Topic: the defiant sucks (Read 16011 times)

Alexander1701 · « **Reply #20 on:** January 30, 2003, 12:33:30 am »

Quote:

For the Romulans, the plasma damage will be measured by the pulse phaser in the patch. i.e. Romulan has to have almost 5 times as long to charge a plasma (I am guessing they mean plasma light?) that does similiar damage with No pentration chance.

This is only partially accurate. The rate of decay will be equal between them (averaging out the current difference), however, the plasma torpedo will continue to do considerably more damage, only now, on those rare occasions it does hit, it will do a small amount more damage, whereas you will have to be nearly on top of someone (not difficult with defiant) to actually do good damage with the pulse phasers. Though I may be wrong. The patch updates have been hazy at best. We will have to wait and see.

Alexander

Aliasalpha · « **Reply #21 on:** January 30, 2003, 02:54:57 am »

For overpowering, try loading the Defiant up with 4 Antimatter minelayers and going up against a slower ship, really eats the hull away if you lay all 4 in a cluster

Blitzkrieg · « **Reply #22 on:** January 30, 2003, 03:12:36 am »

Whats worse is people who use that configuration plus strong engines and tractors to completely decimate almost any ship. Most ships become either crippled or 'heavily' damaged in one pass of 4 amm's. Now there is nothing more cheesy than that!

Cruis.In · « **Reply #24 on:** January 30, 2003, 11:31:52 am »

3dot14, I actuallly did not call anyone a dumbass. go and come again.

any numbers i put down was something off the top of my head, not to be concrete.

but it seems to be that if a pulse phaser has a 1/10 (post patch) chance of doing a shield penetrating shot, that is a also a 2/10 chance and further a 4/40 chance. not so? that is what I meant, someone clearly did not understand where i was coming from before they started talking about maths.

defiant might have 7 spots for weapons, but with 1150 mass that could never compare to the sovereign.

peace.

Blitzkrieg · « **Reply #25 on:** January 30, 2003, 12:08:13 pm »

But you see, your using probabilities which are maths. Further more 1/10, 2/20 and 4/40 are the same thing, therefore I was meaning to say you dont appear to have a clear grasp of what you are saying. Quite clearly, your use of probabilities, suck, unlike the defiant, which rules. It may not compair to a sovereign but hey for a CL we are talking about probably the most deadly ship of that class.

If you wont accept my half assed appology, too bad. I only make them once, if you want to go around spouting utter clap trap which clearly most people think is just that, then expect them to tell you so.

Aenigma · « **Reply #28 on:** January 30, 2003, 02:24:23 pm »

The only drawback to a Defiant is that the Romulan Shrike looks a lot better

I mean you'll still have to watch the rear-end of a defiant, which is probably the most ugly there is (except for borg of course, but their ships don't have 'rear' ends in their ship design). No wonder some people do think the defiant sucks and needs improvement. Taldren could you please improve the looks of the defiant rear-end??

HAHAHAHA just joking a bit about the uber-CL that is called the Defiant

Cruis.In · « **Reply #32 on:** January 30, 2003, 09:21:08 pm »

blitzkrieg you have nothing to apologize for, nor did I want an apology nor am I offended...can
t people stop thinking that everything someone says is meant to be harsh just because i dont use smiley's so often.

ok so 1 in 10 is the same probability as 2/20(my 2/10 was a typo) however my intention was to show as the battle wears on the more you would have fired throughout the duration of the battle right? so out of 40 shots, you only would have ever had a 4/40 of those 40 shots...maybe you might get 30 out of 40 to go through, but i wanted to show as that you are firing alot, the chance you have is so slim...this is what I mean.

i have been here for 3 years or something so...well 4 if you count before they got these fancy forums...i was also at the interplay board. i intend no harm. but i will not use smilies. smile here HAHA!

i am never intending to be insulting anyone, however i dont want to be mis understood, and labelled.

back to the defiant. why do people say its a cheese ship...why not say the galaxy is, why are people on its case, because alot of people use, it because its made popular by deep space nine?

talking 2 weapons someone said 2 quantums 2 pulse. what about 3 photon and 2 pulse... or 2 pulse, 1 XF, and 2 photons.
for engines i think maneuverability is most important in this case so i use type 7 thrusters, i think 40 something is enough speed until my officers get more experienced and are able to squeeze upwards of 50 speed out of the type IV impulse so i dont put anything higher than type 4 impulse. i try to bring the warp core and thrusters to the highest.
because when going up a big ship if he gets you in a tractor type 4, and you cant have that high even probably sacraficing everything else in that MASS category then your dead unless you get through his shields and target his tractors. so you need the speed to keep the distance.

what say ye all to that thought?

Alexander1701 · « **Reply #33 on:** January 31, 2003, 02:01:46 am »

This is ridiculous. First off, at 1/6 chance of sheild piercing each shot, each volley of 2 shots makes 2/6, or 1 out of every 3 volleys will deal at least some shield-penetrating damage. But what's really ridiculous is that people are saying that the defiant is not 'cheese', as it were, simply because the dreadnaught classes for federation are better. This is to be expected. But, in terms of tactical effectiveness per price, the defiant is the best. To paraphrase: defiant (fully refitted) costs probably around 30k. Sovereign costs around 80k fully outfitted. Would you rather have three player defiants on your team, or a single player sovereign? This is what it really comes down to. And I can say from experience that the defiants are MUCH more dangerous, well so more dangerous than the 10k extra prestige I've left. Put a sabre with the sovereign if it bothers you that much. The point is that a battle like that should be a tie, with 2 of the defiants destroyed, and the third crippled, whereas more likely one or even none of the defiants would die. So please, stop comparing the defiant to the galaxy. We know that BMW makes very nice cars, but that doesn't mean we can't say that the Jetta is a really nice car for the price. In that same way, a Defiant may be less powerful than a sovereign, but for the price, it is brutally overpowered.

Alexander

Vertigo · « **Reply #34 on:** January 31, 2003, 03:11:51 am »

I find this arguing over odds to be quite entertaining. You guys are simply disagreeing over the same basic ideas, just using different terminology.

If you have a 1/6 change to hit, the number of hits you will score (on average) is: (1/6) * (number of shots). This is a simple number, not a percentage.

An analogy may help. If I'm rolling dice, my odds are 1/6 to roll a one everytime. If I roll 36 dice, I should roll about (6) ones, on average.

This is the scenario we are in when discussing shield piercing effects.

As they love to say in Comb/Perm classes, dice have no memory.

The other formulas mentioned only come into play when discussing the odds of getting a *specific* number of hits (such as 1, none, or all), or when calculating roll totals. If you are rolling up stats for an RPG character (which tend to use totals of several rolls), then these odds come into play.

[I'm gonna go off the deep end here, you can quit reading]

So, if you wanted to know how many Pulse shots you would have to shoot to have (for example) an 80% chance of getting a piercing hit, then you would have to use other math.

Hmm, how does this go? IIRC, that's a polynominal on the order of the number of shots:

O = odds of piercing as a percentage
S = shots taken

Odds of single pierce = ( (1/O)^S - (1/O-1)^S ) / ( (1/O)^S )

So... that means the odds of rolling a one on a six sided die in 10 rolls is about... 84%. Yep, that sounds about right. Anyone check that for me? It's been a long time since college.

Blitzkrieg · « **Reply #35 on:** January 31, 2003, 04:38:44 am »

I think the Defiant is so good that after I have been destroyed in my current Klingon state with little chance of getting back into the game again quickly I will get myself a Defiant and stick with it, see how many humans I can take down etc. I would find this more interesting than any statistical analysis, the proof is in the pudding or so they say.

I see this configuration for AI flying around quite a bit, 2 pulse phasers and 2 quantum torps. With high manouverability plus heavy shielding and armour I think this could be a devestating combination. This particular AI has been quite devestating in certain PvP I have entered into, helping out a human player whoop me real bad.

****Boring Maths Time****

You see, ignoring the shield piercing shot (as its pure cheese to even peirce shields with such a heavy weapon put in a primary slot), you get 2 x 8 damage for the pulse phasers and 2 x 13 for the Quantum Torps (including the high amount of internals these can cause) = 42 damange in one alpha strike. Am I right or is this a decent amount of damage? You then have the power to run away and out manouver your opponant, soak up what shots get in on you and place yourself in position to alpha the same side of the ship you just hit again.

Well anyway I will be trying out this theory, hope to see while I do

jdmckinney · « **Reply #36 on:** January 31, 2003, 07:06:55 am »

Personally, I never felt there was anything inherently wrong with the Defiant having 2 pulses and 2 quantums. It is, after all, the way most people feel the ship should be armed based on DS9.

However, the shield-piercing aspect of the pulse phaser essentially makes it a fast-loading heavy weapon, not a slow-loading primary. Remove the shield-piercing (I don't recall pulse phasers from DS9 being shield-piercing per se) and you have a more reasonable ship, because it will have to actually get past shields to cripple an enemy (not that it's hard to do with qauntums on board).

While the Feds DO need a side-effect weapon, it should be a heavy weapon, and it should be something more in-line with Fed characteristics, like improved weapon targeting (they're always targeting weapons on the shows to neutralize the threat while minimizing casualties). Leave the shield-piercing to the brutal Klingons.

Anyway, it's all moot, since Taldren will never change the pulse phaser to remove shield-piercing. We all just have to live with it.

jdmckinney · « **Reply #37 on:** January 31, 2003, 07:09:18 am »

Oh, and in case people forget, the purpose of the pulse phaser is supposed to be improved effectiveness against the Borg. In this game, the Borg have no shields, so shield-piercing is absolutely useless in that regard.

EmeraldEdge · « **Reply #38 on:** January 31, 2003, 07:17:27 am »

Well, I'm not so sure the Feds DO need a side effect weapon. Why? Because they have something else nobody else does. Proxies. In fact they are the only race that has an optional firing mode on any of their weapons, and they have them on two, so......

Trekker · « **Reply #39 on:** January 31, 2003, 07:55:05 am »

I just wanted to say, that after seeing the pitiful excuse of a Defiant in Armada 2, I was thrilled with the SFCIII Defiant. Look at the series, for crying out loud! The Defiant was the ONE ship that caused the most problems for the enemy! You should just be glad Taldren didn't put a cloaking device on it. The Defiant is not a CL, if we went with the way it performs in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, it should be better than a Galaxy.

News:

Topic: the defiant sucks (Read 16011 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Alexander1701

Aliasalpha

Blitzkrieg

3dot14

Cruis.In

Blitzkrieg

Alexander1701

kevlar

Aenigma

KBF-Dogmatix

Thanos1

Thanos1

Cruis.In

Alexander1701

Vertigo

Blitzkrieg

jdmckinney

jdmckinney

EmeraldEdge

Trekker

Topic: the defiant sucks (Read 16011 times)