Tac consoles Vs. Defense consoles

jlothran · August 2013

I am going to talk about the elephant in the room...

Defense consoles, whether it be hull resists or shield cap boosters have a very strong diminishing returns model that keeps them from being invulnerable. This is very understandable. What is NOT understandable is the fact that tactical consoles do NOT have any sort of diminishing returns model.

It is an impossible to create a balance between defense and offense if both are using different systems.

Having more tac consoles should be an option to allow specialization into both energy and kinetic. Putting 4 neutronium consoles on a cruiser would not be a very wise idea,..neither should putting 4 energy damage modules. Ideally, a ship with 4 tac consoles would put 2 energy and 2 kinetic. For those ships with 5 consoles, they could push a little more into energy or kinetic,.. or they may consider putting some of those tactical only slot consoles ( such as a defense turret ) in place of the 5'th.

Bringing defense and offense into the same model of returns will allow the developers to more easily balance ships as they come out. This will keep older ships viable and create a baseline for future ships.

Otherwise, we may as well create escorts with 12 tac consoles and get it over with, since the damage will be so insane that they won't even need to consider any defensive options.

Please discuss your thoughts about this situation and try to keep the trolling to a minimum. Some people may think that the pew pew is the most important thing, .. but a system like this would make all ships viable for every captain type and open up new gameplay options and build types we have never considered before.

Thanks for reading.

jetwtf · August 2013

jlothran wrote: »

I am going to talk about the elephant in the room...

Defense consoles, whether it be hull resists or shield cap boosters have a very strong diminishing returns model that keeps them from being invulnerable. This is very understandable. What is NOT understandable is the fact that tactical consoles do NOT have any sort of diminishing returns model.

It is an impossible to create a balance between defense and offense if both are using different systems.

Having more tac consoles should be an option to allow specialization into both energy and kinetic. Putting 4 neutronium consoles on a cruiser would not be a very wise idea,..neither should putting 4 energy damage modules. Ideally, a ship with 4 tac consoles would put 2 energy and 2 kinetic. For those ships with 5 consoles, they could push a little more into energy or kinetic,.. or they may consider putting some of those tactical only slot consoles ( such as a defense turret ) in place of the 5'th.

Bringing defense and offense into the same model of returns will allow the developers to more easily balance ships as they come out. This will keep older ships viable and create a baseline for future ships.

Otherwise, we may as well create escorts with 12 tac consoles and get it over with, since the damage will be so insane that they won't even need to consider any defensive options.

Please discuss your thoughts about this situation and try to keep the trolling to a minimum. Some people may think that the pew pew is the most important thing, .. but a system like this would make all ships viable for every captain type and open up new gameplay options and build types we have never considered before.

Thanks for reading.

Diminishing returns on tac consoles would hurt cruisers and science ships captained by engineers or science far more than they would escorts with a tac captain. every bit of improvement to weapons is needed for those class and ships. To remove any would make them not viable for doing anything but taking damage or support. When that happens the escorts will have nothing to fear from cruisers and become the ones doing preasure kills.

I see tac console as a specialization for offense and defense, you choose an energy type and specialize in it, if you go with a torpedo boat you would specialize in that by using a console that improves damage from torpedos. Offense is obvious but defense is killing off the smacktard thats shooting you.

engineering and science consoles on the other hand are more general purpose to be used to improve one thing or another, beit defense, movement, or healing... Whatever the build needs more of. Everyone needs to put out DPS but not everyone needs a neutronium or a shield emitter.

dahminus · August 2013

I hear what your saying, but tac consoles only buff base damage of a weapon which does not amount to much bonus...even with 4 of the same.

If the consoles would buff the enhanced power of weapons from skills then i would be with 100%.

jlothran · August 2013

Interesting points, but the point I am making is that all systems, damage and defense need to follow the same baseline mechanic. Anything that boost defense has a restriction, so even baseline increases need to follow the same restriction, in my point of view.

Once a standardized baseline has been created then tweaks to either damage or defense can be more readily made. But that is the source of this idea. Creating a universal standard makes balancing easier.

As far as it hurting cruiser, I am going to have to disagree with this one. It would be a universal change and diminishing returns have a lesser effect on those who have less consoles to use on a weapon type. Cruiser damage is more based along the lines of continual not burst. Burst would be more responsive to this change than continual dps, as I see it, or it could just neutralize each other out.

The idea is to expand build types and options. Creating a situation where people will want to buy torpedo consoles as a viable option is also good for the market. I don't know many people who even use them. Yes,.. I am sure that some people do. But for the most part, tac consoles should be something that needs to be weighed as you equip them. Right now, most people just stack as much of 1 type as possible.

This would change things quite a bit.

Thanks for your input. I will think about what you have said.

jetwtf · August 2013

And people will still stack as many as possible even with a diminish of return. getting 1 point more in damage is worth it to many people. Look at how much a MK XII purple costs compared to a MK XII Blue? A few extra hundred DPS and people are willing to pay 20+ million more for just 1 console. And sometimes that 1 purple costs as much as all the slots in blue.

The reason it will hurt Cruisers is they will be affected by it more because they have less tac consoles than escorts and with them still being stacked an Escort still has far more DPS's while the cruiser is just made more weak in DPS. Yes Alpha strike wont be as good but alpha strikes rely on crits to be a 1 shot kill. Increased defense because cruisers cant hit as hard as they did and not much decrease in DPS on escorts means they will be able to do an alpha strike and have a greater chance of doing preassure if they did not get a crit. That increases the ability to kill cruisers by escorts and makes it harder for cruisers to kill the escorts.

A better system would be to make no console have a diminish in return up to a set max % increase to prevent invulnerability where you cannot slot another console of that type. 2 of the fleet MK XII nuetroniums (84%) as a max amount of defense would be a good start. That opens up the rest of the console slots for other consoles without a loss in defense.

virusdancer · August 2013

One can make the argument that both and neither have diminishing returns.

Both Tac Consoles and Armor Consoles add the same amount, regardless of the number of consoles.

Tac Console #1 adds +30% to Mk 0/TRIBBLE base damage. So does Tac Console #2. So does #3.
Armor Console #1 adds +20 DRR. So does Armor Console #2. So does #3.

There's no diminishing returns there. Each adds the same amount.

Now though, when you calculate what that same amount means on the other hand...

Say there was nothing else involved (no skills, etc), then you'd have the following with the Armor Consoles:

#0 = 0.0%
#1 +20 DRR = 16.6% DR (it's not 20.0%)
#2 +20 more DRR = 28.3% DR (it's not 33.2%)
#3 +20 more DRR = 36.7% DR (it's not 49.8%)

Tada, diminishing returns!

But surely that doesn't apply to Tac Consoles does it?

Say we've got some VR Mk XII DHCs, 129 Weapon Training (Omega Passive), 99 Energy Weapons, and we're running 125 Weapon Power.

#0 = 1496.3 DPV
#1 +30 = 1626.9 DPV (+8.7% damage over 0 consoles)
#2 +30 = 1757.4 DPV (+8.0% damage over 1 console)
#3 +30 = 1888.0 DPV (+7.4% damage over 2 consoles)

Well, surprise surprise (for some) - that looks like diminishing returns.

Both scenarios are correct though. Diminishing returns both exist and do not exist.

Much like the Tac Consoles add the same amount to that Mk 0/TRIBBLE base damage to be used in calculating the final damage - the Armor Consoles add the same amount of DRR to be used in calculating the final damage resistance.

Much like adding Armor Consoles results in a smaller overall increase of the damage resistance - adding more Tac Consoles results in a smaller overall increase of the damage.

The issue, imho, is not with the gear - it's with the abilities.

You use an ability that affects your damage resistance? That ability feeds into the same formula at the same point that the gear does.

You use an ability that affects your damage? That ability feeds into the formula for damage at a later point than the gear does.

Here's an example using the numbers from above with some "fake" numbers. The fake numbers will be a Tac BOFF ability called X that adds +30 damage and an Eng BOFF ability called Y that adds +20 damage resistance.

Our DHCs:
1888.0 DPV + X = 2454.4 (+30%)

Our Armor:
36.7% DR + Y = 43.1% (+17.4%)

Imagine if Y worked like X instead though, eh?

36.7% DR + Y = 44.0% (+20%)

Yes, one can make the argument that diminishing returns even exists for the BOFF abilities as well. Let's add A (Tac +30) and B (Eng +20) into it...and see the difference there.

Our DHCs:
Base = 1888.0 DPV
+ (1888.0 * X) = 2454.4 (+30%)
+ (1888.0 * A) = 3020.8 (+23.1%)

Our Armor:
Base = 36.7% DR
Recalc w/Y (3 * (0.25 - (75 / (150 + 80))^2))) = 43.1% (+17.4%)
Recalc w/B (3 * (0.25 - (75 / (150 + 100))^2))) = 48.0% (+11.4%)

But since the calculations after Weapon Power are calculated off of that new pre Weapon Power base, well - each of those +30 will actually add +30. So you're looking at +60% damage. The numbers before Weapon Power (the gear) does not - because there are all those other things involved.

The Armor though? +30.8%...not +40%.

So, imho, that's where the actual discrepancy arises...with abilities, not with gear.

canisanubis · August 2013

The OP is factually incorrect in most regards. While HULL RESISTS have diminishing returns, other defensive consoles have purely linear returns, just like weapon consoles. Field Generators, Field Emitters, SIF Generators are all linear improvements to your defenses.

Tac consoles Vs. Defense consoles

Comments