I can see no compelling reason to use a Federation Wolf class frigate hull over the Federation Gazelle. Its just inferior in all stats except for one, and that one is a very very small difference, that if you were to design to exploit it, you would go for a different hull. It really should sport 5 hardpoints or 8 standard modules, or stronger bonuses. Something to actually give it a reason to pick that hull.
Likewise, I see no compelling reason to use a Cruiser Quantum Blaster. I dont know if I am missing something about it. It does less than 1/5th the dps of a cruiser laser, its closest competitor. The only advantage of having low power and a lower cost on a per item basis really fails when compared to the dps/cost or a dps/energy comparison. I would love to see it get re-tuned or re-purposed.
I have to disagree. It’s small, fast and cheap, with just enough power to not need an power plant. Four missiles times 30 frigates kills anything; just don’t supply life insurance to the pilots…
I forget which rebel frigate is unlocked. the 4/4, 4/7 or 6/4. They all have their uses. I primary use the Loki (4/4) for a cheap fast frigate. It has the smallest non fighter hull in the game. Anything that has the “X most” in this game can be used as a best of type for a strategy. Small means more of them can crowd around other ships/baddies, and I suspect is harder to hit. I only put 2 weapons on it through. I use the 4/7 for my anti fighter hull. It needs to be tougher because the fighters tend to retaliate against it. And I have a great 6 torpedo design for the 6/4, although it is slow.
But the Wolf class frigate is literally the gazelle with worse stats. Its larger, matches the hardpoints/standard module count, costs more, has the same bonuses in lesser amounts, all for 1 more power. The power on a frigate hull only really matter to all missile + armor boats that have no power core. But if you wanted more power, you could pick a different fed hull that has even more power on it.
dps is not the end-all be-all of a weapon. The tracking speed is critical to being able to hit what you’re aiming at. If your play strategy is cruisers vs. cruisers with fighters / frigates to take care of enemy fighters / frigates, then tracking speed is largely irrelevant (cruisers are floating pigs waiting to be slapped with damage). My take on the Q blaster is that it is an anti-frigate weapon for cruisers. Since I prefer to kill frigates with rocket fighters, I also don’t actually use the Q blaster. But I don’t know that I’d take it out of the game or repurpose it, I think some players would rather deploy an all-cruiser all-the-time fleet and for them, this kind of weapon becomes relevant.
If the difference between 1.1 and .9 tracking speed actually gave it 300% more dps in that situation, I would agree with you. (not 400% because the quantum blaster is cheaper). But currently a fusion beam, as it has a 1.5 speed, or a Cruiser Pulse Laser, as it has 2.6 tracking speed while still having enough shield pen to break any frigate, would be a better choice for the role you described.
It’s often better just to fit another gun instead if possible. The operational costs on target boosters are pretty high, and they do not stack well.
I don’t think there’s any benefit whatsoever if the target speed exceeds your end tracking speed, so don’t go grabbing them thinking they will help pulse lasers hit 3.99 speed rocket fighters.
I tend to put target booster on most of my cruisers, though admittedly it’s more out of habit than anything. I should probably try a few ships without and see what the effect is.