test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Broadside weapons.
kabutotokugawa
Member Posts: 637 Arc User
While playing in the "Battle of Procyon 5" map last night with my T-5U Dreadnought cruiser a though occurred to me. The 70-degree "broadside" effect that is supposed to work in this game, does not work very well. In fact, ships with a slow turn-rate that mount the maximum of eight-weapons (four-forward, four aft) seem less powerful now with the addition of the new heavy weapons on escorts. With the addition of the new "heavy weapon" slot for escorts (which I am enjoying on my escorts) I was thinking that cruisers (especially the slow turn-rate types) really could use some broadside slots (maybe one port and one starboard).
However, those slots should probably have limited types of weapons allowed (only weapons with a tight firing arc of 90-degrees or less, maybe even allow dual- and dual-heavy cannons on the broadsides) so as not to unbalance things any further than the game already is (escorts are now the most powerful ships in the game).
In classic Star Trek lore (and in the new Star Trek) most of the capitol-ships do have broadside weapons (on the saucers for federation ships, on the main hull for Klingon and Romulan).
Here is a good example:
As you can see the galaxy class has two broadside banks and one ventral bank that fires port and starboard (so three arrays).
So it makes sense for ships with horrid turn rates (less than 8) to have some kind of broadside weapons.
The power drain from two additional weapon slots will help balance the cruisers against escorts and science vessels, while still giving these ships a much needed boost in terms of DPS.
OR...
Perhaps a secondary weapon slot that uses a console to modify the ship's weapon arc coverage (meaning that existing weapons would be modified to cover more percentage in their firing arc. Say in increments of 10% up to 90% more so a beam-array could cover 360-degrees like an omni-weapon or turret, but would require a suitable, weapon-type specific (meaning bank, cannon, or array), console (in a new slot) that modifies the firing-arcs.
A third option would be to have an auxiliary or secondary maneuvering engine (like the secondary deflector array on some ships) that allows for a higher turn rate (though that would not solve the lack of the broadside effect working as it is supposed to). Current "inertia" or other turn-rate modifiers are far too low to be effective (when they actually work, which I imagine is a bug in the game). I've had "combat" impulse engines with a +10 to inertia not give the modifier to my Dreadnought cruiser T-6 consistently. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't and if I'm in a PVE-map I can't log out and log back in to reset it. The modifier to turn rate is also too low to have any appreciable effect. Instead of the +10, maybe it should be modified to a +10% for the inertia bonus on impulse engines.
These are just suggestions to help put some balance back into the game now that we have escorts with heavy weapons, and new damage types (radiation, electrical, etc.) If cruisers, dreadnoughts, and battlecruisers are supposed to be capitol ships, then I shouldn't be able to blast them into dust in a few seconds in my Akira-type heavy escort. As someone that uses both types of ships for different missions and PVE-maps, that just doesn't seem right. The advantage of an escort should be its maneuverability and its speed. When escorts have equal hit-points, carry fighters, and have more powerful weapons than cruisers in addition to their speed an agility, the cruisers are no longer useful and thus lose their appeal to players.
Cruisers need some work to bring the game mechanics back into balance.
Science vessels need work also, but that's another discussion entirely.
However, those slots should probably have limited types of weapons allowed (only weapons with a tight firing arc of 90-degrees or less, maybe even allow dual- and dual-heavy cannons on the broadsides) so as not to unbalance things any further than the game already is (escorts are now the most powerful ships in the game).
In classic Star Trek lore (and in the new Star Trek) most of the capitol-ships do have broadside weapons (on the saucers for federation ships, on the main hull for Klingon and Romulan).
Here is a good example:
As you can see the galaxy class has two broadside banks and one ventral bank that fires port and starboard (so three arrays).
So it makes sense for ships with horrid turn rates (less than 8) to have some kind of broadside weapons.
The power drain from two additional weapon slots will help balance the cruisers against escorts and science vessels, while still giving these ships a much needed boost in terms of DPS.
OR...
Perhaps a secondary weapon slot that uses a console to modify the ship's weapon arc coverage (meaning that existing weapons would be modified to cover more percentage in their firing arc. Say in increments of 10% up to 90% more so a beam-array could cover 360-degrees like an omni-weapon or turret, but would require a suitable, weapon-type specific (meaning bank, cannon, or array), console (in a new slot) that modifies the firing-arcs.
A third option would be to have an auxiliary or secondary maneuvering engine (like the secondary deflector array on some ships) that allows for a higher turn rate (though that would not solve the lack of the broadside effect working as it is supposed to). Current "inertia" or other turn-rate modifiers are far too low to be effective (when they actually work, which I imagine is a bug in the game). I've had "combat" impulse engines with a +10 to inertia not give the modifier to my Dreadnought cruiser T-6 consistently. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't and if I'm in a PVE-map I can't log out and log back in to reset it. The modifier to turn rate is also too low to have any appreciable effect. Instead of the +10, maybe it should be modified to a +10% for the inertia bonus on impulse engines.
These are just suggestions to help put some balance back into the game now that we have escorts with heavy weapons, and new damage types (radiation, electrical, etc.) If cruisers, dreadnoughts, and battlecruisers are supposed to be capitol ships, then I shouldn't be able to blast them into dust in a few seconds in my Akira-type heavy escort. As someone that uses both types of ships for different missions and PVE-maps, that just doesn't seem right. The advantage of an escort should be its maneuverability and its speed. When escorts have equal hit-points, carry fighters, and have more powerful weapons than cruisers in addition to their speed an agility, the cruisers are no longer useful and thus lose their appeal to players.
Cruisers need some work to bring the game mechanics back into balance.
Science vessels need work also, but that's another discussion entirely.
"Morbius. Morbius!.....Something is approaching from the southwest. It is now quite close."
I'm a graphic design artist by trade. Check out my gallery on deviantart:
http://kodai-okuda.deviantart.com/gallery/
I'm a graphic design artist by trade. Check out my gallery on deviantart:
http://kodai-okuda.deviantart.com/gallery/
0
Comments
That aside, I agree that the large cruisers need something unique to make playing them more interesting, and it should not be yet another passive bonus. Science ships habe Sensor analysis as ability and secondary deflectors as item. Escorts habe a "heavy" weapon as item, they need a ability. Cruisers have comnands as ability, they need an item. However, broadside weapons is not the thing I would choose, simply because it is so unfitting for the setting (if that is of any meaning at this point). A secondary warp core came up in the past, yet that would mean just more passive boni. Cruisers should have gotten the "heavy" weapon and escorts something else, really.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Being able to slot 8 BA's just means your ship has access to firing a certain number of beam shots from any array Shard-points on the model. Just the same as you don't actually need 8 torp tubes on a model to slot 8 different torpedoes.
Cryptic decided a sci ship would be least well armed, because it gets magic to play with, so it gets 6 guns. Just because Voyager actually has more than 6 guns don't mean a dang thing here. It's a science ship so it get stuck like that.
Cruisers are the biggest ships, so they have more room for guns, more room for batteries and ammunition store. Therefore they get 8, the max number. Even though some cruisers in canon have way more that that.
Escorts are in the middle of these two extremes. They are faster than a cruiser bu they can't hold the same number of guns or they'd be overpowered and make both cruisers and sci ships obsolete.
What you see in game on your ship's stat tab is a very rough idea of what the devs think the ship would equate to onscreen, but not an exact copy with matching hard-points, weapon numbers etc. You have to sacrifice some realism when you make a game of the mechanics get too complex.
rapid torpedo launch, rapid shots from a single 300+ degree main bank, and from 2 pylon mounts.
But hey, yes i want a scimitar with ~50 disruptor cannons and ~30 torpedo launcher (exact numbers might differ^^).. would just instant kill everything in the game available right now
ingame: @Felisean
That aside, I agree that the large cruisers need something unique to make playing them more interesting, and it should not be yet another passive bonus. Science ships habe Sensor analysis as ability and secondary deflectors as item. Escorts habe a "heavy" weapon as item, they need a ability. Cruisers have comnands as ability, they need an item. However, broadside weapons is not the thing I would choose, simply because it is so unfitting for the setting (if that is of any meaning at this point). A secondary warp core came up in the past, yet that would mean just more passive boni. Cruisers should have gotten the "heavy" weapon and escorts something else, really.[/quote]
I like the idea of escorts needing another ability and cruisers needing another item. Cruisers should get a new dedicated torpedo(s) slot that can fire fore and aft. All cruisers in the shows used torpedos as their heavy hitting weapon. In STO people use beams for firing arc and since torpedos are underpowered anyway it would add a better weapon dynamic to the game allowing them to fire more frequently. Since most enemies redistribute shields, it would be OP but would help take advantage of drops in shields with more chances to fire torpedos, esp. if it had its own cool-down.
Isn't necessarily true in terms of PVE (where DPS is more prevalent). The new heavy weapons aren't that all powerful given that their damage isn't modified by much (by Cryptic's intention). Escorts were given heavy weapons because in PVE, they are lagging behind Beam Array (FAW) cruisers in terms of DPS. Given that their role is supposedly to DPS, this change was welcome. However in all honesty, the Heavy Weapons aren't enough to close the gap. Many of the heavy weapons are pretty weak (just slightly ahead of a single turret in most cases) and in some builds, actually result to a DPS loss when slotted due to the power drain they create.
In terms of PVE at least, the DPS boards are mostly dominated by Cruisers (or variants of Cruisers) running Beam Arrays and therefore likely broadsiding. In fact, of the top 10, only 1 is using a cannon build (which I suspect is a Scimitar) and he is only at #7. Broadsiding in PVE with (single) Beam Arrays isn't a problem at all.
In terms of PVP, where spike (not sustained DPS) reigns supreme, then fast cannon escorts do have the advantage over slow Cruisers. But slow cruisers have the advantage of long term survivability due to it's better Engineering seating and higher hull HP.
So is this a PVP issue or a PVE one?
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Ok, I'm going by publicly available parses from the SCM tables.
To compare that to a single Terran Taskforce Beam Array, the TTFA did 11.2k DPS on its own in the top ISA parse. That's 11.2k DPS on normal firing mode. In addition to that, it did an additional 16.9k DPS under FAW3.
To compare that further, that player's normal Disruptor Arrays did 27.2k. Since he is running 1 TTFA and 1 Kinetic Cutting Beam, that would mean he had only 6 of these on his ship. That would amount to 4.5k DPS each under normal firing. On top of that, it did an additional 55.6k DPS from FAW3 or about 9.3k DPS each on FAW. That would mean each beam was doing about 14k DPS each.
So yeah, Cruisers, and Beam Arrays do not have a shortage of DPS in PVE.
Escorts IMO are not as powerful as Cruisers in PVE. They can have the theoretical higher damage output, but they lack the survivability Cruisers will give in sustained firefights commonly found in PVE. Since they cannot stay in the fight longer, they'll be beaten by Cruisers in most PVE DPS races. IMO the edge goes to Battlecruisers and Dreadnoughts even. If the escort is running Cannons or DBB, they won't even have the coverage a standard BA FAW Cruiser would give (hence why tanks generally run single BAs with FAW).
Yeah I was following the discussion (since you opened it actually) but what I do not agree on, is that Cruisers are behind Escorts in PVE. I'll agree that in PVP Escorts are better due to their defense (from speed) and ability to go in and out of combat really quickly give them the edge.
But in high end PVE, cruisers give the best balance in firepower and survivability in both my experience playing in the mid to high end of all 3 ship classes and what the DPS tables show. If there is a jack-of-all-trades ship in STO, they are the Cruisers. Try doing an all Escort HSE or an all Escort Fez for example. That would be so much harder than doing an all Cruiser or all Science Vessel HSE or Fez. In fact, I'd say Escorts are behind even Science Vessels.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Tooltip values can be extremely misleading, so no matter if it shows 1000 DPS on a heavy weapon, your *actual* DPS (that is done to an enemy and read by parser) is going to be TRIBBLE to mediocre (depends on player and type of heavy weapon used).
And as other expert players have told you here, no, escorts are not too powerful.
For fed players, the strongest ship in game is most probably Science T6 Odyssey, the Yorktown. For roms, it's T6 Scimitar. For klinks, I'm not sure, but I doubt it's something other than 8-weapon (battle) cruiser style ship.
U.S.S. Buteo Regalis - Brigid Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer build
R.R.W. Ri Maajon - Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird build
My Youtube channel containing STO videos.
Also honorable mention to the Krenim Imperium Warship for feds.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Already this sentence proves how clueless you are about what's actually going on in the game. But then again, why did I expect anything else from forums?
U.S.S. Buteo Regalis - Brigid Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer build
R.R.W. Ri Maajon - Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird build
My Youtube channel containing STO videos.
Again, I think this is a flawed assumption because both ship types have their own strengths and weaknesses in PVP and PVE scenarios.
It does not.
Again, this is not a good indication of balance between the ship classes (based on the weapons they can carry). You cannot ignore the skills used to modify these weapons' output. For example, a 4/4 beam array build with FAW will essentially have a 360° coverage for the duration of that FAW, with each beam hitting 2 targets each. A Cannon setup using CSV will only hit 3 targets within a cone around your primary target.
Just there alone, Beam Arrays are ahead in the DPS front (hence why many Escorts run beams as well for PVE). If cannon-escorts are truly that much superior in DPS compared to cruisers, you'll be sure to see all those DPS'ers jumping into the bandwagon... but they are not. The guys who dive deeply into spreadsheets are running FAW cruisers.
Also, Cryptic devs have stated on several podcasts that the reason why they've added Heavy Weapons to Escorts is because Escorts are behind all the other ship types in terms of DPS. The Heavy Weapon was their way of equalizing Escorts with Cruisers and Science Vessels. Their own metrics say that Escorts are behind Cruisers. The DPS charts say that Escorts are behind Cruisers. Those are 2 (3 if you count the other DPS league) independent sources with empirical proof that Escorts were behind Cruisers.
Again, this is a flawed conclusion because nobody runs around any map just firing normal shots. You have to put the powers that affect the weapons into account.
You do know that for the very basic DPS builds, adding a torpedo will result to a DPS loss right? You are splitting your consoles, your BOff and DOff abilities as well as your traits to make the most of either. There are certain builds where a torpedo is beneficial (like using the Nausicaan Disruptor torpedo with the array for the set bonus) but for general energy weapon DPS setups, you do not want to slot a torp.
Again, buffing cruisers at this point would make them above the other ships as of the current setting. Right now, cruisers are in a good middle ground.
This opens another can of worms (PVE vs PVP balance). PVE and PVP in this game are so far apart right now. IMO the main advantage Escorts have over Cruisers in PVP is speed (and the associated defense boost). Also, PVP is more of a spike race. A cruiser excells at sustained DPS, while an Escort does spike damage really well.
Generally, a BFAW/CSV build works great in PVE, while a BO/CRF/SS build works better in PVP. The raw DPS of each weapon type has little to do with the final balance of these ships IMO. It's how powers, traits and captain abilities interact with the environment the weapon is used that matters.
For example, say you do add arc for DBBs when used in Cruisers, then while you'll end up a bit more competitive in fighting escorts in PVP, you'd be making Cruisers so much more OP in PVE. Likewise, if you nerf Cannons for PVP, you'll knock Cannons back to where they were last year in PVE (lackluster) and bring us all back squarely into BFAW Online.
See above.
No, not really. A properly built Sci ship will do well in both PVE and PVP. I'd say Sci ships are actually ahead of both Cruisers and Escorts in terms of adaptability to different scenarios.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
The answer is Heavy Beam Arrays for cruisers.
Make em like you see in TNG. Shoots 1 beam, not pew-pew-pew-pew. Longer animation duration that standard and hits 4 times as hard, maybe a 'freebie' buff like DHCs have for their hitting harder-ness. I could see being hit by 8 quadruple strength beams being a broadside you'd prefer not to take.
That is the problem with your argument though... The weapon base numbers do not tell the entire story of the performance between these ships.
It does not. The TTFA does not (in your words) "need" the kinetic cutting beam. Besides, the reason for slotting the Kinetic Cutting beam for today's builds have nothing to do with 360 coverage. The fact that it is a kinetic weapon and unable to be upgraded with any of the firing modes is actually a DPS loss for that slot.
Highlight in the above quote is mine since you talk about ignoring "specialized builds" then proceed to talk about your own "specialized build". Core Assault runs are generally not a good indication of ship performance because a vast majority of players playing in Core Assault do not know how to fight other players. The basic player does not even know how to leverage the main advantage of cruisers, which is their ability to tank out damage.
This is funny... since I almost made a joke last night on whether or not you are in 2017 with me, because much of your arguments sound like they were from the era when STO was called "Escorts Online".
Here you go. It is here (at just after 1:12)
http://priorityonepodcast.com/po315/
It increases your DPS output yes, but not to the extent BFAW will simply due to the map coverage BFAW gives. Remember, CSV limits you to 3 targets. Your primary target, and 2 more in a cone around it. Whereas FAW will simply hit everything in range of your ship.
This is why FAW has been popular for years now and the tool of choice for the top end of the DPS'ers. It's only with the S13 rebalance that Cannons have come back to close the gap (if not still a bit behind).
So you're comparing your MkXIV cannon builds with MarkXII common weapons?
Even for basic builds (or one may argue that especially for basic builds), a torpedo on a primarily energy-based build will be a DPS loss. Torpedoes require very specific builds to work well.
Except that in cannon, the Defiant (and the basis of STO's Escort class) is the first Federation warship. It was built in response to the huge losses the Federation took in the Battle of Wolf 359. It was built with firepower in mind.
This all boils down to the parameters of the test. Against a single target, sure! Cannons and potentially escorts will mow that down faster than a Cruiser using BFAW. But when you move to more NPC-dense maps (which is a majority of the PVE maps in the game), you'll start to see Cruisers edge out Escorts.
Remember how DPS is calculated. It's not on a per target basis, but a total amount of damage per second. To simplify an example:
See how coverage multiplies DPS now?
I do not think you know exactly how powerful Science Vessels are in relation to other ship classes now in S13. They were only partially behind Cruisers in S12. With S13's changes, Sci ships are some of the deadliest ships in the game for both PVE and PVP. As a player whose played mostly high-end sci ship builds for the last 3 years or so, I can tell you that they do not need further buffs.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
Ok, this is good. We are now on the same page regarding this which is IMO, the root of all misunderstanding in this post.
Now to address that...
True, in a 1 vs 1 scenario, a Cannon-equipped escort will out perform a broadsiding Cruiser (but not by much really especially with the buff to BO, which is another story). But in a map of multiple enemies, a team of FAW-broadsiding cruisers will outdo a team of CSV escorts primarily due to coverage. In the example above, a team of 5 Cruisers with identical piloting and gear would theoretically drop a collective 25k DPS on each target, in a 360-arc.
Escorts, to bring their 10k DPS damage to each target will have to maneuver and aim. In the time it would take do do that, the cruisers would have already vaped everything around them (hence the number of threads complaining about DPS FAW builds vaping targets all over this forum). The more target rich the environment gets, the more BFAW gets ahead. So in this instance, there is a pro and con to both. Escorts would excel at picking off small groups of targets, while BFAW builds would be better for clearing maps.
That right there indicates to me there is an inherent balance between the 2 ship types. You've got one set of ships capable of dealing better concentrated damage, and another set better suited for dealing damage spread-out.
For basic gameplay (normals and advanced) this is fine, since the damage requirements for such maps are generally low. It's when you get to Elites that mixed builds start to suffer, unless the build is specifically specialized to utilized that mixed setup through various synergies.
Yes I am familiar with Ryan's work and they have been very useful as a guide in the past. While some of the things he covered before are still relevant today (mostly on the piloting side), a lot has changed since the skill revamp and the subsequent space balance passes were made.
Which brings up the question, what would they use then? BO works very differently now. An 8-DBB broadside BO would be devastating (and unbalanced) in PVP I would think.
The main problem with DBB in my experience is the loss of damage for having to run omni-beams. Omni-beams not only have a lower innate damage, they also come with less favorable mods and even less slot-able flavors. For most cruisers, it is better to run 8 arrays and broadside.
No problem. Science vessels and associated builds got a huge buff with the skill revamp, temporal rep/spec trees and while S13 did nerf some Science abilities, it also buffed others so it was more of a "sideways-adjustment". If you are interested in them, you might (hopefully) find my rather lengthy discussion on flying sci-torp builds useful:
If you just want to see them in action, @tunebreaker did a nice video of one of our runs at The Battle of Korfez (which is one of the most difficult PvE maps right now post S13).
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!
That's what they are meant to do though, deal damage. This is even mentioned in the podcast link I sent earlier.
There should also be a consideration made for survivability between ship classes. The cruiser with its innately higher hull, better engineering seating and shield modifiers get better survivability for its damage output (hence the ship class of choice for tanks).
Escorts do get speed and defense but that comes with the trade-off of possibly getting their weapons out of arc, or they themselves can end up out of position.
Are you talking about the new Heavy Weapons slots or Dual Heavy Cannons? If yo uare talking about the Heavy Weapons, they are not as good as you might think. On my best run for example, my 2 rear Mk XII Fleet turrets did about 10k DPS (combined CSV and normal fire) on my best run for my Mercury Pilot Escort, compared to the 2.1k DPS total from my Heavy Weapon.
This coincides with what most other Escorts pilot tell me, the Heavy Weapons are generally weaker than a single Turret. You also have to consider, Turrets are the weakest energy weapon type to begin with.
True. Hence why most escorts also run beam arrays.
This will be contradictory to Cryptic's design intent though, and the reason they gave Escorts heavy weapons to start with.
Yeah the energy torps do help in energy builds. I'm curious though, when was the last time you've tried an Elite Space STF? They are quite a bit harder than the single player "mission" or "patrol" maps.
I understand that now, thanks. But I am still not convinced Cruisers would need them, and neither does Cryptic it seems.
Not really worthless. Suboptimal maybe. But still very much a viable build choice.
I hope you enjoy them. It was fun making them.
| USS Curiosity - Pathfinder | USS Rift - Eternal |
The Science Ship Build Thread - Share your Sci Ship builds here!