test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Should bare hull resist Energy Weapons the same way Shields resist Torpedoes?

praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
Torpedoes get screwed over in that even the tiniest sliver of a shield grants a massive (I believe 75%? I might be higher, I can't remember for sure) damage resistance against the damage that torpedoes do.

Why do Beams/Cannons get a free pass and do the same damage versus shields and hull?
  • Beams have significantly larger arcs.
  • FAW does way more than Torp Spread, in damage, effect (Aggro or Passive buff) and procs.
  • Aft energy weps can fire forward (Omnis/Turrets), where as Torps can not and Mines have a short range.
  • Beams can be broadsided with; torps can not.
  • The Rate of Fire of energy weps is laughable when compared to kinetic weapons
  • You'll get significanty more procs with energy vs Kinetic
  • There are tons of traits that not only boost effectiveness of Energy Weapons, but also give them highly desirable bonus procs. Kinetic ones are few and less desirable.
  • The timed nature of Attack Patterns favors Energy Weapons more.

Yes, Energy Weps are dependent upon Weapons Power, but is power really that hard to come by nowadays? (Hint: It's not).

With all that in mind, why are there no (other than easily obtainable Weapons Power) drawbacks to using Energy Weapons versus using Torps and Mines?

Before you start, no, there is no canon precedent for this either way. In the movies/shows, Beams and Torpedoes are equally as effective against both. This mechanic (torps for hull, energy for shields) started with Star Trek Legacy and was adopted by STO.


EDIT:
kozar2 wrote: »
Why does everyone only think in absolutes? That is the problem.

Give hulls an innate 25% resistance to energy weapons.
Bump up torpedo damage by 30%.

All builds are now viable.

This solution was brought up in this thread. It's a simple and easy to implement idea that would both make torpedo builds far more viable overnight, as well as preventing the issue of having "Godmode" ships by stacking Hull Armor consoles.

Instead of buffing torp damage, another idea that I'm a huge fan of would be to implement a "sliding scale" of resistance for torpedoes vs shields. Instead of a tiny sliver of shields giving the full resistance, it should only give a fraction of the resistance that full strength shields would give.
Post edited by praxi5 on
«134

Comments

  • arincdiarincdi Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    praxi5 wrote: »
    Before you start, no, there is no canon precedent for this either way.

    That's not /entirely/ true though, is it? On the show Enterprise (yes, I know, but hey, it's canon and we have to live with it), the ship didn't even HAVE many decent torpedoes and it definitely didn't have shields. And yet, beam weapons were still effective. Also, of course, Star Trek II, the Reliant/Enterprise battle was almost all beam weapons and it tore those ships up like crazy.

    So canonically, beam weapons are effective. :) Neutering them against hull just for game balance would clash with that.

    Conversely, there's a TON of evidence in the shows that torps act exactly as we have them act. Star Trek VI, for example - the difference between a torp hitting a shield versus hitting the hull when shields collapsed was HUGE, and they definitely made a very big deal out of it.

    All of that said, it's not like we need to rely on canon too much when we're 40 years ahead of it. It's as simple as "hey, we've developed new metal X to build our starships, beam weapons practically reflect off of them" and call it a day. Cryptic gets to sell Tier 7 ships out of the new metal and make a TRIBBLE ton (because you know that's how they'd release it, of course), and we get a more balanced weapons system idea.

    But honestly, I don't see a massive influx of beamboats out there. A few people go with it, but most of us like our torps because it FEELS quicker, watching hull drop multiple points in one hit as opposed to pecking them to death. Plus there's a whole feel to that strategy, "knock the shields down and unleash the torpedo spread NOW", that's really a lot of the fun in space combat. Even if beams are inherently superior, they're less FUN.

    Tl;dr Why fix a "problem" that isn't really affecting anyone?
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,009 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    "Should bare hull resist Energy Weapons the same way Shields resist Torpedoes?"

    In my opinion, yes. It makes sense and requires a more dynamic gameplay.

    EDIT: Of course, the type of armour you choose is important. The poster above mentioned massive hull damage due to energy weapons - they still do damage and I'd figure if you slot a disruptor armour and are hit with polarons you still take significant damage. Even disruptors would DO damage, but a lot less.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • voivodjevoivodje Member Posts: 436 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Now, I too am the oddball, running an actual Torpedo/Mine boat.
    However, the torpedo in ST is not meant to be the primary weapon, or better, was not meant.
    Theoretically, one ran a laser bank, or some other form to kill shields, and then torp the hell out of the now shield-open vessel.

    But like with virtually everything in ST: it all changed, changed more, and then some.
    They were masters in contradicting their own stuff.
    So yeah, I'm not sure what to say on this topic, I guess.

    Both options are viable, when it comes to ST anti-lore. XD
  • driveclubfandriveclubfan Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Praxi5's plan is to annhilate the forums by pointing out all the existing flaws or overabused AoE mechanics. I like that. :D

    To me yes hull has to resist as much as torpedoes do on bare hull. But this way PvErs would have to deal with loading a torpedo up front and TRIBBLE their AoE gimmicks like FAW, while PvPers would hardly get to get a kill because of the healcreep there is, which has been amplified by iconian rep.
    But PvP is dead so it doesn't matter.

    Do I care about this in the end? No I don't. I'm witnessing from outside the long list of fails of STO. lol
  • spyralpegacyonspyralpegacyon Member Posts: 408 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Praxi5 at the dead horse, the bat swinging.

    Unless you have the cash to donate to Cryptic to completely revamp space combat from the ground up, broadside beam spam will always be superior. FAW, weapon power, crit rates, skill points, and recharge times will all have to be fundamentally rebuilt to give cannons and torps more equality.
    tumblr_n1hmq4Xl7S1rzu2xzo2_400.gif
  • edited April 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • zathri83zathri83 Member Posts: 514 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Posting in a pvp thread that belongs in the pakled very pakled forums and not General Discussion.
  • jellico1jellico1 Member Posts: 2,719
    edited April 2015
    Hull should TRIBBLE over energy weapons like shields TRIBBLE over torpedos

    That would be balance wouldn't it ?

    Scratch that then.............balance isn't a thing cryptic does
    Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
    Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
    Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng

    JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
  • samt1996samt1996 Member Posts: 2,856 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    There is something that yall are forgetting... I can easily run 55-60% resists in an engineering escort and I've seen cruiser builds with 75% resists. It's not hard, just expensive and/ or time consuming to do. So, adding a significant resistance to hull would make it possible to build a cruiser that is almost impervious to energy weapons. PVP aside this would still make player ships VERY powerful. If they keep they're shields up they would be practical invincible to torpedoes as well so... Bad idea.

    That being said, I like your concept. Energy weapons are precise but low yielded shot while torpedoes are very destructive. What we need is a new mechanic to reflect this. I think they should reevaluate the crew mechanic, torpedoes kill a lot of crew you see. Perhaps if they revamped this torpedoes would have that special effect that energy Weapons do not.

    My phone is really messed up please excuse any errors.
  • spyralpegacyonspyralpegacyon Member Posts: 408 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    I really wish they'd buff torpedoes.

    But, the new boff skills do show love to torpedoes. And I am grateful for that.

    You'd have to find a way to balance torps out against overcapped energy weapons, and even then balance them out against bad rolls. We've meta'd out one shot wonders.
    tumblr_n1hmq4Xl7S1rzu2xzo2_400.gif
  • demonicaestheticdemonicaesthetic Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Should bare hulls resist directed energy weapons the way shields resist projectiles?

    HELL NO.

    Projectiles do less damage against shields because they are basically a projectile, explosives, proximity based damage, kinetic etc...

    It's throwing a cannon ball at a rubber sheet...

    In addition if you tried making bare metal resistant to directed energy weapons, I suspect the remaining pvp diehards would lynch you because many of them do not use torps in their builds, all beam boats.

    Endless cries about "dumb pve torp users" trying to nerf their "leet pvp bfaws".

    Trust me, buy armoured underpants before suggesting this where they can hear you.
    <center><font size="+5"><b>Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day...
    Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life...</b></size></center>
  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 7,897 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    They just seem to hate torpedoes for some reason...I don't know why. They made this Plasma energy torpedo recently...but almost no one is going to use it because it is destructable...so that is probably going to be their excuse why they wont make more energy damage torpedoes.

    They just hate them plain and simple...nothing in canon to support that torpedoes had little to no affect on shields.
    Can't have a honest conversation because of a white knight with power
  • jellico1jellico1 Member Posts: 2,719
    edited April 2015
    As far as canon is concerened torpedos hit harder than energy weapons

    But STO isn't canon just the looks of a few ships are :P
    Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
    Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
    Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng

    JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
  • burstorionburstorion Member Posts: 1,750 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Change energy and the rage will be biblical in scale...

    ..so please do it after I get my popcorn ready :)
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,009 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Should bare hulls resist directed energy weapons the way shields resist projectiles?

    HELL NO.

    Projectiles do less damage against shields because they are basically a projectile, explosives, proximity based damage, kinetic etc...

    It's throwing a cannon ball at a rubber sheet...

    In addition if you tried making bare metal resistant to directed energy weapons, I suspect the remaining pvp diehards would lynch you because many of them do not use torps in their builds, all beam boats.

    Endless cries about "dumb pve torp users" trying to nerf their "leet pvp bfaws".

    Trust me, buy armoured underpants before suggesting this where they can hear you.

    At least in canon treknology that's not true. Photon torpedoes are far from "cannon balls", they aren't dealing kinetic damag either. They create a matter/anti-matter reaction, they don't "punch" through armour like a cannon ball would. Unshielded starships would take severe damage/be destroyed even when they weren't taking a direct hit.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • thenoname711thenoname711 Member Posts: 204 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Removing the damage penalty vs shields would be the best from my point of view. Torpedoes are already limited by the 1 second global CD that starts on all your other torpedoes to prevent firing them all at once.
    (this comes from energy weapons only user)

    At the same time however, I would also remove decreasing-damage-over-range "feature" from cannons.
    Gameserver not found.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,009 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    jellico1 wrote: »
    As far as canon is concerened torpedos hit harder than energy weapons

    But STO isn't canon just the looks of a few ships are :P

    They should print that on the box/download page as a disclaimer :D
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • jaturnleyjaturnley Member Posts: 1,218 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    samt1996 wrote: »
    There is something that yall are forgetting... I can easily run 55-60% resists in an engineering escort and I've seen cruiser builds with 75% resists. It's not hard, just expensive and/ or time consuming to do. So, adding a significant resistance to hull would make it possible to build a cruiser that is almost impervious to energy weapons. PVP aside this would still make player ships VERY powerful. If they keep they're shields up they would be practical invincible to torpedoes as well so... Bad idea.

    This. I have my KDF Eng running a Recluse with this build, set up to draw aggro from the elite mesh weavers. In PvE, shields or no shields doesn't matter on that boat - resistances are so high that nothing short of the CE's burst attack followed by multiple fragments hitting it before I can trigger MW can take it out. Anti-beam can be done, it just means you don't get to do as much DPS so people don't do it.
  • kozar2kozar2 Member Posts: 602 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Why does everyone only think in absolutes? That is the problem.

    Give hulls an innate 25% resistance to energy weapons.
    Bump up torpedo damage by 30%.

    All builds are now viable.
  • edited April 2015
    This content has been removed.
  • demonicaestheticdemonicaesthetic Member Posts: 3 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    angrytarg wrote: »
    At least in canon treknology that's not true. Photon torpedoes are far from "cannon balls", they aren't dealing kinetic damag either. They create a matter/anti-matter reaction, they don't "punch" through armour like a cannon ball would. Unshielded starships would take severe damage/be destroyed even when they weren't taking a direct hit.

    Matter/Anti-Matter reaction is mutual destruction, the whole E=MC^2 thing... BANG...

    An outward rush of heat energy and kinetic damage from other matter in the vicinity of the reaction being accelerated to C Fractional values, basically the torps casing is turned into near light speed atomic shrapnel.

    Ships take severe damage from near misses because its a blast area affect, from the original matter/anti-matter reaction point.

    You reduce said damage by keeping the blast further from your ship, so the torp hits your shields, detonates away from the hull, rather than hitting the hull and bang or even worse, punching though the hull and bang, inside the ship.

    Forget TV show plot can on, and check out what said canon is actually referring to in scientific terms. Matter/anti-Matter is just fancy high end explosive, H-bomb Plus.

    Edit.

    A m/am reaction would also put out large quantities of hard radiation, gamma, xrays, radio, as well as heat and visible light...

    Unshielded crew members close to a torp blast area would suffer burns and radiation sickness if they survived the blast it's self
    <center><font size="+5"><b>Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day...
    Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life...</b></size></center>
  • trennantrennan Member Posts: 2,839 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Hmm someone seems to be forgetting that hull plating with energy resists are in the game. If you haven't been using them. That's just your own fault.
    Mm5NeXy.gif
  • driveclubfandriveclubfan Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    trennan wrote: »
    Hmm someone seems to be forgetting that hull plating with energy resists are in the game. If you haven't been using them. That's just your own fault.

    That's not the point. Shields innately resists kinetic damage.

    Hull does not innately resist energy damage.
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Having tac consoles that only* boost energy XOR projectile damage and the preeminence of energy *cough*BFAW*cough* means mixed loadouts will never be optimal.


    *AP torpedo aside

    If tac consoles started running into DR like Armor consoles do so you wouldn't be gimping yourself by running half energy and half projectile consoles, it would start bringing mixed loadouts into play. But right now, you're all energy or all projectile.

    Command would be awesome for a torpedo boat but you've got to proc it with an energy weapon and non-torpedo boats don't run torpedoes as energy doesn't suffer against hulls. I can see how they wanted to encourage a more canon loadout but the tac consoles don't support it.
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • dpsloss88dpsloss88 Member Posts: 765 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Would be a nice balance change which would suddenly make torpedoes viable....
  • jaturnleyjaturnley Member Posts: 1,218 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Having tac consoles that only* boost energy XOR projectile damage and the preeminence of energy *cough*BFAW*cough* means mixed loadouts will never be optimal.


    *AP torpedo aside

    If tac consoles started running into DR like Armor consoles do so you wouldn't be gimping yourself by running half energy and half projectile consoles, it would start bringing mixed loadouts into play. But right now, you're all energy or all projectile.

    Command would be awesome for a torpedo boat but you've got to proc it with an energy weapon and non-torpedo boats don't run torpedoes as energy doesn't suffer against hulls. I can see how they wanted to encourage a more canon loadout but the tac consoles don't support it.

    There are ways to make a build with massive torp damage while not sacrificing the energy tac consoles, especially if you use the grav photon. Stack that with the set bonuses from the voth weapon 2/3 piece, the KHG/Adapted MACO 2-piece and the undine weapon 2-piece sets and maybe the ferengi torp console if you have room and you will not be disappointed with the torp damage while leaving your tac slots all free. Add in a 360 beam with BO to go knock-knock on the facing shield just before your overrun and your cannons and torp will absolutely wreak havoc.

    Yeah, it's not as simple as just slapping 8 beams on your ship and spamming FAW, but it's not boring as TRIBBLE like that is either. It also doesn't generate as much area aggro, and is a lot less tolerant of mistakes made by your opponent being burst damage vs sandpapering.
  • mustrumridcully0mustrumridcully0 Member Posts: 12,963 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    The exact values I am not sure about, but I think the general idea - if torpedoes are less effective against shields, energy weapons should be less effective against hull - seems solid to me.
    Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    jaturnley wrote: »
    Yeah, it's not as simple as just slapping 8 beams on your ship and spamming FAW, but it's not boring as TRIBBLE like that is either. It also doesn't generate as much area aggro, and is a lot less tolerant of mistakes made by your opponent being burst damage vs sandpapering.

    So with just two rep sets and a lobi console you can be almost as good as an off-the-exchange beam boat.
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • coupaholiccoupaholic Member Posts: 2,188 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    It would make more sense if it were the other way around.

    Energy shields absorb the energy from energy weapons. Hulls absorb the impact of kinetic weapons.
  • praxi5praxi5 Member Posts: 1,562 Arc User
    edited April 2015
    Another idea is to reduce the amount of resistance shields give proportional to their strength.

    If full shields give 75%, then maybe shields that are "red" should only give 15-20%?
    samt1996 wrote: »
    There is something that yall are forgetting... I can easily run 55-60% resists in an engineering escort and I've seen cruiser builds with 75% resists. It's not hard, just expensive and/ or time consuming to do. So, adding a significant resistance to hull would make it possible to build a cruiser that is almost impervious to energy weapons. PVP aside this would still make player ships VERY powerful. If they keep they're shields up they would be practical invincible to torpedoes as well so... Bad idea.

    That being said, I like your concept. Energy weapons are precise but low yielded shot while torpedoes are very destructive. What we need is a new mechanic to reflect this. I think they should reevaluate the crew mechanic, torpedoes kill a lot of crew you see. Perhaps if they revamped this torpedoes would have that special effect that energy Weapons do not.

    My phone is really messed up please excuse any errors.

    This is a very valid point. Resistances might need reworked as well. But, someone else posted a this solution (see quote below).
    kozar2 wrote: »
    Why does everyone only think in absolutes? That is the problem.

    Give hulls an innate 25% resistance to energy weapons.
    Bump up torpedo damage by 30%.

    All builds are now viable.

    This is actually a really simple and elegant solution. I like it.
    Praxi5 at the dead horse, the bat swinging.

    Unless you have the cash to donate to Cryptic to completely revamp space combat from the ground up, broadside beam spam will always be superior. FAW, weapon power, crit rates, skill points, and recharge times will all have to be fundamentally rebuilt to give cannons and torps more equality.

    Ideally, yes, a full re-work of mechanics would be the best thing to happen to this game in a loooong time.

    But, in lieu of that, there are a few relatively easy fixes they could do to free us from the 'RAWR FAWSMASH!!!!' monotony.
    Praxi5's plan is to annhilate the forums by pointing out all the existing flaws or overabused AoE mechanics. I like that. :D

    You're onto me :P
Sign In or Register to comment.