test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Importance of turn rate...
jestersage
Member Posts: 8 Arc User
This question arise from a thread of ship selection - as in, how important are turn rate?Is the difference of 3 turnrate factor going to affect its effeciency in DPS?
Post edited by jestersage on
0
Comments
Turn rate is also somewhat important defensively because you have 4 shield quadrants to absorb damage. If you lose a shield facing and can't turn so that a different shield facing is presented to your attacker, you'll start taking damage directly to the hull. This is somewhat negated by the use of Tactical Team, which will very quickly begin redirected shield power from your other shield facings to the one that is being hit, but Tactical Team has downtime in most builds so you can't rely on it 100% of the time.
The universe has a wonderful sense of humor. The trick is learning how to take a joke.
Now you said "up to a certain point". So where does it get dropped off on average?
That is likely to be a matter of opinion and also a matter of "what ship are you using and how and where are you using it?" In PvE, turn rate is somewhat important for keeping targets within your optimal targeting arc, but the AI isn't particularly smart, and AI ships generally aren't very agile, so turn rate has moderate importance. In PvP, you'll need a higher turn rate to keep up with the more agile targets, or to deal with concentrated fire on a single shield facing (see my above post), making it much more important in most circumstances in PvP than in PvE.
The universe has a wonderful sense of humor. The trick is learning how to take a joke.
I see. Thanks for the answers.
With escorts, turn rate is king. The higher the turn rate, the higher their defensive values, and the better you are at keeping your forward guns on the target.
For sci ships, turn rate is not as important, since a large selection of sci powers are omnidirectional, and beams are a choice of weapons.
Cruisers benefit least from turn rate, with their weapons, aside from special builds, being exclusively beam based.
Member since early 2011
NPC's are agile enough to be a challenge, and smart enough to rebalance their shields after taking damage on particular vector, something many people here don't seem to understand. Cannon equipped escorts need a snappy turnrate due to the nature of cannons. Cruisers DON'T need turnrate as much for mostly for the same reason.
Hint: Fly a well-equipped cruiser for a few days to the exclusion of all else. Hopefully doing so will highlight their benefits and teach one to appreciate them for what they are, and not hate them because they aren't escorts.
How about instead of crying rivers of tears you instead switch to a beam broadside and realise that big ships are not going to deal as much concentrated DPS as escorts and its balanced out by having superior defenses? Of course, whether a cruiser pilot chooses to take advantage of that or not is up to them.
I speak from experience. I WAS one of those bad pilots that had no clue of what I was doing, so I ended up in a cruiser because it was all that would keep me alive during PvE missions. Then I saw what knowledgeable players could do and I set to learning. Back then there wasn't the wealth of information available now. I fly both a tacsort and an engi cruiser extensively and I can tell you with utmost confidence my engi cruiser does not contribute less to group content than my tacscort. I will say that to make a cruiser work is harder than making an escort work, and some cruiser designs are just not suitable at all for the current meta. The galaxy and star cruisers are primary examples of such designs. Hybrid ships are all the rage these days, its why the Ambassador is a better design than the Galaxy or the Star Cruiser.
I understand why it might be frustrating, wanting cruisers to be the battleships but they never were that in the shows or movies, at least not the modern ones. Heck, even the Intrepid was shown as a more combat capable ship than the Galaxy ever was (or the Sovy if we're being fair).
As to your wanting ranges to be a bigger deal... for the little combat we saw in the shows I never got the impression that ships fought artillery duels at range. It was always up close and personal. True, that was done for the audience's benefit but it stands as the way it was done in the shows. In that regard STO feels very much like the larger DS9 battles.
Edit: You also need to realize that all ships need to be roughly equally playable, so making big ships the battle line and everyone else just a support for them doesn't work in a game where all ships are played by people. Before you mention eve keep in mind that in eve getting the resources to GET bigger ships is part of the competitive game, not so in STO.
"I'm drunk, whats your excuse for being an idiot?" - Unknown drunk man. :eek:
IIRC cruisers are supposed to hull tank and not shield tank. But hulls don't last long once the shields go so that isn't much of a role. Maybe they can do what they're supposed to with an increased hull HP.
Except that a APA3, APO3, THY3 mk XII quantum with one [crtd] mod can easily do over 120k in a crit on bare hull, which makes hull tanking a joke. You would need drastically increased hull hp to make hull tanking possible, and then you would have ships that energy weapons would NEVER be able to kill.
Some of you guys really need to rethink your approach to interacting with others.
Really, isn't obvious that "stand your ground" as a cruiser tactic isn't available in STO? I won't insult your intelligence by offering ideas, being that if you've piloted a cruiser for any length of time you should already know the tricks.
Yep. Tactical skills remain stupidly powerful and fast compared to everything else that counters it. But nerfs would cause tears to short out the servers.
Currently, my turn rate is 47.4 at 52 engine power. Turning in this ship is ridiculously easy to keep targets in my fore.
In PvP, I can chase down other escorts without them being able to shake me. It's quite fun.
There is a downside to having too much turn rate though. Currently, while flying in a straight line, my flight speed is ~30. If I start doing donuts, my flight speed drops to ~26 or 28. This is with a ship with a pretty high inertia rating. I'd imagine it would be worse with a ship that has a lower inertia rating.
Escorts need high turn rate. Science doesn't need it as much (especially with the Sci power activation arc buff). Cruisers could use some too, but too much could make the ship power slide around and it may be harder to keep targets in your broadside arc.
I think this explains quite a lot. Grace under fire is a neat addition that is mostly useless to most capable cruiser pilots. My engi cruiser routinely survives STFs without dying, far mroe often than my escort at any rate. Keep in mind my engi flies and Aux2Batt build (the least tanky style of build) on an Fleet Assault Cruiser (one of the least tanky style of cruisers). You saying that its a a genuinely great addition and that it adds a lot to your survival rate makes me think that your build has somethings not working right. That's the thing about cruisers, they are easy to play and level with but are hard to figure out how get the most out of them at endgame, unquestionably its counter intuitive to use the same survival tricks escorts use while flying a cruiser but its the way to go. Soon you learn the escort survival tricks are not for escorts only.
I will freely admit that several cruiser designs are simply outdated at this point and have simply been left behind by the STO metagame, the Star cruiser and Galaxy lines of cruisers to be exact. That does not mean an enterprising player can't make them work above what is needed for PvE content. But it does mean you won't as much out of them as from a ship from the Excelsior, Ambassador or Assault Cruiser lines.
As for the Fleet Corsair being better... OF COURSE ITS BETTER. It has a better turn rate, has a shuttle bay, and is a hybrid ship. A mix of engi and sci boff stations allow for a more interesting and capable build than an overabundance of just engineering ones.
Turn rate is important because it allows your ship to be in optimum firing position more often and maximize your dps. In PVP this becomes even more crucial as the person with the most maneuverability will have a much easier time avoiding damage and dishing it out.
I would take turn rate over armors/alloys, because if you're shields are gone, an escort can't really hull tank very well. You're pretty much screwed, armor/alloys or not.
The PVE thing got changed recently. AI's still dumb, but in the ongoing borg STF grindfest, those pesky spheres now button mash their emergency power to engines, and it's a lot more effective. So those encounters are now weird. The stationary targets are still stationary. So no real turn rate needed. Then in come these spheres that like to bunny hop around making slow turning ships just kind of seethe. Overall it's still mostly a non-issue. It's just prior to LOR you never had any real worries over a low turn rate on anything. Now, spheres can make you sigh, at least, a little.
I disagree with that assessment. Tanking comes down to ability to maintain threat. And ability to soak damage while keeping that threat. The FLEET Assault Cruiser has top of the line hull points. Not the most, but certainly well within striking distance of all the other top tier cruisers. It also has strong enough shields. So it's ability to soak damage is right up there. It's ability to maintain threat comes down to skill points like any other build. So that's on the player. And it's ability to deal damage and keep proximity to the target (people always forget about proximity aggro). The Fleet Assault Cruiser has the setup to deal damage in the cruiser class. And is one of the more agile cruisers so it can maintain proximity easier than, say a Odyssey.
It also has enough engineering consoles to a healthy dose of armor. And engineering BOFF slots (though this is where your build diverges) to be defensive in nature.
The Fleet Assault Cruiser, by viture of being a fleet ship, is one of the better tanks in the game. I'd say what it loses in some areas, it makes up for in the damage and turn rate to be one of the top tanks if that's how you choose to fly it.
But at the end of the day, it's overkill. The tank role is a minimal role in gameplay and you can get away with a lot LESS in the encounters.
So building the ship for something else (like damage) is probably the better avenue to take.
Just, you know, the whole idea of a tank in one of these games? It's just damage soak and aggro generation and the Fleet AC can do those. It's a fine ship for tanking. Tanking just isn't needed in STO right now to the degree that the ship can specialize.
People always bad-mouth the turret build. I think those people are just PvPers.
Another issue to consider is that at high turn rates it can be hard to control your ship. Especially when you pop Evasive Maneuvers/Attack Pattern: Omega and find yourself overturning a lot and learning to adjust only for the buff to fall off and find yourself underturning to compensate.
That can vary from person to person however.