![]() This is not necessarily a bad thing depending on your player group in PVE matches or PVP, but it is a genuine limitation at times. Sure the DPS numbers look great, but not concentrating fire on a single target allows the shields to recover on the primary target while fire is wasted on other targets like targetable torpedoes and wimpy carrier pets. It also keeps the player from focusing on a single target. ![]() ![]() But it does bring the heat on as it increases the threat from multiple angry bad guys. This is fine for a tanking engineer in a cruiser trying to draw fire away from flanking raiders and escorts. Against multiple enemies this ability randomly selects targets. If you look at the DPS masters however you will notice that they are typically using ‘fire at will’. This compares well to cannons at 180 and dual cannons at 45 degrees. Beam Arrays have a 250 degree firing arc and the more powerful dual beam banks cover 90 degrees. The next “truth” about beams is the wide firing arc. I found one guy who went to great lengths to chart the data and you know how much I love me a good chart □ Check it out here. This compares favorably to cannon weapons including turrets that fall all the way down to around 35% efficiency at the 10km limit. In fact studies conducted by a variety of hard-core gaming geeks show that beams lose roughly 4% per kilometer of range bottoming out at around 65% damage output at the limits of the 10km range. First beam weapons do not lose nearly as much power over long-range. The primary argument in favor of beams lies in a couple of absolute beam truths. Although the argument in favor of “King Beam” is strong, it may not be the best ultimate killer after all. The prevailing theme lately is that beams are the only way to go for maximum DPS. To be fair, these masters of destruction also have great ship and character builds that squeeze extra damage from the ship’s weapons. I have noticed that many players that achieve insanely high DPS do so utilizing beam weapons and multiple instances of ‘fire at will’. DPS alone however does not tell the whole tale. For the benefit of any gaming newbs, DPS stands for “Damage Per Second” and it is the standard benchmark for determining the ability of your toon to lay waste to enemies. Let’s make no mistake about it, DPS is important. There are even DPS leader boards whereby players can challenge the best damage dealing fiends in the Galaxy for ass-kicking supremacy. There are a variety of forums where this is hotly debated. I just don't feel that I am doing the same amount of raw DPS that I get from CRF.I have noticed that many people are heavily invested into the idea of DPS and maxing the DPS of their ships. annoyances for it.CSV has helped me keep things at bay (minus the targeting issue I am having now.) and I have pretty decent uptime with it currently, I want to say just by feel it is probably something around 70-80% uptime. If you have 100% uptime with CRF (though I don't remember precisely how to do that, I think a Starship Mastery Trait that extends the duration when some conditions are met?) then it's obviously gonna out-DPS the alternatives, and probably worthwhile to deal with the Tholian/hanger/etc. This isn't taking specific builds into consideration, of course. The accuracy penalty isn't really much of a concern in PvE, much like with FAW, since there's plenty of ways to mitigate that. As in you won't even notice them if you're cycling CSV. It won't be a life or death thing, but things like Tholian web walls, HY plasma torps, fighters, or mines are really trivialized by CSV. ![]() Whereas there will be occasions where you will miss CSV's crowd control. There's a few occasions where CRF would be better, but you won't really miss it. For the vast majority of PvE content, you'll want CSV. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |