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.
Dual launchers = projectile weapons officers. A torpedo launcher has poor DPS, but a "correctly set up ship" will boost torpedo DPS 300% over nominal since the reload times all but vanish. But if you're going to equip 2 torpedo launchers and 3 projectile officers, now you are heavily invested into your frontal arc and it makes no sense to use beam arrays on your broadside.
First off the OP test is at max range, please tell me you understand range effects damage.
The test was a relative test to analyze the effects of power drain, not an absolute test to get the typical damage output number. The test was performed at maximum range to increase the target's survivability without resorting to a lot of heals that would harden the shields by varying amounts mid-test and skew the results.
if you havent figured out set weapons to 100, then stack EPtW, 2-piece borg, Maco Shield (or equivalent), plasmonic leech, Aux2Bat (specific builds)
As I said I was already using 100 weapon power, with EPTW, Leech, and even plasma manifold consoles. Borg set has no impact on power drains; I think you mean Omega set, which does help some. Why does it help? Because it directly fights power drain.
And I watched an interesting video where somebody was using Aux2batt heavily on a high damage assault cruiser. Given how effective it seemed to be and how ineffective EPTW seems to be, I think it's worth considering that Aux2batt overcaps power in a different way than EPTW, and that EPTW needs to behave more like it.
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.
....And? Again, you're dealing with a nice agile ship that has a lot of tactical abilities and is fully invested into its frontal arc. How does this contradict my basic point that torpedoes and beam arrays do not play well together.
Keep using your isolated test, meanwhile players are parsing full ESTF runs and putting up comparable numbers between cannon and beam ships. Doesnt really get anymore "real world" than that.
They must be crazy because your test, obviously, is more conclusive.
Dual launchers = projectile weapons officers. A torpedo launcher has poor DPS, but a "correctly set up ship" will boost torpedo DPS 300% over nominal since the reload times all but vanish. But if you're going to equip 2 torpedo launchers and 3 projectile officers, now you are heavily invested into your frontal arc and it makes no sense to use beam arrays on your broadside.
So let me get this right...you're trying to argue that a weapon handled in the correct way so as to become devastating somehow doesn't become devastating because it requires proper handling?
Why then bother with beams, since they require significant handling to get any meaningful effect?
Keep using your isolated test, meanwhile players are parsing full ESTF runs and putting up comparable numbers between cannon and beam ships. Doesnt really get anymore "real world" than that.
They must be crazy because your test, obviously, is more conclusive.
That kind of parsing isn't the be-all, end-all of determining weapon effectiveness. Unless the parser can determine how much DPS went to the intended target and wasn't wasted on non-primary targets, all you're seeing is numbers. Beams can do a great deal of DPS provided they're going nuts with BFaW and hitting multiple targets. That doesn't mean that they're effectively producing consistent, high-number DPS to single targets over a sustained period of time. It doesn't even mean that extra DPS had any effect on the engagement time of the encounter.
If you want to "fix" beams, then keep their DPS numbers identical, but give them the same firing efficiency as DHCs. That means the same firing cycle time and weapons drain behavior, but keep their energy drain at 10. That'll keep six beams at 2/3 the damage of four DHCs before consoles numbers and types are taken into account.
Comments
Dual launchers = projectile weapons officers. A torpedo launcher has poor DPS, but a "correctly set up ship" will boost torpedo DPS 300% over nominal since the reload times all but vanish. But if you're going to equip 2 torpedo launchers and 3 projectile officers, now you are heavily invested into your frontal arc and it makes no sense to use beam arrays on your broadside.
The test was a relative test to analyze the effects of power drain, not an absolute test to get the typical damage output number. The test was performed at maximum range to increase the target's survivability without resorting to a lot of heals that would harden the shields by varying amounts mid-test and skew the results.
As I said I was already using 100 weapon power, with EPTW, Leech, and even plasma manifold consoles. Borg set has no impact on power drains; I think you mean Omega set, which does help some. Why does it help? Because it directly fights power drain.
And I watched an interesting video where somebody was using Aux2batt heavily on a high damage assault cruiser. Given how effective it seemed to be and how ineffective EPTW seems to be, I think it's worth considering that Aux2batt overcaps power in a different way than EPTW, and that EPTW needs to behave more like it.
What are we looking at here?
....And? Again, you're dealing with a nice agile ship that has a lot of tactical abilities and is fully invested into its frontal arc. How does this contradict my basic point that torpedoes and beam arrays do not play well together.
Your words, not mine. I just offered the argument that the statement was bogus. But to each their own.
They must be crazy because your test, obviously, is more conclusive.
So let me get this right...you're trying to argue that a weapon handled in the correct way so as to become devastating somehow doesn't become devastating because it requires proper handling?
Why then bother with beams, since they require significant handling to get any meaningful effect?
That kind of parsing isn't the be-all, end-all of determining weapon effectiveness. Unless the parser can determine how much DPS went to the intended target and wasn't wasted on non-primary targets, all you're seeing is numbers. Beams can do a great deal of DPS provided they're going nuts with BFaW and hitting multiple targets. That doesn't mean that they're effectively producing consistent, high-number DPS to single targets over a sustained period of time. It doesn't even mean that extra DPS had any effect on the engagement time of the encounter.
If you want to "fix" beams, then keep their DPS numbers identical, but give them the same firing efficiency as DHCs. That means the same firing cycle time and weapons drain behavior, but keep their energy drain at 10. That'll keep six beams at 2/3 the damage of four DHCs before consoles numbers and types are taken into account.