you are KDF or not, Cutting beam, Rom Beam, and the 180 torp if Fed. Fly a ship with enough Tac slots 4+, unless you are using Aux2Bat build. You dont need a million healing skills, you need less than a handful. Make sure you have APB, preferably back to back.
You should be able to parse in STFs nearly the same dps as most escorts and much more than escorts if in a beam carrier. Escorts will still have more burst, but your sustained dps should be close. And hopefully you are nice enough to have threat control and actually do damage and be a viable tank.
None of this matters because later today I will get into an STF where all 4 other player will never even break 2.5k dps, regardless if they are in an escort or cruiser.
The amount of damage the OP was doing is not the point; the point is that damage gain from boosting weapon power was not working as advertised. Range is irrelevant.
You will also note the chained EPtW and Plasmonic Leech were both included in the test.
On the contrary, his point was that existing drain mechanics, specifically the power inefficient nature of non-DHC weapons, are not fully counterable by existing anti-drain capabilities.
Power boosting and weapon drain countering abilities work, they're just not strong enough to deal with 7 beams firing concurrently
Well not quite, because Nadion Inversion, which was also included in the test, would count as an existing method. Why have a single ability that lets you do it once in a blue moon, when you still have to try to make those weapons work the rest of the time through inadequate means.
You make it sound like we aren't supposed to be able to run 7 beams at once; but then why do we have the means, and why do we have that one ability that lets it work on occasion? There is a case to be made that it is not working as intended.
Please elaborate on how an existing anti drain ability not being powerful enough to counter existing weapon drain mechanics on a macro scale clashes with the statement that existing anti drain mechanics are not currently strong enough to counter existing weapon drains.
You'll notice I made zero quality judgements about whether you should or should not be forced into a specific loadout.
http://www.zeta-aquilae.net/Test/Beams.png
There you go. Just keep adding weapon power and see your DPS on a full beam broadside boat increase up to 25% and more!!!
Beam Arrays / Power level have always been broken for a stupid reason, bad programming, etc.
...
What?
I just pointed out that one of the existing anti-drain mechanics that was tested did in fact produce a decent amount of damage gain; and therefore your statement about the purpose of the OP was not entirely accurate.
I also said nothing about being forced into builds. I just pointed out that the argument could be made, that if something can be done, but can't be done well, then perhaps it isn't working right. It would certainly be grounds to re-examine it.
Emphasis mine, since you clearly didn't see it the first time. I chose my words carefully.
Again, emphasis mine.
If you're going to contest a point, please be consistent.
In addition, simply because something can be done, doesn't mean it should inherently be able to be done well. You can make a balloon out of lead, or a plane out of concrete, but it doesn't mean they're going to work better than a plane or balloon of different design or implementation.
Look folks, I'm going to be bluntly honest, beams work fine. I have 2 engineers, one fed one klingon, Fleet Ambassador/ Fleet Vor'Cha respectfully. I average 6-7k dps parsed Infected elite runs. Ive run literally hundreds of Infecteds since starting to play STO, so my pool of test run are more than sufficent.
Beams lack only one thing that DHC's have, big burst. Knowing beams as well as I do, I took my tac officer in a Fleet Defiant and built a pve broadside beamscort. Bfaw3 + Omega 3 and APA is nothing to sneeze at, toss in a couple torp spreads, and I am pulling 11-13k dps parsed dps infected elite.
Is it fair to have to overstack power for beams compared to DHC's, no. But if you do, you're not going to have a problem pulling you're own weight and then some in PvE
Brody/Salander/Tsamsiyu ToSVets.
Well? Who said it would work in the first place? Part of experimenting with those sorts of exotic weapons loadouts is going to be trial and error. So okay, that wacky idea didn't work. Now you try something else. If everything worked and every unique snowflake loadout doled out an equal amount of DPS then the game would be even less involved than it already is, and experimenting with weapons setups wouldn't be fun because everybody gets a cookie and every paper gets an A.
I have to interject on this point...I have seen and experienced the "business end" of a Chel Grett armed with nothing but transphasic, rapid-reload transphasic, and Breen transphasic cluster torpedos, and ship gear that enhances torpedos, mines and shield penetration. The build in question put ZERO POINTS in any energy weapon captain skill, allowing those points to be spent elsewhere for survivability. They fly at the minimum energy weapon power of 25 in every power mode.
And the captain in question is an Engineer.
Their damage output is through the roof. To say that torpedo launchers have pathetic DPS output is wrong...the man is getting it DONE.
The weakest of the forces does take it easy once you achieve escape velocity.
You are twisting my words. Again, I never said anything about being forced into builds. You are making an assumption that running 7 beams is meant to result in these problems; I am not making that assumption. I don't know whether it is or not; I think there is a case to be made for re-examining the issue to make sure the results are the ones the devs intended. That is all.
To think, I only can in here to point out that range has nothing to do with the matter at hand...
Of course i'm flying the X with my Engineer, so power really isn't a problem for me. I did fly an Excelsior with Disruptor beams for a good while, and damage was just though the roof on that thing, but it's been a while since I did anything with that captain. I'd say look at your spec points and what type of beams you are using. I've got XI purple Acc CritD and CritH phaser beams arrays on my X, so i'd imagine the Disruptor beams would be as good if not better damage considering the procs.
problem with that logic: escorts turn on a dime so firing arc is irrelevant. A cruiser or sci ship bringing to bear 8 or 6 beams should be competitive vs a 4 fore cannon escort (before buffs of course).
I think the real problem is that beams do not have enough benefit over cannons to be competitive.
Its not a power drain issue though. I think its a niche/utility issue.
Beams can be made more useful by:
1- Increasing effective max damage range. For example, have beams do max damage out to 6km and have up to 20% loss of damage by 10km. Cannons oth, should have noticeable damage loss by 6km (40% dmg loss) and be near useless at 10km. Full dmg 2km and under.
2- Beam weapons should have higher chance to proc effects than cannons. Why? They're lasing the target not peppering it all over with cannon rounds. More focused energy=better chance of triggering effect. Rather than 2.5% make it 10%. There is precedence to this with the mission-acquirable 10% proc chance beam array. Not only does this make a ton of sense, it also works with cruiser and sci ship reliance on non-dps to achieve their weapon roles.
Cosmetic change but vital: Rather than a beam firing 4 or 5 pulses per cycle, have it fire just one or two beams long duration beams for the duration of the attack and have those beams 'pulse' like a lance weapon does. Not only would it make it look more canon and helps reduce FPS loss.
I've also seen the Enterprise D's shields drop to 10% after being hit with a Pakled phaser.
Maybe it's power distribution is different than the Galaxys in STO focusing more on weapons power.
I miss that from TOS, the Original Enterprise could do things that would make all the newer ones implode.