test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
Embassy [Pla] consoles incorrect damage
jarvisandalfred
Member Posts: 1,549 Bug Hunter
Here's a list of suspected issues with the plasma console's scaling/damage. Clarification as to how much of this is intended would be appreciated.
First: Damage
The base damage of a MK XIV Epic [Pla] console is 2494.4. As per this post and this clarification, the base damage should be 4x the full damage of the 'old' console, so 60 (4x15)x the damage of the console as it was before the first change to it. As the initial live value was 157.7, the base value should be 9462. As it stands, that number is significantly down.
The same issue persists at MK X and XII: Tribble value for MK X is 720.6, when it should be 2052, and XII is 886.9, when it should be 2832. I don't have XI/XIII or XIV UR consoles to test, however, I'm logically presuming the issue extends to them.
Now, if I presume that bort was referring to the current state of plasma consoles as 'old console', the ratio of predicted to on tribble becomes 3.46 for all 3 consoles, which is still significantly lower than expected.
Second problem: These consoles do not scale with weapons power. (possibly intended, as per " The damage dealt by these Consoles can no longer be increased by Consoles or most other Passive effects." - is weapons power one of those passive effects?)
Third: Not affected by +weapon damage (Nukara 2-set)
Fourth: These consoles are getting +20% cat 1 from "Enhanced Weapon Systems", a starship mastery that gives +10% all energy damage and +10% weapon damage. Presumably, this double-dipping is not as intended. I'm not positive yet, but it appears something similar may be going on with the accolade for dealing damage's 2% bonus damage
---
Just to state for clarification, here is what does appear to be working as intended:
"all damage" abilities/passives, such as Nukara Aux->Offense, APO, Ambush, and AMP, are buffing this
Edit: ETPW is yes in fact buffing this; I double checked this after EPTW was found to buff the AP torp. Props for consistency there.
TT is buffing this ability (presumably because of the skills it buffs)
+Beam tactical consoles and +Plasma tactical consoles are not buffing this dot's damage.
It does appear (at first glance through combat logs) that one console proc'ing does not trigger the others, however, (and this was rare) they can proc at the same 1/10th of a second to the same target. In addition, the proc rate appears to be close to the 1 proc/40 shots per console expected.
They are not buffing each other's damage.
No longer affected by [Dmg] modifiers (No official statement on this, I doubt this was WAI, but it is a change to note)
First: Damage
The base damage of a MK XIV Epic [Pla] console is 2494.4. As per this post and this clarification, the base damage should be 4x the full damage of the 'old' console, so 60 (4x15)x the damage of the console as it was before the first change to it. As the initial live value was 157.7, the base value should be 9462. As it stands, that number is significantly down.
The same issue persists at MK X and XII: Tribble value for MK X is 720.6, when it should be 2052, and XII is 886.9, when it should be 2832. I don't have XI/XIII or XIV UR consoles to test, however, I'm logically presuming the issue extends to them.
Now, if I presume that bort was referring to the current state of plasma consoles as 'old console', the ratio of predicted to on tribble becomes 3.46 for all 3 consoles, which is still significantly lower than expected.
Second problem: These consoles do not scale with weapons power. (possibly intended, as per " The damage dealt by these Consoles can no longer be increased by Consoles or most other Passive effects." - is weapons power one of those passive effects?)
Third: Not affected by +weapon damage (Nukara 2-set)
Fourth: These consoles are getting +20% cat 1 from "Enhanced Weapon Systems", a starship mastery that gives +10% all energy damage and +10% weapon damage. Presumably, this double-dipping is not as intended. I'm not positive yet, but it appears something similar may be going on with the accolade for dealing damage's 2% bonus damage
---
Just to state for clarification, here is what does appear to be working as intended:
"all damage" abilities/passives, such as Nukara Aux->Offense, APO, Ambush, and AMP, are buffing this
Edit: ETPW is yes in fact buffing this; I double checked this after EPTW was found to buff the AP torp. Props for consistency there.
TT is buffing this ability (presumably because of the skills it buffs)
+Beam tactical consoles and +Plasma tactical consoles are not buffing this dot's damage.
It does appear (at first glance through combat logs) that one console proc'ing does not trigger the others, however, (and this was rare) they can proc at the same 1/10th of a second to the same target. In addition, the proc rate appears to be close to the 1 proc/40 shots per console expected.
They are not buffing each other's damage.
No longer affected by [Dmg] modifiers (No official statement on this, I doubt this was WAI, but it is a change to note)
SCM - Crystal C. (S) - [00:12] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 8.63M(713.16K) - Fed Sci
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Working as intended, but we welcome feedback on it. You're correct that I failed to update that thread that the damage figures were tuned during testing, after I'd posted the original statement. We're comfortable with where these values ended up after internal iteration, and the values you're seeing are currently intended.
Intended. Weapon Power is intended only to increase weapon damage, and generally not miscellaneous procs.
It does not increase "Omega Graviton Amplifier" for example.
Also working as designed, since Plasma Consoles are not, strictly-speaking, Weapons.
This does sound like a bug, if it's accurate. Thanks for reporting it.
Cryptic - Lead Systems Designer
"Play smart!"
Is there any chance we could see the rational behind that change? Because, frankly, it's kind of crummy when I report four potential bugs about the damage, and am told that the 3 decreasing damage are WAI and the one increasing damage would not be. Perhaps if we saw where you were coming from that would help. I'm not surprised that there was some nerf to what you initially described, since my first crunch at the numbers came up with a level of excessive damage, but I'd like to see any kind of a thought process on this, some reasoning behind an arbitrary 'this looks like too much damage'.
The other things, 2 and 3, make sense, but I thought I'd throw them in to check and make sure. Same reason I posted a 'presumed currently as intended' section.
Though, I'll be sure to give an a look at things, see how they shape up.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
Too many things influenced this decision to list, but I guess I can boil it down to these 3 general considerations:
1) In our testing, we just felt it did too much damage at its baseline as a Console-related damage increase. (This portion of the decision is admittedly subjective.)
2) This new proc benefits from Crits substantially more than the old DOT version (the entirety of the damage crits, instead of one tick at a time).
3) The DOT could be cleansed. This cannot.
It should still be a noteworthy DPS boost to the build that is currently live on Holodeck.
Cryptic - Lead Systems Designer
"Play smart!"
All that dilithium wasted on buying and upgrading my Romulan Plasma beams. For a sci capt. in a sci ship that really helped with my damage output. I felt that Romulan Plasma was a good alternative to Antiproton, at least to stay competitive in this game. Perhaps maybe boosting the 2pc Plasma Circuity to make up for plasma damage loss? STO seems to be a DPS game and the incentives to use other beam types outside Antiproton or ship with less than 4 tactical consoles seem useless.
Edit: Disregard what I said about this being a nerf. From the sound of it it's getting changed to equivalent but different. However another "Sci Tool" I just remembered that unperformed compared to other of it's like are the Dyson Shield Refrequencer consoles from the Dyson reputation. The two procs that come built in to them are in my opinion don't make up for the significantly smaller science stats. Having a sci ship rigged out with 4 Shield Refrequencer [+PartGen] will under perform compared to a identical sci ship equipped with 4 very rare Particle generator consoles.
The Dyson Auto Targeting Module consoles are another console that in my opinion unperformed compared to "equivalent" tactical consoles.
Had a feeling this would be the reasoning. A switch to spikes dealing the same damage as the old DOT seemed too good to be true. I'll take a weaker spike over a stronger DOT any day, personally. Especially given the next bit...
Great work on these. I can't wait to try the changes out.
-edit-
Oh, and since I know this thread has your attention, this is off-topic but thanks so much for letting us slot primary specializations as secondaries! This is going to be a game-changer for my main, right as she's finishing up Commando and would've had nothing to spec into (saw no reason to fill out another primary tree with the previous setup, personally).
I tested my fleet long range science vessel last night on tribble with the embassy consoles combined with a secondary deflector that boosts SA +DMG. This build on the holodeck server is somewhat meek, but when used in the current tribble server, it becomes competitive in DPS output. Now, this output is not going to break top DPS records, but it does make this particular science vessel have more teeth, and fun to fly. It changes the dynamic of being able to choose the Intrepid style ships based on nostalgia of the Voyager series (in spite of its very humble DPS potential), to confidence in knowing this ship can inflict markedly better damage to the opposition than what it did before. It really gives science based players more versatility.
I also tested my Nicor on tribble with the pre-console nerf build and it was brought back to its former glory--definitely made me feel the investment value from upgrading the consoles had returned.
I want to thank the development team for working on these consoles in the timely manner as promised.
***Also, I want to add that I slotted a Romulan Plasma Beam as well and it picked up the 2.5% procs from the consoles exactly like the other types of beams. The original versions of the embassy consoles did not give the same procs to Plasma Beams as other types of beams. Plasma Beam users, to me, seem more fairly included with the benefits from these consoles than before.
Looks on the face of it reasonable; I'll crunch my own math on these and get back to you.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
Okay, I've done some runs, and here's my thoughts:
1. Subjective, sure, and my (obviously biased) opinion is that the damage is too low. I'd like to see at least a 50% buff over what's currently on tribble; especially because a few major things:'
First, they were buffed significant from Pre-DR on tribble to how they initially went live: This album of epic upgrades by sarcasmdetector highlights this rather well - a MK XIV Epic console showing only 77.1 damage on ground instead of the 157.7 that went live. This indicates that some thought went into increasing the damage between pre-DR on tribble and live at DR.
Secondly, as a result of that, a large number of players upgraded these consoles in mark and rarity; under the impression that these consoles were working as intended, as no change occurred with these for more than 3 months after DR dropped.
As a result of those things, it would be appreciated if these consoles were a bit nearer to their previous state in terms of overall effectiveness - this helped several people be capable of aSTF's or eSTF's, and let some off-meta builds be more viable, something healthy for the game, imo.
And since it didn't significantly (on average, especially compared to the bonus CrtH/CrtD they could have run in their place) buff up the elite dps'ers (RyanSTO did 171k without +Beam consoles and only one of these in a FPER, Alfie did 126k with no recluses or [pla] consoles, Felisean did over 160k in a run where the plasma consoles were less than 20k), it's not going to swing game balance significantly in the favor of those who can dps. In fact, some of the nature of plasma fire made it significantly better with a worse team, leading to an increase in people pugging - and pug success as a result.
Furthermore, one of the rather valuable things about the console is that they have +Th on them as an option; with the ShH and HuH procs being so insignificant, and threat scaling being not incredibly strong, it would be appreciated for these consoles to be doing at least close to the value of bioneural/tachyokinetic/zpec/dps consoles, otherwise it's yet another area where tanks significantly lose out on dps to gain threat, which is a bit counter productive.
I mean, this is pure opinion here, from someone who will admit to being invested in them myself, and as someone who hasn't switched for some of the reasons mentioned above.
2. Actually, the old method was much more odd in how it dealt with crits - if the first tic crit, the rest of the dot did. That, combined with the possibility of the target dying, how debuffed the target was, and how many procs you got off in the first place, made runs with these consoles highly RnG based.
3. Very good point, but not applicable in PvE; the possibility of the target dying before the whole dot triggered, however, is.
4. Very much so, as on Holodeck the consoles are lost in the variance between runs. It's nice that they'll be doing anything noticable again.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
I Kinda agree on this. tanks with +th need a bit more dps to draw aggro. If nothing else The +th should be a bit more powerful then the -th.
Also agree with this since NPCs tend to not use cleanses like Hazzard emitters. In fact most npcs rarely have more then one or two buffs at a time.
Thank you for the thorough write-up on your thoughts, but I'm going to disagree with the quoted statement on the sole following principle:
A single one of these Plasma Science Consoles offers a larger potential DPS increase than a single Tactical Console of the equivalent Mark/Quality. While ALSO offering additional skill boosts.
In fact, with the above information in mind, we have been seriously considering aiming the damage even lower.
Player expectations are definitely important to keep in mind, but they are not as important as maintaining a measure of control over the actual comparisons that drive equipment choice and progression via items.
Cryptic - Lead Systems Designer
"Play smart!"
If the damage was lowered by much you'd make them unworthy of use, aside from on sci ships who are after after the root skill. As it stands I'd say they are about right for PvE content, they do enough damage to be worth equipping but not so much that someone not using them is completely outclassed by someone who does. The results also seem to be a consistent percentage of your DPS rather than varying wildly like the old DoT proc did.
I am sure your going to hear allot of PvPers howling when these go live. As it stands 3-5 procs from a properly flown ship will kill just about any player ship, with a team of 5 using these consoles that won't take but a few seconds. Would strongly suggest a much weaker vs player version of this proc be added.
It is a SCIENCE CONSOLE that in addition to the +- threat and very large science skill bonus is adding about ~130dps PER weapon PER console! on a 8 weapon ship +1k dps from a SCIENCE console. +1k per console is probably a bit low if every target in a CSV or FAW has the same chance for damage. More like 2-4k per console. What else are you going to use? It should be good but not better than anything you would slot there.
Yes, but isn't that a fundamental issue with your tactical consoles more than these specific consoles? For example, Nadian Saturation bomb can do more damage than the entire rest of your ship (even if your ship is already outputting in the 50k+ range); isocharge can do more damage than a tac console would add; and so on.
See, here's the problem.
- Your tac consoles got a small (17.5%) increase in their damage from XII UR to XIV Epic.
- Your Assimilated Module went up by a similar factor (potentially as a relative nerf to this given the strength of the set, potentially because it was late and rushed)
- Tachyokinetic? It went up by nearly double.
- Bioneural? The same, nearly double.
- Then you have [Pla] consoles? Went up by nearly triple.
- Nadian Saturation Bomb? It went up by 43% (because of the tac console increase and the additional tac console)
- Isocharge? Quite possibly the same amount (via sci consoles)
- Weapons? Went up by ~50%.
The problem isn't the [Pla] consoles; you're just seeing it because of them because you're rebalancing them. The problem is the math behind things. You used weapon mark/rarity to scale your weapon damage up 30%, while ignoring how much tac consoles faded into the background. While not directly targeted at this, my proposal on revamping damage calculations will help solve this problem.Tac consoles are drowning in cat 1 buffs - you've got AMP (even fixed, it's 12.2%), potentially 109% from skill points, up to 270% from weapons, 10% from a warfare specialist, 2-sets (roughly 7-25%, based on weapon type), 10% from exocomp, heck, even up to 150% from your other tac consoles. This is what you're seeing; that tac consoles are not nearly as effective as they should be.
Seriously, if you have to revamp the damage calculations of everything, and delay this going live for a month, I'm okay with that. But don't take this as [Pla] needs to be nerfed, take this as our damage calculations mean tac consoles need some love.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
Yes, they have certain intrinsic design facets that, if we had to do it all over again, we would probably design differently. You can call them flaws, but that's technically a matter of opinion. And disagreeing with a design decision doesn't mean it's a bug.
If anything, the rest of the items on that list might be bugged. I wouldn't know without investigating closer.
Cryptic - Lead Systems Designer
"Play smart!"
Whether Tac consoles are the issue or everything else on the list is the issue is just a question of perspective.
Unless I'm mistaken, weapons (and everything else) used to be capped at MK X, back before warp cores. This lead to a maximum cat 1 of 326.3, with tac consoles being 26.2 as their max boost. That means that adding a 4th tac console was still a 9% boost, or 1/3 of face value. Today, with MK XIV gear, the max cat 1 is ~600. Adding a 5th tac console is a ~6.5% boost, or ~1/6th of face value. Tac consoles, which may have been the standard, are now less than half as effective than they used to be, even at fleet MK XIV Epic.
So, yes, if your standard is still tac consoles, then perhaps the standard should be revisited for consistency with its past self.
As to bugs, the rest of the consoles aren't bugged. Math based on the current game mechanics supports current game testing. I actually had to test out tactical consoles because people were getting the same results with +Plasma or +AP consoles on AP weapons, so low is the effect of tactical consoles these days. And I verified, to the best of my ability, in a highly controlled environment, that they're working as designed. But the difference of a full set can get lost in the variance between runs. Do you not see that as a problem?
I heard you said that you're looking at [Dmg]? It's got the exact same problem as tac consoles, cat 1 oversaturation. Simply put, [Dmg] mods used to be good, and still are at low levels. Interestingly enough, we've oversaturated cat 1's so much that we had to move on to cat 2's - which are getting oversaturated themselves so much that [Over] is actually a good proc, because cat 3's aren't oversaturated by their very nature.
The same thing hit tac consoles. Cat 1's became so oversaturated that we moved on to cat 2's for maximum effectiveness, or, in the case of embassy consoles (the DR alternative), Isocharge/Tet cascade (the S9 alternative), the Saturation Bomb (the RyanSTO alternative), reducing damage resistance (recluses pre-DR, IF post-DR), simply introducing other sources of damage. Since there's only so many potential consoles that give bonuses, the tac consoles obviously stayed, but their relative strength has significantly waned.
This is a logical consequence of how the power creep in the game, especially with DR, was handled. Critd/crth stacking hasn't been as apparrent, as in the end it's still the weapon doing the damage. Because these specific consoles indroduce their own sources of damage, they make easy targets. If consoles with CrtH/CrtD, Saturation Bomb, Tet cascade, Isocharge, or things that affect damage resist came up, we would have had the same conversation.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
Yeah, the main issue is that tactical consoles scale off of pre mark 13+ math (heck, probably pre-mark 10+ math, if you want to be technical), and provide their boost based on the base, uncapped, white version of whichever weapon they boost IIRC. This means that with the exponential boost in damage and HP values that mark 14 items and level 60 combat sees (pve or otherwise), that tactical consoles are underperforming with regards to the rest of the game.
By all means, if you can rebalance the entire game to put all the enemies, hull strength, healing, all the weapons, powers, gear, set bonuses, everything in line with the mark 10 tactical console linear math... I'd love that. The game wouldn't be quite so much a slog.
But I really doubt you guys have anything approaching the time for a grand rebalance of everything. I understand that tactical consoles are working as designed, but remember the conditions they were designed for. If you contrast those conditions with the conditions the game runs under currently... they just don't hold up.
I've gotten to the point where I don't even bother using tactical consoles, because at level 60 the bonus is so minuscule compared to everything else.
Whether something is WAI:
All the focus seems to be on whether these consoles are being buffed by a certain mechanic or not. However the real question is whether these consoles were intended to be tactical consoles than can be slotted in science slots or were they intended to be science consoles with a bit of bonus damage to sweeten the deal. The mechanics are just a means to an end.
About player expectations:
All the discussion seems to be about the expectations of players who have bought plasma consoles, but the expectations of ship owners don't seem to factored into the equation at all.
The very existence of "tactical science" consoles dramatically shifts the relative value of ships in the game. Ships with more science console slots become much more valuable.
Owners of science console heavy ships are getting a windfall gain, tactical console heavy ships are getting their value diluted by the competition, and engineering heavy ships are simply getting screwed.
I don't have any stats to to support this, but my bet is that the amount of resources and money spent by players to acquire their existing ships exceeds the amount of resources spent on these consoles by a VERY considerable margin...yet no thought seems to be given to the impact of any changes on the investments of ship owners.
Once this new version of the console hits holodeck, I wonder how long it'll be before someone starts a thread titled "Give my strike ship more sci slots or give me a refund!"
Making science ships more relevant is good, but should it be done by haphazardly running along with what is essentially a historical accident, or should it done via a more considered and thought-out design process utilizing separate/new game mechanics?
The impact on high DPS Scimitars:
The consoles as they are on tribble will probably increase DPS numbers by about 20% after allowing for opportunity costs. Does that mean much?...probably not. Since every other DPS scimitar will be obliged to run plasma consoles (which essentially represent cheap, no-skill required, % increases to a player's existing DPS output), they certainly aren't going to help me out-DPS anyone anytime soon.
As far DPS is concerned, everything is relative. A 100K record is meaningless if everyone else is doing 100K.
As far as content in this game is concerned, everything still dies in a blink of an eye, no practical difference there either.
The net impact? Boring build design I suppose...instead of designing Scimitar builds around 5 consoles slots (11 - 5 tac - 1 leech) I now only have 2 console slots to play with - at this point I think I deserve a refund too!
Changing the damage systems:
Great idea! - But only if it can be done without having us deal with a years worth of game breaking bugs and TRIBBLE up the balance of just about every DPS related item, ability and trait in the game.
Though I do feel that other things might deserve more attention - like fixing the damn lag in the game so people can actually play?
This new version of the plasma consoles
The biggest problem with the old version was that results were based too much on dumb luck. Hearing that someone posted a new record using a good burn was like hearing that someone won a lock box ship - Gratz dude, but what does that record mean? - Absolutely nothing.
The new version more or less fixes this random element, so I can't really see any fault with it that I'd care about. As for what DPS it does? Well it's a zero sum change for me, so I don't really care.
What's really important:
Whatever the devs decide to unleash onto holodeck, the following considerations are the most important:
- If you're going to buff everyone's DPS by 20%+ make sure you are comfortable doing this without having to scale NPC hitpoints up by 20% at some later point. The whole exercise becomes quite pointless and a complete waste of time (not only for the devs, but also the fact that DPS records become invalidated)
- Ensure as far as possible, that the holodeck release is FINAL. The people who have invested in these consoles for the DPS up to now were either naive enough to think they weren't glitched, knew they were glitched but invested to pad their numbers whilst it lasted, or convinced themselves blindly that they weren't glitched to legitimize their records. However, the new release onto holodeck will be considered by all to be WAI and signed off by the devs. If it gets nerfed later on - people will have a legitimate claim to being victims of a bait and switch scheme...plus, invalidated DPS records and league resets are very tiresome for everyone.
- MOST IMPORTANT: Fix the damn lag so there will be players left in the game to use these consoles!!!
Thank you for relieving my boredom momentarily.
Yes, thank you, I do too think its a good idea to lower their damage.
First I was considering to advice to cut the damage in half since these consoles still outperform every other consoles.
But I got a better idea.
Put a lockdown timer on them, lets say 10-15 secs cooldown.
I think this is a great idea and would make it easier to adjust it in the future, if needed of course.
Spire and AP or Plasma.
Diversity hangs her head in frustration.
Which is a good thing. Sci players are a fraction of the player base. Sci most suits my preferred playstyle, but with the DR insistence we have a main I've settled on my fed engineer.
As well, the consoles Plasma damage should be boostable by PartGens if they aren't already, given that they're Science Consoles (an especially important console slot for proper sci builds). It would still work with being nerfed on base damage, but allow Sci players a valid means of dealing a bit extra damage as opposed to Tac or Eng players, build-wise.
I disagree with part gens. Tac's stacking part gens is nothing new, TBR and Isocharge have already made it so that most tacs run at 99 to part gens. Past that, a lot of the high-dps tacs are running supremacy and leech, so they don't need the extra power from flow caps if they could run embassy [pla] part gen consoles and get more damage out of that.
This is not something that romulans without an astika can do readily, nor is it something that tanks (who need their skill points for defense) can readily do. I would much rather not have 100% part gen escorts become a meta; that can only make it harder for sci ships to actually be effective.
I do like sci consoles being worth something, and my thoughts on that have already been said.
As probably my last thoughts on this thread, Bort, I appreciate the communication back and forth, both on this and my other bug reports and also about threat in RC (that I'm about to bring up elsewhere). It is both an honor as a player that I can get your input on upcoming changes and have some communication on it, and very reassuring as a player that there are people reading and responding to bug reports right when they happen. I'm sure you'll draw your own conclusions from this thread and whatever testing or simulations you're doing, but I appreciate that there's communication on the subject and that a variety of players have been able to make their opinions known somewhere they'll be heard on the subject.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
What i find strange is that they decided to use a similar approach for t5-U/T6 ship mastery damage. The 10% kin/energy damage increase seems also based on the base damage and is not a global multiplier, the same goes for the 15% exotic on Sci ships. This boils down to around 1.6-2% damage increase for kin/energy and 3-4% for exotic.
My main problem with all dmg % in STO is the lack of communication and bad tooltips. STO is one of those games where in many cases the expected tooltip behaviour is so far off from whats happening in reality, so that you need a spreadsheet to figure out whats going on. Even EvE online has a more consistent system, where tooltips matches reality.
This is bad, since it obstructs choices. So without a spreadsheet and the proper formulas you can not do a informed choice on what alternative consoles you could use, all you can do is a wild guess based on the fact that the listed % are far from the real values. The same goes for most of the mods, they are so complicated to calculate that most follow a general rule, instead of doing informed choices themselfs, since they are unable to tell what mod does exactly what and on what scale.
No, it is not.
SCM - Hive (S) - [02:31] DMG(DPS) - @jarvisandalfred: 30.62M(204.66K) - Fed Sci
Tacs are overrated.
Game's best wiki
Build questions? Look here!
We all love our plasma doping - oops sorry, I guess plasma "derping" is the more politically correct term to use now - so bring it on!