test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

An age old question- DBBs vs DHCs

sovereign010sovereign010 Member Posts: 492 Arc User
For the longest time I was told that for damage-dealing the Dual Heavy Cannons were the best way to go on ships that could take them; since many were fast & agile enough to bring them to bear that the firing arc isn't a problem.

Now however it's been pointed out that because of damage drop-off, beams actually dealt greater damage at range and to get the most out of cannons means getting much closer to the enemy.

My issue is that I'm at the point in the game where it's time to swap my mostly looted/poorly chosen fleet guns for crafted/rep ones to get some much-needed DPS and I'm unsure whether to stick with the DHCs I've been using on the following ships (dmg type in brackets):

Fed: Charal (Phaser), Avenger (Plasma)
KDF: Mat'Ha (Disruptor), Peghqu' (Antiproton)
Romulan: Scimitar (Polaron), Daeinos (Tetryon)

Or to switch to DBBs for any of these ships? The main reason I'm using the (leftmost) ships is because of wielding 5 fwd weapon mounts and having 5 tac consoles. Unless I'm reading things wrong, the only ship that stands to benefit from switching is the Scimitar due to its low base turn rate. Of course, if that turn rate can be boosted by one of the sets (e.g. Fluidic Counter Assault for the inertia rating boost) it might not be necessary.

I'm already at max level rep for all these toons so there's no issues there.
Post edited by sovereign010 on
«13

Comments

  • questeriusquesterius Member Posts: 6,639 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    DHC were considered superior due to the combined might of DHC and turrets allowing for concentrated fire power in the frontal arc.

    Since the introduction of the ancient omni AP beam array and the various omni beam arrays from crafting the advantage of the DHC is largely negated.

    There is no immediate need to replace DHC though provided you know how to keep your nose pointed towards your opponent.

    Other than DHC and DBB you can also opt for beam arrays.
    This program, though reasonably normal at times, seems to have a strong affinity to classes belonging to the Cat 2.0 program. Questerius 2.7 will break down on occasion, resulting in garbage and nonsense messages whenever it occurs. Usually a hard reboot or pulling the plug solves the problem when that happens.
  • dpsloss88dpsloss88 Member Posts: 765 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    This question was put to rest about 3 years ago. Beams won. Now the question is DBB vs. Beam Arrays.....
  • razar2380razar2380 Member Posts: 1,156 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    There are different directions you can go with this. Depending on what your Boff stations are, and what you prefer.

    For me, if i have the Boff stations to support it, I prefer to run a combo of DBB, and DHC with KCB, and turrets on the back. It is great for quick kills.

    If I do that on my Scimitar, there are two different Boff setups I use, depending on what I am after. For example, if I want a CC build that will help hold enemies in front of me, I use a science character in the Lt. Commander station.

    This will let me use GW1. For tac, I use this:
    Commander
    TT1, Beam FAW 2, Cannon Scatter Volley1, Cannon Scatter Volley3.

    Ensign
    TT1.

    I just use two DBBs with this build. The DBBs will help to drop shields, and help keep them down, while the DHCs will pound the hull.

    If I am going heavy tac for the build, and don't worry about crowd control, then I will run with 3 DBBs, 1 DHC, and 1 Torp. (Note, pick a torp for the situation. If you will be hitting stationary targets a lot, like in the STFs, then I would go with the RHP torp. Or another that will help with sustained damage. If you are fighting enemies that will move fairly quick like in a lot of PVEs, then I would use one that has a quick reload, and moves fast).

    The stations I would use are Commander, and Ensign Tac, as well as the Lt. Commander universal for Tac.

    The Boff skills will be:

    Commander
    TT1, APB1, BFAW3, CRF

    Lt. Commander
    TT1, BFAW, CRF

    Ensign
    Torp spread.

    Note, the skills for Beam, Cannons, and torps can be swapped out for skills that hit multiple targets, like CRF for CSV.

    This setup will work great for strong hits to shields, and hull.

    I also use two of the consoles from the Scimitar set. The one that lets you have shields while cloaked, and the one that gives you a secondary shield. Both of these can help with survivability, and also will help with turn rate when coming out of cloak. It has increased turn rate.

    Also, if you limit how many DHCs you use, then the turn rate will not be too much of a problem, because you can already start hitting them with the DBBs before you get your DHCs on them. Therefore, the DHCs have a better chance of hitting hull directly.

    With the Crystalline Catastrophe, I get 1st place almost all the time, and have MK XII blue and purple weapons that all have the DMG mod on them from back when it was working. And they still help me get 1st vs others in Scimitars almost all the time.

    For other ships with good turn rates, if I can't get enough stations for both, then I will go with mostly DHCs, and 1 DBB, and focus the Boff skills for cannon skills. This will still give you a DBB to help keep shields down between the time your DHCs fire.

    If they don't have a good turn rate, and they feel cumbersome, then I will run with either DBBs, or beam arrays. Keep in mind that just because it has 5 forward weapon slots, you don't need to go with a forward facing build. Feel out the individual ship(s) and see what you are comfortable with.

    Sometimes I just run all Beam arrays on some of my Scimitars just to be lazy, since it is much easier to fly any ship by broadsiding.
    SSO = Starfleet (not so) Special Operations Group
  • hyperionx09hyperionx09 Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    As far as Escorts and 5 Fore ships go, you might be better off with DBBs due to the lower damage drop-off and wider attack angle. As well, with NPCs hitting harder than ever and being damage sponges, those DHC Escorts lose DPS having to strafe and circle back into their narrow frontal arc (and cannot tank them like they used to), and only heavy ships such as the Scimitar, Astika, Avenger, or other 5-Fore ships can at least manage to park and CSV, while managing their shields/hulls.

    Additionally, DHCs are even further put behind by DBBs due to the fact that Defense bonuses scale on how fast you are (not to mention some are only granted while you're at maximum throttle), meaning that if you want to keep some weapons on target without running figure 8s too often (splitting the damage taken across alternating shield sides), DBBs or BAs give you that wider angle of attack without giving up DPS as much.
    Be like the Borg, and Adapt to changes first. Only after you've Adapted do you have the right to complain about said changes, as you're not the Borg, but you understand the changes.

    Punishing your bandwidth and your eyesight the way your animated GIFs punish mine:
    apttdy.gif
  • maerikcharonmaerikcharon Member Posts: 108 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    If you ask this question, you're probably going to get a lot of old information. Suffice to say that if you're using surgical strikes, generally Dual Beam Banks are the way to go, because they have the sweet spot of re-fire rate vs damage, and also they are easier to get on target.

    If you're using a faw style ship, this is also better because the arc of fire is bigger, and it's easier to get more targets in there. Basically, FAW with DBB > Scatter Volley with DHC. Just based on fire-arc.

    If you're wanting to use Dual Heavy Cannons, pretty much the only thing they are good for is Rapid Fire III on single target dps. And what you'll want to do is Beam-Overload, Rapid-Fire, and High Yield. To take advantage of mass crit-d on dual beam bank, and good cannon dps... and huge hits off torpedoes... which the most reliable for High Yield is the Enhanced Biomolecular, which does a massive aoe when you high yield it (Works wonders with overwhelming force, because everything touched by the aoe procs a shockwave)

    Basically, for objective, or Boss-Burning, you go DHC... for everything else, DBB.
  • baelogventurebaelogventure Member Posts: 1,002 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Basically, DBBs are superior in every aspect over DHCs.

    1. Better fire arc

    2. Beams have less damage drop-off then cannons

    3. Beams actually benefit from Weapon Power overcapping.

    4. Beams will always hit more target then any number of cannons. Why? FAW makes each beam hit 2 targets, CSV caps out at 3 targets total.

    5. Beams have their BOff skills set at lower ranks then cannons, allowing for TT + FAW + Attack Pattern on a ship with Ensign and Lt Tac seats, cannons do not.

    6. Beams have less travel time then cannons, they're effectively hitscan weapons where cannons have to travel across the distance to deal damage.

    7. Beams can be equipped on any ship, further increasing their flexibility.

    Did I miss anything?
  • warmaker001bwarmaker001b Member Posts: 8,973 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Beam weaponry in general are all the rage right now, esp on Cruisers. Very easy to point and shoot... or to be more exact, present a broadside and fire away... very generous arcs, lower tiered tactical skills compared to cannon skills. You also do not need a high turn rate ship to make Beamboating work effectively.

    If there is one thing that Beams suffer in is single target focus fire when there are still a myriad of targets around. BFAW streaks all over the map and it will take clever piloting to ensure the target(s) you only want are the ones being actually hit. BO just doesn't have that kick like it used to despite being a 100% crit chance.

    Cannons however are easier to focus. CRF has lost its luster these days but is still deadly effective in pouring ALL damage on one target. CSV's AOE attack is cone-based and your shots will not be scattered in a 360 degree circle. Your CSV damage is more focused with what's in front and not to TRIBBLE that is at the side. The catch with DHC use is that you need a good turning ship.

    A forward heavy, DBB build in BFAW can achieve very similar results but if it's not a 5 forward weapon ship, it's wasteful.

    Lastly, there is still the very old recipe of several DHCs with 1 DBB. Use Cannon skills with a Beam Overload for the DBB. That is very old school but due to the BO change, it won't deplete your Weapons Power, so it works better than it has in the past. This also helps ensure the the single-target focus capability of such a build.
    XzRTofz.gif
  • alex284alex284 Member Posts: 366 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I was thinking about this just yesterday as I was perusing top DPS builds in escorts, and they're all using DBBs. This is because FAW was fixed and it can crit, and FAW is a bigger boost to DPS than CSV in most situations. Also, FAW will always increase damage by just hitting the main target more if there's just one target while CSV hits all targets the same, so having 1 target means lower dps than many (on the other hand, if you have a lot of targets grouped up like in No Win Scenario or with a gravity well, then CVS is superior).

    Also too, CSV has an even narrower arc than DHCs do, but FAW has the same arc as whatever beam you're using. Also too, overcapping, which allows beams to fire at higher weapons energy levels than cannons can (beam firing cycle is longer so it can draw more energy from the weapons energy that exceeds 125, plus some other mechanics that no one understands that gives beams more power than cannons).

    I like my DHCs on my main so I'm sticking with them (altho my favorite alt is using DBBs to get insane DPS, which is fun in it's own way), but it is strange how DHCs used to be the best but now DBBs will do greater damage at all ranges.
  • millimidgetmillimidget Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    If there is one thing that Beams suffer in is single target focus fire when there are still a myriad of targets around.
    This is why ISAs fail.
    "Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society." - Aristotle
  • sovereign010sovereign010 Member Posts: 492 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Beams have their BOff skills set at lower ranks then cannons, allowing for TT + FAW + Attack Pattern on a ship with Ensign and Lt Tac seats, cannons do not.
    Damn, I didn't notice that, that's very good to know.

    I forgot to say that I play entirely PvE, I've never been one for PvP.

    It's funny, the main reason my Fed alt got into beams was because I'd looted several phaser DBBs, so now I can get to work tinkering with an appropriate build without shelling out a ton of dilithium first. :D

    Because my Rom alt was using tetryon-based weapons she already has the Nukara Tet DBB as well as refracting tet DHCs- looks like I'm going to have fun tinkering there as well.

    Cheers for the info, guys :cool:
  • jorantomalakjorantomalak Member Posts: 7,129 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Basically, DBBs are superior in every aspect over DHCs.

    1. Better fire arc

    2. Beams have less damage drop-off then cannons

    3. Beams actually benefit from Weapon Power overcapping.

    4. Beams will always hit more target then any number of cannons. Why? FAW makes each beam hit 2 targets, CSV caps out at 3 targets total.

    5. Beams have their BOff skills set at lower ranks then cannons, allowing for TT + FAW + Attack Pattern on a ship with Ensign and Lt Tac seats, cannons do not.

    6. Beams have less travel time then cannons, they're effectively hitscan weapons where cannons have to travel across the distance to deal damage.

    7. Beams can be equipped on any ship, further increasing their flexibility.

    Did I miss anything?

    Beams taste like chicken....you missed that lol :D

    I agree with this and it pretty much hits the nail on the head
    I'm Alex MAKEPEACE, not Alex Roundhouse Everyone, Knocking Their Heads Off and Stuffing Their Headless Corpses Into a Black Hole!

    ... Calling it now. Someone's going to ban me for making peace.

  • rodentmasterrodentmaster Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    DBBs with FAW may indeed 'tag' more targets but that doesn't mean they do more damage. DHCs may 'only' target 3 ships with CSV, but they send the entire duration of CSV hitting those targets. Fact of the matter is that FAW can often take longer to kill the targeted enemy because it is scattering shots everywhere. If you have only 1-2 targets, it's fine. If you're surrounded in a sea of them? It's not as efficient. Before DR and the death of gameplay in STO, I was running NWS for the first time in a serious effort. I tried a DBB battlecruiser and in the end I moved on to a CSV/DHC setup because it was killing selected targets and smaller mobs more reliably.


    Look, we all know that beams are king now, but they have their drawbacks. Massive agro generation being one of them now that the BS tachyon beam decimal was misplaced on all NPCs and they ALL have it and ALL fire it at once. Further, FAW is fine if you know how and where to position yourself so that you ONLY target certain things, and not others. However, this often puts you out past 8k ranges (to make sure the targets you DON'T want are past 10k, etc) and you suffer from beam falloff.

    When you run DBBs up front and an omni in the aft you can agro the world in 360-degrees around you because FAW affects your aft beams as well. To do a DBB-scort type of setup you need to run turrets in back, which means they don't get beam buffs from boff skills. If you run turrets with DHCs, they benefit from the same cannon skills. Beside that, if you run DBBs with aft beams running FAW? You might as well run all BAs and broadside for even better results.

    DBBs were only good for those battlecruisers that had only an LT or LT+ens tactical seats, because you could run FAW1 and APB2, whereas with DHCs you couldn't do that. It was kind of a half-step and a compromise to get the most out of 2 different worlds. It wasn't really the best of either world.
  • frontline2042frontline2042 Member Posts: 219 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Side question about the omni-directional beams. I heard that you can only have 2 equipped. Does the born cutting laser count as one of those 2?
    Ignorance is an obstacle not an excuse
    Let the stupid suffer
  • pwstolemynamepwstolemyname Member Posts: 1,389 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    FAW can often take longer to kill the targeted enemy because it is scattering shots everywhere.

    This is very important to bare in mind. If your goal is to clime the DPS charts then beam banks all the way. But if your running with pugs the lack of focus can be detrimental to mission completion times.

    There really are many factors that come into play as to weather BFaW beats CSV. One dose not simply obsolete the other.
  • frontline2042frontline2042 Member Posts: 219 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    skollulfr wrote: »
    no.
    you can have crafted omni beam, ancient omni beam and the kcb.
    there was a bug where you could have both a default ancient omni beam + an upgraded version.

    Thank you sir.
    Ignorance is an obstacle not an excuse
    Let the stupid suffer
  • rodentmasterrodentmaster Member Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Please note you'll do less damage doing that. The ancient omni array is not the same as a crafted ultra rare. It's quite a lot less DPS overall. Then add into that upgrading to XIV, and the crafted blows the stock ancient omni out of the water buy a LARGE amount.

    You'd probably be better off slotting a better weapon, and one that can be upgraded as well to Mk XIV ultra rare. Even if it's a turret and not affected by FAW, you'll still be able to increase your damage. Or, if you're doing BAs, you still are broadsiding and there's no need to run a stock ancient omni.

    TL;DR: Ancient Omni only for the set bonus -- which really isn't worth it if you've got [AMP]. Once you move past that you've got better options
  • uryenserellonturyenserellont Member Posts: 858 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Maybe it's time to get rid of or at least reduce cannon falloff. I don't see any reason to keep it in the game.

    I miss the days when escorts were the kings of DPS, and I still prefer them with DHC now even though DBBs and cruisers are all the rage.
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Maybe it's time to get rid of or at least reduce cannon falloff. I don't see any reason to keep it in the game.

    I miss the days when escorts were the kings of DPS, and I still prefer them with DHC now even though DBBs and cruisers are all the rage.

    DHCs need the falloff to balance their massive 45 degree arc.

    Otherwise they'll just be parked at 6km broadsiding with all 8 weapons spacebar spamming CFAW and hitting everything on the map.
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • blakes7tvseriesblakes7tvseries Member Posts: 691 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    This is why ISAs fail.

    They fail because most people don't have a clue what DPS is or care.
    Some even think it's just something to do to join a channel.
    Whats so funny is DPS is really what the game is all about.
    Just don't know of any STFs that require diplomacy; when they do require aggressive negotiations.
    download.jpg
  • razar2380razar2380 Member Posts: 1,156 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    DHCs need the falloff to balance their massive 45 degree arc.

    Otherwise they'll just be parked at 6km broadsiding with all 8 weapons spacebar spamming CFAW and hitting everything on the map.


    Since Engineering Team, and Science Team no longer share a cool down, you can do that now at less than 5km.

    The only time it might become a problem is when you are spammed with TB, or aggro a large group of NPCs. Though, even then, 6km will not be far enough to protect you because most NPCs use beams.

    This means that if you are within 5km, or at 6km, the NPCs will still hit you for almost the same damage. The difference is so small, it will not matter.

    The benefit to removing the fall off damage of all energy weapons is to help with taking the large shield hp down before you get to the enemy. But, as long as you upgrade your weapons, that isn't a problem.

    Since Delta Rising is about DPS, he combination of DPS and spike damage help with quick kills, therefore helping the team end the queue faster.

    Sadly, I don't see them removing the falloff damage because it would mean that fewer players will need to upgrade. That means less potential money they can make. And history has proven that money is more important than quality.
    SSO = Starfleet (not so) Special Operations Group
  • ssbn655ssbn655 Member Posts: 1,860 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    DHCs need the falloff to balance their massive 45 degree arc.

    Otherwise they'll just be parked at 6km broadsiding with all 8 weapons spacebar spamming CFAW and hitting everything on the map.[/Q

    Massive 45 degree arc???? Wish they had a massive arc like beams have. Would solve so many things.
  • uryenserellonturyenserellont Member Posts: 858 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    DHCs need the falloff to balance their massive 45 degree arc.

    Otherwise they'll just be parked at 6km broadsiding with all 8 weapons spacebar spamming CFAW and hitting everything on the map.

    "Massive" 45 degree arc? Their arc is their drawback, no broadsiding possible.
  • ssbn655ssbn655 Member Posts: 1,860 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    I agree that the drop off on cannons is stupid if anything they should not have one as they pack a tight bundle of energy in a concentrated pulse that should be less influnced by range and other factors. Beam yeah sustained delivery over time but should be range influnced more and as time progress drops off reflecting draining of the "battery" and a increase in CD to reflect recharging. See Wrath of Khan "A few shots sir"reflecting nearly drained power levels. There really is no ryhme or reason in some of the weapon traits in this game.
  • jaguarskxjaguarskx Member Posts: 5,938 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    DHCs need the falloff to balance their massive 45 degree arc.

    Otherwise they'll just be parked at 6km broadsiding with all 8 weapons spacebar spamming CFAW and hitting everything on the map.

    Massive?

    Broadsiding??

    CFAW???

    Have you been drinking????
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    "Massive" 45 degree arc? Their arc is their drawback, no broadsiding possible.

    Have you ever tried Cannon: Fire All Weapons?
    jaguarskx wrote: »
    Massive?

    Broadsiding??

    CFAW???

    Have you been drinking????

    What's silly for the goose is silly for the gander.

    Beams beat cannons in just about every practical scenario. Unless you're trading paint all the time at 2km or less beams are better.
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • ssbn655ssbn655 Member Posts: 1,860 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    "Massive" 45 degree arc? Their arc is their drawback, no broadsiding possible.

    I think he's thinking of Single cannons with the what 120 arc?
  • thatcursedwolfthatcursedwolf Member Posts: 1,617 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    ssbn655 wrote: »
    I think he's thinking of Single cannons with the what 120 arc?

    Those things still exist?
    This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  • frontline2042frontline2042 Member Posts: 219 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Pretty sure the "massive 45 degree arc" bit was sarcasm.
    Ignorance is an obstacle not an excuse
    Let the stupid suffer
  • jaguarskxjaguarskx Member Posts: 5,938 Arc User
    edited March 2015
    Have you ever tried Cannon: Fire All Weapons?



    What's silly for the goose is silly for the gander.

    Beams beat cannons in just about every practical scenario. Unless you're trading paint all the time at 2km or less beams are better.


    DHC have 45 degree firing arcs. They cannot fire broadsides. They are restricted to "forward fire" due to the limited firing arc. The exception are Wide Arc DHCs which have a 90 degree firing arc, but only one can be installed on a ship. However, that still restricts them to "forward fire". Therefore, DHCs are incapable of broadsiding.

    Never heard of Cannon: Fire All Weapons.

    The closest would be Cannon: Scatter Volley which I believe only has a 90 degree scatter angle. Is it a level 5 ship mastery trait? If so, then only players that have bought that specific T6 starship and maxed out the mastery traits will have it as a selectable trait.
«13
Sign In or Register to comment.