We've all seen the dozens if not hundreds of Cruisers are TRIBBLE and escorts are OP threads. They usually come down to a few points, one of which is BAs suck and DHCs don't. But is that really so true?
Now let's look at the Beam Array. It's your basic starter weapon. Every captain in this game started out using them. They are also the most iconic weapon in Star Trek. When you mention Star Trek weapons, most people think of phasers (whether they are hand-held or ship mounted), and the majority of ship class phasers in canon are Beam Arrays in the form of Phaser banks (exception to the rule: defiant with it's phaser cannons). That being said, let's go over the Beam Array.
Strengths:
1) HUGE firing arc. 250 degrees in all directions. That's everything in front of you with a large spillover window on the sides. That massive firing arc enables you to hit things directly above and below you, and also slightly behind you (forward hardpoints). There is a nice overlap as well between your forward and rear beam arrays if you broadside.
2) Moderately low range penalty. BAs only really start to lose out on significant amounts of damage 5k and further out. And I believe their max damage loss is only 40% (not confirmed). They can be used for long range bombarding of stationary targets with not a ton of damage lost as a result of being far away.
3) Instant hit. These weapons practically instantly hit your target. No travel time, no tracking, just a bam bam bam on your shields/hull. This is a strength because procs and damage can be applied instantly, without giving the target that split second to prepare it's defenses (unless they were applied ahead of time, in which case this point is moot).
4) They do equal damage to hull and shields. There is no differential between the two. This is a strength because it will slap shields down and then after that will continue to do well against hull.
5) Quick firing rate. Your target doesn't get much of a respite between attacks, which turns this into a constant pressure on your target. They will be constantly taking damage, which will negate passive shield and hull regen. It will also impede crew recovery.
And now for the fun part: Weaknesses.
1) The biggest gripe against beam arrays. Low damage. Very low. Second lowest in the game, beating out turrets in damage, but not much else.
2) Massive WP consumption. Each BA consumes 10 energy when fired with other weapons. This is a weakness because of how energy level dependent the damage on BAs is. Maximum damage at 100 weapon energy of course, and even with all power to weapons, it's still sometimes difficult to keep your energy levels high, especially with 5 or more BAs.
3) Quick firing rate. This was listed as a strength, but this is also a weakness due to the firing cycle. The quick firing rate also drains lots of weapon energy. Go figure.
4) [Dmg] modifier VERY weak on this weapon, ESPECIALLY this weapon. Courtesy of low base damage and the fact that this modifier just isn't that great to begin with.
Now let's take those 9 points I have compiled and do a quick comparative analysis and see what each point does to the other.
Firing Arc balanced by low damage, low [dmg] modifier, and power consumption. Quick firing rate balanced by itself and power consumption. Power Consumption balanced by firing arc and Low Range Damage penalty. Equal Hull and Shield damage balanced by low damage, low [dmg] modifier, and power consumption.
Now I know this is a very limited list, since it's only 9 features/aspects of BAs. But if you look at them, are Beam Arrays really that bad? I mean they have great positives, and are relatively easy to get/cheap to acquire. They do low damage, but have a huge firing arc and do more damage at range than most of the other weapons. They have a huge power consumption, but their damage is not inhibited by anything outside of resistances.
So I will just leave this up here. Feel free to post your thoughts on BAs and if you think I am wrong, please say so, but try to keep it civil.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
I read fast (its an occupational hazard )
But simply put at 50 power you should not even be in a fight
the greater target arcs and longer effective range makes beams more potent than cannons
the "on target time" assuming both vessels are moving and flown by SANE living people for a DHC is less than 25%
a Beam can fire near constantly
Weapons power should be at 100% minimum in combat (unless you are armed ENTIRELY with torpedo weapons and mines)
Cannons rely on the enemy being stationary / stupid / cooperating to throw the fight
or on you being directly behind and slightly above the target at ALL times
4) They do equal damage to hull and shields. There is no differential between the two. This is a strength because it will slap shields down and then after that will continue to do well against hull.
that's cannons, beams do more dmg to shields and very little dmg when hitting hull.
Where does it state this to be the only case? I have been using BAs since I started, and I have noticed that my BAs do exactly the same to hull as they do to shields (that's after I add in the bleedthrough to the shield hit). If anything my cannons did less damage to shields and more to bare hull, but that may have been due to range etc.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
My mistake, it appears that beams are the base line with 50/50 dmg to hull and shields. I thought beams had a bonus to shields, and that cannons were the base.
In any case, i m not sure it this 50/50 is a strength. In the end no more shields means nothing if you don't kill the hull. No more hull means optional/kill/win.
Beam arrays are ok... not brilliant but ok... Pushed to their very limits on the games best fed-side tac cruiser (Fleet excel) in the hands of an engineer (Build here) one can just about handle seemingly escort only jobs (Kang duty in CSE, upto 6 probes in KASE, sadly they just don't have the required kick to do all 8) one of the main problems is the power drain which while manageable still leaves resistances that DHCs get over through sheer damage output.
Now DDIS and Biteme have both had good ideas on this subject and I agree with both of them.
DDIS's idea would require a small modification in that it would require a reduction in the power drain (per cycle) to reflect the lower number of shots fired however looking at the two I would prefer Biteme's idea however I believe (from my limited programming experience) it would be difficult to implement.
I mention this as the main problem with BAs is they over drain for the damage they deal since this beam array nerf we've all read so much about (Something I cannot find a scrap of information about, searched the release notes and even tried google) however Biteme is right about weapon drain being illogical, it should drain when the shot is fired, not when the cycle begins.
On top of this we've all read about resistance changes I believe it was in one of the "borg have been buffed, their OP, nerf them please" threads, but this too is a problem the sustained firepower of beams has that DHCs don't suffer.
DHCs on the other hand have high damage with low drain (see sources shown above) and if you take 4 unbuffed DHCs (Mk X common) up against 6 BAs (again, Mk X common) you get results shown here*.
*Notes:
Does not take drain into account (due to lack of knowledge on the subject)
Feel free to save and edit for yourself, there are hidden rows showing potential buff analysis for those who wish to play with that
All figures from Mk X common
Another advantage of Beam Arrays is the ability to use FAW to clear fighter and mine spam. Anyone who has tried to use CSV to clear fighter or mine spam knows it is painfully difficult, especially compared to the easy mode FAW solution. BO also provides some excellent spike damage which can be either totally devastating with an alpha strike crit (tac captains), or have the only downside mitigated by nadeon inversion (eng captains).
BA are certainly meant to synergize with Engineer abilities. 6-8 beam Nadeon Inversion or EPS broadside can produce quite respectable DPS. Now you can't constantly do this but throw in Red Matter Converter/Weapons Batteries or the new Omega Weapon Amplifier (which are available to all classes) and you can get a high power broadside going a majority of the time.
Now cruisers or other ships with broadside are more susceptible to having their broadside maneuver thwarted due to their slow turn rate. Tractor beams or simply maneuvering on the targets part can take this attack out of the equation. Even then though - they are still able to deliver strikes with half their weapons and without needing to use the tricks above to keep energy levels high, saving them for when they line up the next broadside. This is opposed to Cannon/Turret builds that have a very tight firing arc for good DPS - outside of which all you can do is a little pew pew scratching with the turrets. Target Engine Subsystem, Gravity Well, Viral Matrix, Tractor Beam, Chroniton Torpedo, Borg Tractor Beam, Temporal Inversion Field etc etc etc... There are many ways to make it difficult for those builds to line up on their target even with decent turn rates.
In summary I think the weapons are just fine the way they are. If anything needs to be changed it is DC need to be buffed so there is a reason to use them instead of everyone that knows anything about builds running around with DHC.
You forgot one of the most important advantage beams have: fire at will II & III. With these powers, if you carefully manage your power levels (which is incredibly easy with an eng character) and use batteries, you can almost double your firing rate and increase your dps significantly. All you need is a brain to be able to tank the whole map but it's doable.
Fire at will is a great power in many situations, even in STFs. Probably not everywhere but ifind it way more useful than CRF and CSV, just because your beam will always find a target to hit.
And for the record the best fed cruiser is the galor.
Although in all honesty Fleet Vor'Cha is the tac cruiser.
Oh, I agree completely. Fleet Vor'cha/Tor'Kaht Retrofit is the best damage dealing battlecruiser in the game. But that's off topic, and it's not a fed ship XD.
BACK ON TOPIC OF BEAM ARRAYS!!!! XD XD XD
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
Didn't want to risk any copyright infringement. And yes, it is diamonds in the rough. But since we're dealing with ships, I figured rust was far more appropriate anyways.
It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once.
The ability to hit a target is meaningless if you don't do any worthwhile damage when you do. Beam arrays are crippled by their power drain mechanics to the point that it requires significant effort just to prevent your weapon power from diving through the floor when you open fire.
Beam tactics are also kind of TRIBBLE. Fire At Will is only a great ability with arrays when you're dealing with tiny and easy to kill targets, or, with a single target. It's a handicap in most combat situations. The reason is that BFAW targets everything randomly, scattering hits across everything within range. For fighters this is fine since they can only survive 1 or 2 hits anyway. For large ships, this means doing minor shield damage to a variety of targets instead of significant shield and hull damage to a single target. Cannon Spread is much better in this regard because it focuses hits on only targets within a relatively narrow cone, which lets you focus your damage output in a meaningful way. BFAW also works dramatically better with Dual Beams for the same reason.
Firing arcs? Compare 2 beam arrays to 2 turrets. You'll lose some hypothetical damage off your broadside but gain true 360 degree damage output, pay less in energy drain, and gain access to superior tactical abilities. The only place turret-boats really miss out on is damage over range.
And if we argue that popularity is an indication of performance, you can't argue "dual cannons need to be massively buffed because nobody uses them" without throwing beam arrays into the same bin. I see more escorts using dual cannons than are using beam arrays.
Engineering as the answer to beam array's drawbacks? Nooooot so much. You have two abilities that affect power, one that completely solves the problem and one that kind of mitigates it, both of them with gratuitously long cooldown times. Batteries? Even worse duty cycle than engineering abilities.
Heck, even EPTW which I thought helped enormously with this problem has proven to be rather unreliable now that I've started really looking into this, due to the kludgy way power overcapping works.
What makes the whole situation even more frustrating is that it makes no logical sense. The fact that power drain is instantly refunded at the end of a firing cycle and the fact that you get one weapon firing "for free" makes the system behave as though it has an infinite power generation potential and the only limitation is transmission through your power grid. In which case why wouldn't you just build your ship to have a single beam weapon with an utterly absurd power conduit connected directly to your infinite reactor. Dual heavy cannons LOOK like a way to increase burst damage within the limits of the power grid by trickle-charging a bank of capacitors and then ramming the whole lot into your weapon in one violent discharge, but they don't work that way at all because they should be draining around 5 power per second constantly instead of 12 for 2 and then 3 seconds of sleeping.
And just to put the cherry on top, I've never seen any indication that the developers care about this topic at all. Which means any and all discussion is irrelevant. Which is very depressing.
And if we argue that popularity is an indication of performance, you can't argue "dual cannons need to be massively buffed because nobody uses them" without throwing beam arrays into the same bin. I see more escorts using dual cannons than are using beam arrays.
Because it would make no sense and that's not the topic. The purpose of the topic is to see if the complaints about beam arrays are justified or it's just eng/cruisers complaining about tac/escorts who complain about sci/sci ship who complain about eng/cruisers, and so on. From my point of view it's rather a matter of how you play the game and how envious you are.
I really have no issue with my eng on a cruiser, sure, i can't dps like mad but it's definitely not the purpose of cruisers, they're healboats and ifyou fit them and use them well they'll do a decent amount of damage too. On a typical cure space elite/klingon scout force instance i'll do half or more of the dps a good tac can do and i'll be healing the whole team (if i want to). That's definitely not insignificant.
I don't get how you can get into trouble with your power levels and fire at will with the new borg set. I'm using it currently and with batteries, EPTW, nadion inversion, and just one purple Mk XII EPS console, i'm doing well and my beams never fire under 100 weapon power. I think you're just confused because the power levels can drop to 80 in rare occasions but it's right after a FAW fire cycle, and it doesn't mean your beam fired at 80, there's some time for your power levels to increase before the new cycle. Don't look at figures, loot at the power levels when your beams fire. It makes a great difference and you'll see it's not that bad.
Of course playing a cruiser is harder than playing a tac with cannons, because even if you're completely stupid and not using half of your boff abilities, your escort will still do some damage, but it doesn't mean beams or cruiser sucks, it means you can get better at it.
Beam tactics are also kind of TRIBBLE. Fire At Will is only a great ability with arrays when you're dealing with tiny and easy to kill targets, or, with a single target. It's a handicap in most combat situations. The reason is that BFAW targets everything randomly, scattering hits across everything within range. For fighters this is fine since they can only survive 1 or 2 hits anyway. For large ships, this means doing minor shield damage to a variety of targets instead of significant shield and hull damage to a single target. Cannon Spread is much better in this regard because it focuses hits on only targets within a relatively narrow cone, which lets you focus your damage output in a meaningful way. BFAW also works dramatically better with Dual Beams for the same reason.
Would the solution to this then be to simply split FAW into FAW (single target) and FAW (multiple target) BO powers? I think doing that would put a lot of pressure on engineering based beam boats to find enough tacslots to be versatile. Maybe implement new functionality into the BO ability, that allows you to change it's type ingame without it costing another BO slot?
All cannon users and rejecting arguments of beam users are just up to protect their enornmous advantage they currently have. I say that, as someone, who mainly uses cannons.
One of the major argument is, that the firing arc of cannons is very narrow in comparsion with beam arrays. But that is not true. To deal any noticable damage, beam user need to broadside, which means, they have to keep their target in an 90 deg arc. Most beam users, however, fly fed cruisers with low turn rates, which makes it at much as difficult to effectively use beams as cannons.
Another very specialized beam are dual beam banks. Dual beam banks make only sense, when used as burst damage tool with beam overload. Combinign 3-4 beam arrays with turrets back will fall behind compared to using 3-4 DHCs with turrets back, escpacially because CRF and CSV.
In my opionen, there should be heavy front beam arrays, that do damage of dual beam banks when fired in an arc of up to 90 deg. If fired in an higher arc up to 180 deg. they do the damage of normal cannons, and above this arc, the damage of normal beam arrays.
This would allow to do beam users more foreward directed damage and damage spikes using beam overload without equiping a dual beam bank and, therefore, reducing the broadside damage.
[QUOTE=momaw;7463111
Beam tactics are also kind of TRIBBLE. Fire At Will is only a great ability with arrays when you're dealing with tiny and easy to kill targets, or, with a single target. [/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure FAW is not meant to be a DPS booster, at least that is not its primary purpose. I think its meant to "clear the skies" and help grab agro from every NPC in range.
Also, why is everyone simply ignoring the obvious. If you feel beams are too weak you can always upgrade to single cannons. They have better DPS at the cost of firing arc. You can then use all those tasty cannon boff powers that everyone seems to want. [/sarcasm] Besides since "everyone knows" that the range limitations in cannons don't matter its virtually a guaranteed win for a cruiser! [/sarcasm]
In their current state, beam arrays are garbage. In exchange for the second best firing arc, you get the second lowest DPS combined with the second highest power drain of all the weapons. They are so horribly inefficient that their already low DPS gets even lower with sustained fire.
Since Cruisers have such a low turn rate, beam weapons are one of the few weapons that they can reliably use. And since beam arrays are so horribly inefficient, Cruisers are nerfed even more (in terms of DPS). Cruisers absolutely shouldn't have the DPS of Escorts, but they also shouldn't have an absurdly low DPS either.
Comments
assuming the captain is reasonably good
Personally Id make beams the default and only allow cannons to be mounted on t 1-3 escorts
but im a Canon TRIBBLE
But simply put at 50 power you should not even be in a fight
the greater target arcs and longer effective range makes beams more potent than cannons
the "on target time" assuming both vessels are moving and flown by SANE living people for a DHC is less than 25%
a Beam can fire near constantly
Weapons power should be at 100% minimum in combat (unless you are armed ENTIRELY with torpedo weapons and mines)
Cannons rely on the enemy being stationary / stupid / cooperating to throw the fight
or on you being directly behind and slightly above the target at ALL times
Beam arrays track ANYWHERE
*nevermind*
a history of sto pvp: 2010 - 2011
a history of sto pvp: 2012 - 2013
Where does it state this to be the only case? I have been using BAs since I started, and I have noticed that my BAs do exactly the same to hull as they do to shields (that's after I add in the bleedthrough to the shield hit). If anything my cannons did less damage to shields and more to bare hull, but that may have been due to range etc.
Beg to differ. Read the info text on any beam weapon. Cannons read the same.
ROLL TIDE ROLL
In any case, i m not sure it this 50/50 is a strength. In the end no more shields means nothing if you don't kill the hull. No more hull means optional/kill/win.
a history of sto pvp: 2010 - 2011
a history of sto pvp: 2012 - 2013
Now DDIS and Biteme have both had good ideas on this subject and I agree with both of them.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=7386571&postcount=468
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=7333431&postcount=1
DDIS's idea would require a small modification in that it would require a reduction in the power drain (per cycle) to reflect the lower number of shots fired however looking at the two I would prefer Biteme's idea however I believe (from my limited programming experience) it would be difficult to implement.
I mention this as the main problem with BAs is they over drain for the damage they deal since this beam array nerf we've all read so much about (Something I cannot find a scrap of information about, searched the release notes and even tried google) however Biteme is right about weapon drain being illogical, it should drain when the shot is fired, not when the cycle begins.
On top of this we've all read about resistance changes I believe it was in one of the "borg have been buffed, their OP, nerf them please" threads, but this too is a problem the sustained firepower of beams has that DHCs don't suffer.
DHCs on the other hand have high damage with low drain (see sources shown above) and if you take 4 unbuffed DHCs (Mk X common) up against 6 BAs (again, Mk X common) you get results shown here*.
*Notes:
Does not take drain into account (due to lack of knowledge on the subject)
Feel free to save and edit for yourself, there are hidden rows showing potential buff analysis for those who wish to play with that
All figures from Mk X common
BA are certainly meant to synergize with Engineer abilities. 6-8 beam Nadeon Inversion or EPS broadside can produce quite respectable DPS. Now you can't constantly do this but throw in Red Matter Converter/Weapons Batteries or the new Omega Weapon Amplifier (which are available to all classes) and you can get a high power broadside going a majority of the time.
Now cruisers or other ships with broadside are more susceptible to having their broadside maneuver thwarted due to their slow turn rate. Tractor beams or simply maneuvering on the targets part can take this attack out of the equation. Even then though - they are still able to deliver strikes with half their weapons and without needing to use the tricks above to keep energy levels high, saving them for when they line up the next broadside. This is opposed to Cannon/Turret builds that have a very tight firing arc for good DPS - outside of which all you can do is a little pew pew scratching with the turrets. Target Engine Subsystem, Gravity Well, Viral Matrix, Tractor Beam, Chroniton Torpedo, Borg Tractor Beam, Temporal Inversion Field etc etc etc... There are many ways to make it difficult for those builds to line up on their target even with decent turn rates.
In summary I think the weapons are just fine the way they are. If anything needs to be changed it is DC need to be buffed so there is a reason to use them instead of everyone that knows anything about builds running around with DHC.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but your supposedly epic fleet excel is not the best tac cruiser in the game for damage output... The fleet regent is...
Fire at will is a great power in many situations, even in STFs. Probably not everywhere but ifind it way more useful than CRF and CSV, just because your beam will always find a target to hit.
And for the record the best fed cruiser is the galor.
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
http://www.stowiki.org/Fleet_Advanced_Heavy_Cruiser_Retrofit
http://www.stowiki.org/Fleet_Assault_Cruiser
My character Tsin'xing
You forget that universal Lt that the Imperial has.
My character Tsin'xing
Actually Sci Oddy would be the best IMHO. Sensor Analysis is vastly under-rated.
Although in all honesty Fleet Vor'Cha is the tac cruiser.
Oh, I agree completely. Fleet Vor'cha/Tor'Kaht Retrofit is the best damage dealing battlecruiser in the game. But that's off topic, and it's not a fed ship XD.
BACK ON TOPIC OF BEAM ARRAYS!!!! XD XD XD
Didn't want to risk any copyright infringement. And yes, it is diamonds in the rough. But since we're dealing with ships, I figured rust was far more appropriate anyways.
Beam tactics are also kind of TRIBBLE. Fire At Will is only a great ability with arrays when you're dealing with tiny and easy to kill targets, or, with a single target. It's a handicap in most combat situations. The reason is that BFAW targets everything randomly, scattering hits across everything within range. For fighters this is fine since they can only survive 1 or 2 hits anyway. For large ships, this means doing minor shield damage to a variety of targets instead of significant shield and hull damage to a single target. Cannon Spread is much better in this regard because it focuses hits on only targets within a relatively narrow cone, which lets you focus your damage output in a meaningful way. BFAW also works dramatically better with Dual Beams for the same reason.
Firing arcs? Compare 2 beam arrays to 2 turrets. You'll lose some hypothetical damage off your broadside but gain true 360 degree damage output, pay less in energy drain, and gain access to superior tactical abilities. The only place turret-boats really miss out on is damage over range.
And if we argue that popularity is an indication of performance, you can't argue "dual cannons need to be massively buffed because nobody uses them" without throwing beam arrays into the same bin. I see more escorts using dual cannons than are using beam arrays.
Engineering as the answer to beam array's drawbacks? Nooooot so much. You have two abilities that affect power, one that completely solves the problem and one that kind of mitigates it, both of them with gratuitously long cooldown times. Batteries? Even worse duty cycle than engineering abilities.
Heck, even EPTW which I thought helped enormously with this problem has proven to be rather unreliable now that I've started really looking into this, due to the kludgy way power overcapping works.
What makes the whole situation even more frustrating is that it makes no logical sense. The fact that power drain is instantly refunded at the end of a firing cycle and the fact that you get one weapon firing "for free" makes the system behave as though it has an infinite power generation potential and the only limitation is transmission through your power grid. In which case why wouldn't you just build your ship to have a single beam weapon with an utterly absurd power conduit connected directly to your infinite reactor. Dual heavy cannons LOOK like a way to increase burst damage within the limits of the power grid by trickle-charging a bank of capacitors and then ramming the whole lot into your weapon in one violent discharge, but they don't work that way at all because they should be draining around 5 power per second constantly instead of 12 for 2 and then 3 seconds of sleeping.
And just to put the cherry on top, I've never seen any indication that the developers care about this topic at all. Which means any and all discussion is irrelevant. Which is very depressing.
Because it would make no sense and that's not the topic. The purpose of the topic is to see if the complaints about beam arrays are justified or it's just eng/cruisers complaining about tac/escorts who complain about sci/sci ship who complain about eng/cruisers, and so on. From my point of view it's rather a matter of how you play the game and how envious you are.
I really have no issue with my eng on a cruiser, sure, i can't dps like mad but it's definitely not the purpose of cruisers, they're healboats and ifyou fit them and use them well they'll do a decent amount of damage too. On a typical cure space elite/klingon scout force instance i'll do half or more of the dps a good tac can do and i'll be healing the whole team (if i want to). That's definitely not insignificant.
I don't get how you can get into trouble with your power levels and fire at will with the new borg set. I'm using it currently and with batteries, EPTW, nadion inversion, and just one purple Mk XII EPS console, i'm doing well and my beams never fire under 100 weapon power. I think you're just confused because the power levels can drop to 80 in rare occasions but it's right after a FAW fire cycle, and it doesn't mean your beam fired at 80, there's some time for your power levels to increase before the new cycle. Don't look at figures, loot at the power levels when your beams fire. It makes a great difference and you'll see it's not that bad.
Of course playing a cruiser is harder than playing a tac with cannons, because even if you're completely stupid and not using half of your boff abilities, your escort will still do some damage, but it doesn't mean beams or cruiser sucks, it means you can get better at it.
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
Would the solution to this then be to simply split FAW into FAW (single target) and FAW (multiple target) BO powers? I think doing that would put a lot of pressure on engineering based beam boats to find enough tacslots to be versatile. Maybe implement new functionality into the BO ability, that allows you to change it's type ingame without it costing another BO slot?
One of the major argument is, that the firing arc of cannons is very narrow in comparsion with beam arrays. But that is not true. To deal any noticable damage, beam user need to broadside, which means, they have to keep their target in an 90 deg arc. Most beam users, however, fly fed cruisers with low turn rates, which makes it at much as difficult to effectively use beams as cannons.
Another very specialized beam are dual beam banks. Dual beam banks make only sense, when used as burst damage tool with beam overload. Combinign 3-4 beam arrays with turrets back will fall behind compared to using 3-4 DHCs with turrets back, escpacially because CRF and CSV.
In my opionen, there should be heavy front beam arrays, that do damage of dual beam banks when fired in an arc of up to 90 deg. If fired in an higher arc up to 180 deg. they do the damage of normal cannons, and above this arc, the damage of normal beam arrays.
This would allow to do beam users more foreward directed damage and damage spikes using beam overload without equiping a dual beam bank and, therefore, reducing the broadside damage.
I second that! Change one point of turn for an extra tac boff power??!! Yes please!
Also, everyone knows cool looking ships give their player a psychological advantage!
The only way the fleet A-cruiser could be cooler is if you could paint it red and add racing stripes....
Beam tactics are also kind of TRIBBLE. Fire At Will is only a great ability with arrays when you're dealing with tiny and easy to kill targets, or, with a single target. [/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure FAW is not meant to be a DPS booster, at least that is not its primary purpose. I think its meant to "clear the skies" and help grab agro from every NPC in range.
Also, why is everyone simply ignoring the obvious. If you feel beams are too weak you can always upgrade to single cannons. They have better DPS at the cost of firing arc. You can then use all those tasty cannon boff powers that everyone seems to want. [/sarcasm] Besides since "everyone knows" that the range limitations in cannons don't matter its virtually a guaranteed win for a cruiser! [/sarcasm]
My character Tsin'xing
Since Cruisers have such a low turn rate, beam weapons are one of the few weapons that they can reliably use. And since beam arrays are so horribly inefficient, Cruisers are nerfed even more (in terms of DPS). Cruisers absolutely shouldn't have the DPS of Escorts, but they also shouldn't have an absurdly low DPS either.
I started a related thread here: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=510971
Here's a reference thread on weapon power usage: http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?p=2750495